Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Eventually, these may be a good investment. The first generation is going to mostly be about what Apple has put into it. The fact that 3rd party developers haven't even had access to the device lowers any expectation that anyone other than Apple will have a 'wow' factor. Perhaps the 2nd gen version will a better purchase. I also did not buy my first iPhone until the 3GS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: johntherazz
Don't see why you would buy this unless you have the money to burn, have more money than sense, or you want to develop for it.

Most people should just wait for the 2nd gen headset or even the 3rd or 4th. I'll maybe get one when we're on the 4th or 5th gen and they have a "cheap" SE version or something.
This is exactly how it will play out. Not everyone will buy a first gen anything, especially not something priced at $3K+. This is what is happening in the EV market right now, as automakers focus on the upper end of pricing. But Apple needs to start somewhere with so many new technologies. And I’m not sure that gen 4 or 5 is going to be at the point where it’s cheap or eliminates the “wearing a pair of ski goggles“ look.
 
All this "cheaper" speculation should call out what they want reduced/eliminated to make them cheaper... because that's the Apple way of getting to cheaper. Some key candidates:
  1. Lower resolution. Cut this from 4K per eye to- say- a 1080p HD view and price could be towards comparable HD glasses/goggles already in market.
  2. Fewer cameras, likely reducing functionality
  3. Weaker SOC, likely resulting in slower responsiveness
  4. Cheaper build quality
  5. Less battery life/*battery sold separately
  6. No audio (bring your own)
Pick 1+ from the list and reduce the price accordingly. Those dreaming of steep price cuts are probably going to have to chop MOST of those, especially the first 4.

Option 2: wait for first gen to be "OLD" and that usually offers a lower price when next gen or next-next gen is out. See old iDevices still for sale now. Of course, "we" can't seem to want anything less than "latest & greatest" but that is a known Apple path to cheaper.

Option 3: involve OPM (other people's money) to subsidize it. The cell phone subsidy is about $1000. Put a cellular modem in it, offer a virtual iPhone when using it and offer it at $1000 off with 2-3 year cellular contract? I can't think of many other comparable subsidy channels: some kind of educational offering (like a school providing a "free" laptop/iPad) and Apple gets their money from the "enhanced" tuition at that school? $3,500 direct is insane, but $3500 indirect among $40K/yr tuition is "what a deal!"?

I suspect too many are believing that all features & benefits will be preserved but Apple will just cut their margin. Best I know, that has NEVER happened... and is unlikely to start here.

Someone will refer back to the original iPhone, quickly getting a fairly steep price cut after fan "will pay anything" enthusiasm thinned out... but that's because Apple adopted the subsidy model- still getting paid in full but by AT&T... who recovered the subsidy and then some from the cell service fees sold to those iPhone buyers.
 
Last edited:
Compared to the cost of few long-distance flights, the price (even of this first version) seems relatively modest - and since (I presume) one of its major functions will be to make you feel as if you’re in the room with people on the other side of the world, I can definitely imagine a market for it. Video calls have already become ubiquitous for and this feels like the next step. I guess we’ll have to wait for next spring to see if it really does live up to its promise, but I don’t think its potential for magically bringing people from far away together should be underestimated.

The killer app will be to enable collaborative meetings where you actually feel you're in the room with others, and can see them there. e.g. you're sitting around a desk and you can see their bodies, arms and faces. And not stupid emoji faces or self-designed smiley faces.

That's the kind of thing freelancers would pay for and corporates would pay for alike - as a way to have the cost benefits of remote meetings with the benefits of _presence_.

Individuals / families will pay for this too to keep in touch.

Looks like we're at least 2 or 3 generations away from that.
Can anyone explain to me how “feeling as if you are in the room” or seeing their bodies, arms and faces increases productivity in a meeting? When someone says something utterly stupid in the meeting, does that person being able to see me extend my middle finger at home really help? If you are in a virtual meeting and your focus is the tech you are using to conduct the meeting, productivity will tank. If you are the kind of person who can’t conduct take part and contribute to meetings (face to face or virtual) in a productive way, this tech won’t help you. And if you are savvy enough to take part in such meetings, the tech involved makes no difference. I‘ve participated in/conducted many truly productive meetings in person, via audio telecom, and via video telecom. I’ve also experienced an equal share of unproductive meetings across all mediums.

Think about all the savings with Vision Pro. For example a family of four now spending $3500 for decent seats to a professional sporting event can now just use the Vision Pro and have even better seats for every game! Just one of many life experience examples btw.
I can’t tell if you are being sarcastic. Replace multiple shared family experiences with the ability to provide one member of the family with a “good seat”? This is supposed to be better?

I continue to read through threads related to this device hoping someone can describe a truly killer use case or app, but it’s simply not there. Most still basically talk about “fancy” teleconferencing, floating monitors, or watching movies. Lots of reviewers talk about being “blown away” by the experience, and I don’t doubt that Apple‘s implementation of the 3d environment on very capable hardware is top-notch, but none have described anything that actually improves productivity even a little, or described anything that would compel the masses to want this device at any price, let alone $3500 + possible correction lenses.
 
Call me when the consumer model gets announced.

I hope I'm not the only one who feels like that photo of the headset screen/lights like that looks unintentionally terrifying

You're not the only one. Pretty much everyone, even in the VR community, do not like the Eye display and want it cut for the consumer model, and it's looking like that may very well be the case.
 
Can anyone explain to me how “feeling as if you are in the room” or seeing their bodies, arms and faces increases productivity in a meeting?

That's about the notion of connection with other collaborators. Something that humans naturally like.

However, that's a tiny aspect when considering what AR is really about and the problems it can address/solve.
 
All this "cheaper" speculation should call out what they want reduced/eliminated to make them cheaper... because that's the Apple way of getting to cheaper. Some key candidates for "cheaper":
  1. Lower resolution
  2. Fewer cameras, likely reducing functionality
  3. Weaker SOC, likely resulting in slower responsiveness
  4. Cheaper build quality
  5. Less battery life/*battery sold separately
  6. No audio (bring your own)
Pick 1+ from the list and reduce the price accordingly. Those dreaming of steep price cuts are probably going to have to chop MOST of those, especially the first 4.

Option 2: wait for first gen to be "OLD" and that usually offers a lower price when next gen or next-next gen is out. See old iDevices still for sale now. Of course, "we" can't seem to want anything less than "latest & greatest" but that is a known Apple path to cheaper.

Option 3: involve OPM (other people's money) to subsidize it. The cell phone subsidy is about $1000. Put a cellular modem in it, offer a virtual iPhone when using it and offer it at $1000 off with 2-3 year cellular contract? I can't think of many other comparable subsidy channels: some kind of educational offering (like a school providing a "free" laptop/iPad) and Apple gets their money from the "enhanced" tuition at that school? $3,500 direct is insane, but $3500 indirect among $40K/yr tuition is "what a deal!"?

I suspect too many are believing that all features & benefits will be preserved but Apple will just cut their margin. Best I know, that has NEVER happened... and is unlikely to start here.

Someone will refer back to the original iPhone, quickly getting a fairly steep price cut after fan "will pay anything" enthusiasm thinned out... but that's because Apple adopted the subsidy model- still getting paid in full but by AT&T... who recovered the subsidy and then some from the cell service fees sold to those iPhone buyers.
I think some people have suggested to cut the front eyes display, but I recall Apple execs saying it was core to the device to make it non-forcefully-isolating.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HobeSoundDarryl
In my online meetings (and I have several every week), about 4/5 of the attendees have their cameras turned off. Most don't want to be virtually present.
That’s because a camera is a live feed of your current look and environment. A Persona can be created when you look your “best” - clean shaven, makeup, etc. and that’s how you’ll look for every meeting / FaceTime. Your room / office / etc won’t be on camera either, so it’s just less distracting and more focused than FaceTime and typical video chats.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HobeSoundDarryl
Do we have confirmation that employees have already gone to Cupertino for training? Corporate training for Apple Watch was Feb. 2015 and I’m surprised anything would happen during the holiday season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheNewLou
Why should I buy a device that controls my whole view? Imagine what that does with the "focus muscles" in your eye. Even if that image looks like 3D, your eyes will always focus at exactly the same distance while your are wearing it. That is very unhealthy.

You should buy a device if it helps you solve problems. For example, at the extreme end, a surgeon using AR to assist with a cardio-thoracic surgery procedure, that will produce a much better outcome for the patient, with much lower risk.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ankaa
I think some people have suggested to cut the front eyes display, but I recall Apple execs saying it was core to the device to make it non-forcefully-isolating.

Yes... humans like to connect with other humans, and often that's through eyes.

I wouldn't worry about what Apple is going to cut - if anything. That's just speculation because many people feel better when spouting negative stuff.

Rather, for me, it's what useful functionality, including apps in addition to tech, Apple will be adding over time creating an even better experience allowing people to go further with AR.
 
Last edited:
Pretty much everyone, even in the VR community, do not like the Eye display and want it cut for the consumer model, and it's looking like that may very well be the case.
Why do you say it’s looking like that may be the case? I heard in some interview of Apple execs that the eye display is core to the device.
 
  • Like
Reactions: visualseed
The internet has done such amazing things brought humanity out of the dark. There’s absolutely no problems that the internet and smartphones caused. Everything has been amazing. We are an enlightened species now. Yes I can’t wait to be a lonely goggles wearing anti social internet person with VR scars all over my face and messed up hair.

That's the spirit!
 
what can u actually do on it, it has no killer feature, I had the quest 3 for 2 weeks was fun the first few days but then just didnt need it. these are gimmicks and wont take off
It has the one killer feature that the Quest 3 doesn't have, usable passthrough and MR. I own a Quest 3 as well and it is fine for VR gaming, but it sucks for MR. The hand gestures are inaccurate and require repeated retries and result in a lot of misclicks, the UI is confusing (Windows can't be resized unless they are not in the "tablet" mode...and then they keep their size when brought back forward...) and the resolution of the displays just isn't high enough to use for productivity tasks on a regular basis. Combine that with wobbly/noisy passthrough cameras (Only 2 4MP cameras) and you get a really poor MR experience. Also connecting to computers is just a little too much setup work, and each platform has it's tradeoffs (Immersed, Remote Display, Virtual Desktop, Workrooms - I've used them all and there is no clear winner, each one has distinct negatives about it.)

The Vision Pro gives you connection to your Mac's out of the box. So put it on, and start using your mac with a larger display with no hassle. Plus, add in virtual VisionOS windows alongside for status apps/email/slack/music control/etc. Then there is entertainment. Just open the TV app and watch your content as you do on any iOS device, only on a massive screen with intuitive controls, at a nice resolution and with great sound. I imagine gaming will also be a nice use case - connect to a gaming desktop with Steam Link, or use Xbox Gamepass and an existing xbox controller. Those are the out of the box, day one experiences, which are going to blow away the out of the box experiences of the 3rd generation Quest. Then we will get actual VisionOS apps, which can take things much further than just 2d floating windows, but those remain to be seen just yet.

The problem with the Quest is that it was designed with controllers and VR in mind, and only in this current iteration after the Vision Pro was announced has the focus changed to MR and hand controls. So every experience has different control setups, different requirements, some things require controllers to do simple tasks (Moving windows...for example.) The quest will still do fine in it's own right, but it is in a completely different league from the Vision Pro.
 
  • Like
  • Disagree
Reactions: jz0309 and AeroEd
That's about the notion of connection with other collaborators. Something that humans naturally like.

However, that's a tiny aspect when considering what AR is really about and the problems it can address/solve.
Per the rest of my response that you conveniently cut out, this “connection” you speak of has nothing to do with how productive a meeting ultimately is. Care to elaborate about the problems AR can address/solve?
 
Why do you say it’s looking like that may be the case? I heard in some interview of Apple execs that the eye display is core to the device.

Apple execs say one thing but always do another. Case in point: the excuses they made to why the iPhone wouldn't be on USB-C, then once the EU mandated it suddenly they're saying how much of an improvement it is that the iPhone is now on USB-C

Do not trust a single thing an Apple exec says. They will always stretch the truth to control the message and try to silence criticism of any bad practice.
 
Think about all the savings with Vision Pro. For example a family of four now spending $3500 for decent seats to a professional sporting event can now just use the Vision Pro and have even better seats for every game! Just one of many life experience examples btw.
I'm not sure if its a life experience if you are advocating using a headset in place of actual real life experiences. If you are watching sport through a headset it will never replicate being there in person.

Getting over the major obstacles of weight & comfort of the headset, I can see the headset being great watch to watch movies as long as it really does replicate the IMAX experience for example & perhaps gaming, as Apple claimed in the product demos. But living life through a headset? I'm not having it. It might do a semi-decent job of replicating some experiences, but it's quite dangerous if your life experiences are all synthetic.
 
Was there ever an actual plan to launch this in January 2024 because Apple said "early 2024"? March is technically still "early 2024".
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.