Apple Vision Pro Immersive Video 'Arctic Surfing' Available Now

[MacRumors]

Apple Vision Pro users can watch a new six-minute Apple Immersive Video today via the Apple TV app. It's the second episode in the company's "Boundless" series.

"Arctic Surfing" lets viewers "paddle into icy waters with a group of intrepid surfers and feel the rush of riding Norway's wintry waves."

The previous episode in the series is "Hot Air Balloons," offering viewers a journey above Türkiye's iconic rock formations. Another new episode, "Deep Water Solo," is arriving next Friday.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1892872071979684048

The new Apple Immersive video content is available from the Apple TV app in Australia, Canada, Hong Kong, France, Germany, Japan, Singapore, the U.K., and the U.S. Users in China can watch the content through the Migu Video and Tencent Video apps.

Article Link: Apple Vision Pro Immersive Video 'Arctic Surfing' Available Now

 

[ghostface147]

I still think this will be discontinued within 2 years.

 

[Kissmo1980]

Well for 3000 USD which in Europe translates to 4000 EUR - might as well book a flight to Norway and experience this live -don't you think? 🤔
Maybe come home with frostbite, loose a toe.... memories for life! 🤣

 

[mattopotamus]

While I ultimately did not keep my AVP, these videos are pretty amazing and probably the most immersive content I've seen. This and the dinosaur thing are great to experience if you never have.

 

[Aeronauts]

I still think this will be discontinued within 2 years.

Tim Cook likes to kill off products that don’t sell well quickly so you’re probably right which is a shame because I do think this has potential if they can make it smaller, lighter and cheaper.

 

[t0rqx]

I still think this will be discontinued within 2 years.

The majority even forgot about this product.

 

[nathansz]

I still think this will be discontinued within 2 years.

I could see it taking 2 years to sell all the units they made

 

[nathansz]

Tim Cook likes to kill off products that don’t sell well quickly so you’re probably right which is a shame because I do think this has potential if they can make it smaller, lighter and cheaper.

the price is no issue for many people. people will spend crazy money on gadgets if they are useful or interesting enough

I think that most people just aren't interested in strapping two screens on their faces and cutting themselves off from the world

agree that it needs to be MUCH small and lighter

until they can get the form factor down to a normal pair of glasses it will not take off

I think the reason that thrift stores are littered with piles of vr headsets of every size, age and description is because they just aren't compelling devices for most people

 

[arcite]

Facebook spent $100 billion on failed virtual reality. At least Apple didn’t burn quite that much.

 

[Realityck]

The majority even forgot about this product.

Disney making their 3D content available to AVP owners did them the biggest favor. Still it shows not everything is mothballed.

 

[MacKenzie999]

Do these things require stereo vision? I can only use one eye at a time

 

[nathansz]

Well for 3000 USD which in Europe translates to 4000 EUR - might as well book a flight to Norway and experience this live -don't you think? 🤔
Maybe come home with frostbite, loose a toe.... memories for life! 🤣

or you could just go to an Apple Store and just watch it for free, if the staff can remember where they left the headsets

 

[rizzo41999]

Pre-owned Vision Pros still north of $2k on eBay. Price point really killed momentum. Writing this using a Quest 3 via Remote Desktop on my Mac lol.

 

[HJM.NL]

Tim Cook likes to kill off products that don’t sell well quickly so you’re probably right which is a shame because I do think this has potential if they can make it smaller, lighter and cheaper.

Well… in the Netherlands it’s already sold out 🤭. Must be a HUGE success. /s 😎

Available for “only” € 4.349 which is $4.555,43 😳

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

I'm one of the seemingly odd-man-out people who thinks Vpro is great and offers much potential. With the whole industry chasing a bigger mobile screen goal, it seems like an ideal crack at the target in that it can stay the same size & weight while delivering ANY size screens... far superior to fold & roll options (where size & weight scale with screen size)... and it works in brightest day (too) vs. the projection option. That said though...

These cartoon-length videos are great and all but so little. Watch this one for 6 (SIX) minutes and the experience is complete.

Put some of that 46.9% margin-driven cash hoard to work and line up a deal for March Madness VR which virtually puts Vpro owners courtside for any of the games. NBA tournament will not be far behind. USFL? NHL? Soccer & MLB (with which Apple already has a business relationship)? NCCA F this Fall? NFL this Fall? Nascar? Formula 1? Ringside? WWE? Olympics? World sports? And on and on.

And for those who don't care much about sports, Broadway show series? Cirque? Music concerts? Travel "explore the world" series? Museum VR? And on and on.

I don't get why Apple doesn't allocate a budget and talent like they did for AppleTV+ to forge deals with those in control of such exhibitions to simulate the illusion of being there. There's big wins- including monetary wins- for all parties involved. Get some of this kind of thing going and Vpro as an entertainment device gains much opportunity.

For example, in various playoffs, tickets to one event can be north of $10K. Again, that's for ONE game. Send in some "look around" cameras and partner with whoever owns the event for optional play-by-play and all not able or willing to pay $10K could get great seats to that game for much less (even after paying "too much" for the Vpro device one time). Seat 20K virtual bodies in that same virtual seat to make the money part work for the venue/team, the partner and Apple.

Yes, Apple would have to put up some tangible money to buy their way into these kinds of deals but that's comparable to putting money towards software for any brand new platform. Even the now-ubiquitous TV wouldn't have sold had there been nearly no investment in programming to watch on it. Apple seems to have built this relatively amazing tech but then kicked the ball to third parties to come up with the content/apps/programming that can make it a success. I believe whatever investment went into developing the product should be allocated to developing desirable content/apps for it too. The quality of the content (experience) will draw an audience to new tech platforms. Few- if any- are "build it and they will come" propositions.

Imagine if TVs were just getting launched now... and there would be 5-8 minute programs to watch, being released every couple of months. Why buy one of these "crazy expensive TVs"?

 

[nfl46]

I will check it out later. Thank you!

 

[nathansz]

With the whole industry chasing a bigger mobile screen goal

I have no interest in a bigger mobile screen

 

[turbineseaplane]

Pre-owned Vision Pros still north of $2k on eBay. Price point really killed momentum. Writing this using a Quest 3 via Remote Desktop on my Mac lol.

There's a poor sap near me on FB Marketplace who's been trying to sell his AVP for months.
I've watched it go from $3200 to $2400, over the course of little price cuts every week or so

Brutal

 

[rizzo41999]

There's a poor sap near me on FB Marketplace who's been trying to sell his AVP for months.
I've watched it go from $3200 to $2400, over the course of little price cuts every week or so

Brutal

Truly, it's incredibly unfortunate. I could find ways to justify but it's has a bit more room to fall for me to consider.

 

[robertosh]

For example, in various playoffs, tickets to one event can be north of $10K. Again, that's for ONE game. Send in some "look around" cameras and partner with whoever owns the event for optional play-by-play and all not able or willing to pay $10K could get great seats to that game for much less (even after paying "too much" for the Vpro device one time). Seat 20K virtual bodies in that same virtual seat to make the money part work for the venue/team, the partner and Apple.

I see many reasons for that not to work:
- It will be really expensive to Apple to coordinate the logistics for covering live events. Tracking of events, onsite contractors to check that the cameras work, network installations to allow high quality streaming, live support team, etc
- If the ticket is 10k is because somebody is willing to pay it. There is nothing wrong with that, and offering other cheap alternatives may also impact in the physical tickets prices and attendance (assuming that VR really goes mainstream)
- Implications of privacy. I wouldn't feel so confortable in an Stadium with cameras around used by random persons watching from their couch. And you know "Apple is Privacy"...
- Implications of piracy, it will be another method that could be exploited to watch events for free.

And more important, in my opinion being live in an event is not just being there watching, it's more like a social experience: you talk with people, have some drinks or food, etc.. and you cannot have that via a VR set.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

I have no interest in a bigger mobile screen

That's fine. There appears to be at least a few more people in the world than just you.

The entire industry is chasing bigger mobile screens. That's why we see all these fold/roll/projector rumors/news/videos. Apparently the want for bigger screens is > the want for smaller or even same-size screens... OR... the sellers THINK that is true.

This is not an either-or proposition. The world can still have existing form factors, smaller (if anyone wants to make smaller) and bigger (but still existing form factors) AND these other options like fold/roll/projector/virtual. Of those latter 4 though, should "we" succeed in the group quest to kill the VR/AR option(s), no one seems to name the one they want instead. Folds & rolls would be miserably heavy & sizable if we also want VR-like 100" screens at times. Projectors only work well in the dark and offer no privacy. And yet, the industry wants to go larger anyway. A fold and a tri-fold would only get them so far before then they hunt for quad-fold, quin-fold, octo-fold and so on. As that size scales, so goes the physical size (plus LOTS of hinges) AND weight. Roll is not much better. Projector has very hard limitations on use (in fact, we tend to sleep when it would work the very best).

I can certainly critique Vpro in a number of ways but I can also take the other side and see it as fixed size & weight, small enough to fit into the bag to go anywhere, and able to summon any-size high-resolution screens with no hinges, creases, loss of privacy, etc. For those who do their best work on bigger screens at home & office to then have to deal with up to 16" laptop screens when on the go, it's a way to have their bigger (to much bigger) screen(s) wherever they are.

I do most of my work on a 40" ultra-wide. When I have to drop down to 16", it's a much less productive scroll fest. I have no desire for a MB "fold" or "roll", nor a MB 24" or 30" but otherwise existing form factor. I do most of that work in the day, so a projector wouldn't do it either. But just like you, I'm but one person. There's more people in the world than just me too.

 

[nathansz]

Line up a deal for March Madness VR which virtually puts Vpro owners courtside for any of the games. NBA tournament will not be far behind. USFL? NHL? Soccer & MLB (with which Apple already has a business relationship)? NCCA F this Fall? NFL this Fall? Nascar? Formula 1? Ringside? WWE? Olympics?

All of these leagues/events already have rights holders worldwide. Apple would have to bid for those rights when the contracts become available.

I doubt many leagues would want to switch from national cable and/or broadcast networks in favour Apple TV. there goal is to get there events in front of more people, not less

It's just not even remotely realistic.

 

[turbineseaplane]

I saw a piece on COSM and know one person who finally got to check it out and it's apparently AWESOME

Cosm | We Power Immersive Experiences Around the World

We Are Storytellers, Curators, and Innovators. It is our mission to foster the art of fulldome filmmaking and the immersive creator ecosystem. We have gathered an interdisciplinary community of some of the most talented artists, filmmakers, technologists, and experience designers, to push the...

www.cosm.com

This is the sort of thing the mainstream will likely find far more compelling, due to the social and community aspect, well before everyone instead wants to plug into personal scuba masks at home

I wish I lived near a COSM so I could go try it out

 

[nathansz]

other options like fold/roll/projector/virtual. Of those latter 4 though, should "we" succeed in the group quest to kill the VR/AR option(s), no one seems to name the one they want instead.

holographic projection will be how this niche is filled in the future

strapping screens to your face is a clunky stop gap that will seem even more ridiculous in the future then it does now

VR/AR is not new, and has seen virtually no mainstream uptake

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

I see many reasons for that not to work:
- It will be really expensive to Apple to coordinate the logistics for covering live events. Tracking of events, onsite contractors to check that the cameras work, network installations to allow high quality streaming, live support team, etc

There are mobile crews who deliver 4K events now through Fox and other apps. If they can do it, Apple can do it too... and/or outsource it to similar crews. I regularly watch 4K events on the Fox and other apps.

This does have cost involved- just as watching stuff shot with 4K cameras has cost, or watching via cable has cost, or producing this Arctic Surfing video for Vpro has cost. All programming and all programming types has costs & logistics. If other options can be worked out, this can be worked out too.

- If the ticket is 10k is because somebody is willing to pay it. There is nothing wrong with that, and offering other cheap alternatives may also impact in the physical tickets prices and attendance (assuming that VR really goes mainstream)

Doubtful. The experience of actually being there is far beyond the experience of virtually being there. IMO, there is plenty of room between watching through a 2D window (our TVs) and actually being there. NFL Sunday ticket doesn't kill live attendance to games. NCAA-B, NCCA-F, PPV fights, PPV concerts, etc are all existing options that are proven to work just fine with live attendance situations too.

Reality is that there are only so many seats in an arena. This could allow many more people to attend than available seats. Many who can't afford $10K for one game but would rather simulate being there vs. watching on TV (if available) might be a market niche for a market niche product like Vpro.

- Implications of privacy. I wouldn't feel so confortable in an Stadium with cameras around used by random persons watching from their couch. And you know "Apple is Privacy"...

You already do that if you attend any live event. They are all televised in one way or another. Vpro would let the wearer choose where they want to look but you can see all on TV for decades now.

- Implications of piracy, it will be another method that could be exploited to watch events for free.

The pirate crowd tends to be focused on something for nothing. They are probably not the crowd paying $3500 to then attempt to pirate. But for the more fortunate pirates who do buy a Vpro in such a scenario, piracy is always a thing and how well it is policed is always the challenge. If Apple can't figure out a way to limit the ability to watch to legit buyers/renters of such programming on hardware for which they have complete control, then nothing can be protected from piracy.

And more important, in my opinion being live in an event is not just being there watching, it's more like a social experience: you talk with people, have some drinks or food, etc.. and you cannot have that via a VR set.

...which goes back to the second reply. Live in person is superior to virtual. But virtual could be superior to watching through a 2D window called a TV. This doesn't REPLACE live or watching on television- just slots in between the two... like PPV events or NFL ST, etc. All who want live pay up (if they can afford it) and go see it live. All who are fine with TV watch on TV. Some though could get into something between the two if they desired it... and this kind of "season pass" or "tournament pass" existed.