Nobody cares about that, because nobody (other than complete nerds or fake tech influencers) cares about wearing an effing heavy set of goggles to watch or do things, or looking like a member of the Devo band. No matter how much it costs, no matter how “light” it is, such contraptions will still be as useless and annoying as 3D movie glasses.
Haha, I suppose that's true for others. I'm a lightweight and for me if I add 1TB of storage and 24 GB of RAM to an M4 iMac, that fits my needsThat’s the cost of a well-spec’d Mac.
So, if some version of AVP came in around $2K or less, that's a price I personally could stomach.
I have to agree. 10 years from now, there will be an absolute revolutionary VR headset/glasses that will have all its roots tied back to this device. Not many will remember that then...
People don’t even remember that the iPhone didn’t have copy/paste for YEARS!
no there is no new Vision Pro this year the M5 will have the R2 next year
Yah the virtual desktop has been a game changer. Wish it was part of the original release, maybe more people would have used it.
Or both, as needed. I've noticed my M4 Air will consume as little as 2-3 watts when I'm not doing much with it, but is capable of ramping way up to 10x that if something demanding is happening. The Apple Silicon chips are really good at dividing things out between performance cores and efficiency cores as appropriate.
They're not directly comparable but the Mac was definitely a trajectory product. You have to plant a flag and start from somewhere and Apple really did nail so many important aspects of the Vision Pro experience in a similar fashion to the Mac. The real challenge started the moment they released the first gen.
Of course, any time you read the tea and plot forward assumptions will have to be made 😁
The Vision Pro nails some key concerns in terms of usability and GUI plus it has a few solid use cases such as watching movies on a 200" screen, remotely exploring high fidelity environments or working as a spatial computing space for Mac productivity but the size, weight and price run counter to all of those use cases.
And yet at the price point, the original macintosh sold well below expectations - apple expected a million units sold they only got 250,000
No, we wouldn’t praise it, nor buy it regardless of price.
You are correct in my not wanting to afford it. Spending $3,500 on something that performs worse than my $1,200 Studio is an easy decision — no thanks. Just because you can work on a spreadsheet with the Vision Pro doesn’t mean you should, or that it’s an efficient way to do it.
Agree if it's only one spreadsheet, but can you work with three or four on your Studio Display? I have the same monitor as you. Switching desktops and resizing windows to handle multiple spreadsheets and other documents is far less efficient than using my AVP's ultra-wide virtual display, which I do almost daily. I can't duplicate the experience of watching 2D and immersive videos on large screens, looking at panoramic photos that nearly fill my field-of-view, or enjoying spatial photos on a large screen, using any other device, whether I'm alone at home or flying. I also prefer reading documents and practicing presentations on the AVP, sitting in a comfortable chair and using hand gestures to control what I'm seeing. All this makes the AVP very much worth it to me. You're so focused on bashing it that you refuse to recognize that there are valid use cases that boost efficiency and provide enjoyment.
