Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
There's something weird about making YouTube video demonstrations about a visual device you can only properly experience when it's on your head.

I'm used to watching videos about audio equipment, which you obviously can't properly demonstrate on a YouTube video, but I've never seen an Apple device that has a visual component that can't be properly shown on video. I think you will just have to test this thing in person to know if you want it.
 
I’d rather hear from a REAL consumer and not some ‘Influencer’ who is going to say all the right things to sell the product so Apple continues to send them items and not cut them off due to a negative review.
Most of these reviews seemed balance. If we’re talking about sycophants that would be people like Ben Bajarin/Carolina Milanesi or Neil Cybart. Cybart hasn’t posted a review yet, he’s weirdly talking about Meta.

 
The problem is creating a transparent OLED that is also capable of getting bright enough to pass through the required optics. Not to mention making the world around you bright enough to see through the optics. The Sony OLEDs that Apple is using can reach 5000 nits, but only about 20% of that makes it through to your eyes.
Much less than 20%. Probably less than 5%.
 
The new Vision Pro by Apple is ugly tech that no one should buy as advertised.

It looks awful, and beyond geeky. All the rich people will buy one to watch their entertainment in style, but who cares? Would anyone prefer to work on a virtual computer with a huge thing on their face? Nu-uh. As it’s being advertised right now, it will flare up and be a ritzy novelty in a year.

I want one…need one. You see, people are idiots. They see the glossy entertainment, wiz-bang virtual computer, and want one, mostly to impress their friends. They don’t see what it is good for, or in the right programmers hands, how it could be the first step in making life better for the user, not just more entertained. It’s ability to provide the user with opening up their world and how it is made.

Imagine: Put on the headset, turn it on, and look around your room. Oh, a desk. How would I put that together, or how is it made? My app would let you click on anything that you see that you want to know more about. A tap and stretch motion will pull the components of the object apart. Go ahead, walk around the parts and examine them close up. Tap on that interesting cup and see its origin story. Walk up to a painting to hear an explanation of how the painter made the particular strokes that are in view. Pick up your guitar and see a virtual hand playing the correct way for your song. Play any other instrument and see a visual you playing it correctly as you look down at your instrument.

Now go outside (hopefully where people won’t see you in your idiot gear) and open the hood of your car to fix it. The tapped on part of the engine shows the dis-assembly steps in front of you in 3d as you work. No need to look at a YouTube video with one hand while working. Need more info on a part or need to order one? Tap to bring up more info. Hanging a picture on the wall? See exactly where every stud is in the walls, a map of all the electrical, etc.

This is what the Vision Pro is good for. Augmenting your world to know more about everything in detail, and how to fix it, order it, get info on it.

The Vision Pro is a jack ass lame new device as advertised. The world needs to get smarter advertisers.

Yes, it looks lame. This is where Meta is doing it right. They are starting with the decent looking platform of RayBan sunglasses and limiting its capabilities to just what matters: Augmented Reality (AR). The software is still a bit rudimentary, but they are improving it. When their AR gets to the Vision Pro level (if possible), they will rule this space.
 
Last edited:
"With Apple Vision Pro, users can experience Apple Immersive Video, a remarkable new entertainment format pioneered by Apple. Apple Immersive Video features 180-degree 3D 8K recordings captured with Spatial Audio to transport viewers to the center of a place, moment, or story."
Yeah that supports your argument. Not.

Look. The screens are 4k per eye. That doesn't make it an 8k display.

The original source video resolution is irrelevant. I should know. I was creating 12k 360 degree video almost a decade ago.
 
  • Like
Reactions: klasma
Halo product
But will Vision Air (not Pro) be mass market?
The original Watch had 1 million pre-orders in 2015, and was $550-$1050.

Now you can get a Watch for under $200, and they're everywhere.
Because it has a use, health and fitness and before that it was just niche product for tech nerds at a decent price and was seen as a geek item.

This however is just a glorified iPad in goggles with a crap battery at a terrible price.

It won't flop but it won't be mainstream like the watch or iPad, its just goofy, pointless and overpriced.
 
I’m not sure I would include Nilay Patel in this. I don’t love the Verge (a lot of their stuff is too click-bait) but Nilay’s review seemed pretty neutral.
Patel seemed like he was straining to come up with negatives.
 
Expect the part where it is own by Meta.
Who cares let’s be honest the Vision Pro is locked down doesn’t even have YouTube app and you can’t do proper vr games so what’s it good for well content viewing cool and external monitor wow, is that it for £3500 it has no special features, the pass through from reviews are not impressed, let’s be honest the £480 quest 3 can do so much more and can actually do vr games and watch content in huge cinema with big screen vr; what is the Vision Pro it’s another useless product that’s limited
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: jmpstar
Regaring the Verge's take. Yeah I think camera based mixed-reality is a temporary measure. Transparent OLED tech is getting pretty far and I would guess that is where we will end up.

Should be a bit cheaper without the external screen and less camera-tech, though it could become quite tricky to handle privacy. Maybe dual-layer OLED.
Transparent OLED tech is irrelevant. If you put an OLED directly in front of your eyes, transparent or not, the only way you can focus on it is by putting a lens in front of it to adjust the focus. And when you do that, you can no longer focus through the display into the reality beyond it.
 
As someone who was very interested in the AVP but was waiting for a price drop or V2, these reviews honestly made me happy I didn't take the plunge. I don't see the purpose of needing to compute in my apartment spacially through a screen. I'd much rather watch my TV with my eyes, or curl up with my iPad Pro 🤷‍♂️
 
Last edited:
Why aren't reviewers putting the virtual keyboard on the table so the fingers feel something solid. Can the VP sense there's a table and stick the keyboard on it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: gerald.d
Because it has a use, health and fitness and before that it was just niche product for tech nerds at a decent price and was seen as a geek item.

This however is just a glorified iPad in goggles with a crap battery at a terrible price.

It won't flop but it won't be mainstream like the watch or iPad, its just goofy, pointless and overpriced.
The cheaper headsets like Meta Quest 3 are gaming - downside is my son gets bored with games and starts watching YouTube.
There's no f---ing reason to watch YouTube on a VR headset.
 
Why aren't reviewers putting the virtual keyboard on the table so the fingers feel something solid. Can the VP sense there's a table and stick the keyboard on it?
i think you can position it there, unless I'm wrong.
 
Patel seemed like he was straining to come up with negatives.
The biggest negative with VP is you‘re wearing dorky, heavy ski googles on your face. I wish reviewers would stop saying this is the future of computing/entertainment. This is not the future of anything other than dystopia. Heck, even if the future gets this tech into a pair of reading glasses it still will be dystopian. It’s funny how right before Apple Watch launched Tim Cook was on stage saying the wrist is interesting and that people only wear glasses because they have to. But now the future is having googles strapped to your face. No thanks.
 
Everyone here trashing the YouTube videos (most of which are clearly labeled “unboxing” and not “review”) without acknowledging the very thorough and balanced WSJ and Verge pieces… 🙄
I dont need a review to tell me what to think. Show me what the device can do and any potential bugs in the hardware/software.

The verge was good at showing me some things but I felt line I came away with more information on what the Apple Vision Pro can do from iJustine.

Whether or not someone can justify $3500 on Apple Vision Pro means nothing to me. Just show me what it can do and ill decide if I want one at whatever the price is.

The Verge was doing too much. Theyd be better off just taking the iJustine approach with out the girlie giggles and shrieks…. And just showing me what the Apple Vision Pro can do and cant do.
 
The cheaper headsets like Meta Quest 3 are gaming - downside is my son gets bored with games and starts watching YouTube.
There's no f---ing reason to watch YouTube on a VR headset.
You've not watched any 3D 180VR videos on YouTube have you.
 
The cheaper headsets like Meta Quest 3 are gaming - downside is my son gets bored with games and starts watching YouTube.
There's no f---ing reason to watch YouTube on a VR headset.

Exactly and the Vision doesn't even have YouTube app or games, Quest 3 is the right price for this kind of product and no amount of pixels and personas make the vision pro worth that price for what it actually does.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.