Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
We'll see. Obviously, nobody can see the future. The counter point to such optimistic prediction is the fact that VR and AR headsets have been around for quite a while and they have not succeeded so far. Sure, Apple headset has better specs but this does not guarantee anything. We don't really know why people don't like those headsets. One factor seems to be that it attaches to your face. Better specs are not going to change that (until we get light AR eye glasses like what Google was trying to do, but Vision Pro is not even a move in this direction). People love to compare the situation with iPhone but they are way off. Smart phones were taking off even before iPhone showed up. They were going to happen no matter what. Combination of three advancements related to smart phones made the tech a success: development of capacitive screens, huge progress in wireless technology, progress in semiconductor tech (increased performance with lower power consumption). Some of this progress helps VR/AR headsets too but it is not clear if the critical mass is there yet. Probably not in this generation of VP.

Here's what I think Apple is doing right: they're making a system that works well with fewer functional compromises and they're targeting it at use cases that people can relate to-- specifically as a more general purpose computing device and not as a novelty toy.

We didn't see one zombie hunter game that had users running around half blinded, an the word "metaverse" never came up. Meta has been treating these headsets as novelties which narrows the audience to zombie hunters and tweens who want to live in an avatar world.

Microsoft has been trying to position Hololens as a more serious product, but the capabilities are rather crippled.

Vision Pro makes a case that it is another class of device. I don't know why I'd have thought Apple would do anything different than they did, but having seen the pitch I'm more open to (and frankly excited about) the product that I thought I would be.
 
The price is fine, the battery pack is whatever, especially if spares are affordable and available. I think it really is the next thing, but especially at its price, it needs to be the device that bridges the gap between macOS and iOS/iPadOS. Needs to be capable of replacing my iPad Pro for artwork, and replace my MacBook Pro for desktop apps (looking at you blender). I don’t see any reason why it couldn’t run even a virtualization of macOS in a floating window, and pair with a keyboard and mouse/trackpad right along with it’s native apps, and run iPad apps as well. It could even use its own version of an Apple Pencil to draw virtually on real surfaces, or paint on 3d models as procreate does. It has all of the potential to be the next big computing device, but non of the software to make it happen, yet.

I weep for your hair style. I guess we’ll all have to get buzz cuts to wear this and not ruin our look.
 
As though it's not already? You're doing "massive, expensive, mission critical" Photoshop work without a screen?

A screen does not mediate my life. Looking at a monitor is not the same as strapping a screen to your face. Attempting to claim a 1:1 in this case is disingenuous.
 
Um, no, you won’t. And you might not even see me then depending on how expensive it is.

Uh, yeah, yeah I will. You were the same dude arguing in favor of Apple Watch Edition when it first launched. Your track record isn't great.
 
A screen does not mediate my life. Looking at a monitor is not the same as strapping a screen to your face. Attempting to claim a 1:1 in this case is disingenuous.

It is absolutely mediating your life. You can't do your massive, expensive, mission critical work without that screen.

I'm sitting behind a pair of monitors right now that are mediating my work and life experiences.

Hold it in your hand, hang it in front of your field of view, strap it to your face-- different solutions that bring different benefits. Strapped to your face you can overlay data that is registered to objects in your visual field. That's a significant advantage. If your massive, expensive, mission critical Photoshop project is a billboard, or an art installation, you can visualize it in situ.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SFjohn
It seems well-executed, but sadly gimped by its lack of I/O... par for Apple.

The lack of a video input eliminates many uses for which this would be a great product. Then there's the predictable but dumb lack of a headphone jack, and no mention of how much storage this thing has for media or how to get files onto and off of it.

I also thought it could be an interesting laptop replacement, but again with no video input how are you going to get the computer's video image into the goggles without latency and compression? Does anyone think that Apple has invented some kind of magical uncompressed zero-latency wireless video-transmission method for these goggles... that can be added to the millions of computers and other devices out there?

You mean like airplay? The whole point is that this is a wireless device and the user isn’t tethered to any physical location. It would make no sense to have a bunch of cables and storage media protruding from it.

The other possibility is that it may charge via usb c, which would let you connect it to a laptop for power and data? I have not been able to find out just what standard it uses to charge though.
 
  • Love
Reactions: SFjohn
Not for nothing, but it's worth pointing out that Apple was an absolute trailblazer for successful and legal music and video distribution and then very quickly lost their edge when streaming became dominant not that long after.

"It's not the thing. It's the thing that gets you to the thing." - Some Fictional TV Character

I can tell you that my vision was never for one company to dominate so much of the consumer landscape. I really wanted to see a future in which independent artists thrived. The reality became quite the opposite. That's where I was wrong. That said, Apple never had it in mind to dominate the music market. That was just a vehicle to sell the hardware that people play their music on, and not just to sell iPods but to give people a reason to buy iMacs (remember, back then they didn't work independently of iTunes).

AppleTV is another example... AppleTV+ subscription revenue is immaterial to their bottom line, but it helps them sell a product class that gives them a greater footprint, and a greater ecosystem with which to make switching costs prohibitive.

That's the thing that matters to Apple, and it's where I think the e commerce thing is headed. Just as cable's fragility (and some novel court decisions) opened the door for motion picture studios to launch their own boutique apps, the fragility of brick and mortar, malls, etc., opens a door for manufacturers to create boutique "experiences" (I hate that word, but I'm sure that's what they'll call them) with different tiers for different levels of clientele.

I do however think it's ridiculous to measure the success of a product by what it could potentially be if only we had technology that isn't yet feasible.

Nowhere have I called the product a success. I'm simply expressing an opinion that, if I wanted to dox myself I could show you the context, I've been talking about for at least eight years. Honestly, my view was that Google and Apple would have to partner, combining Google's competencies in search, ML/AI, with Apple's UI/UX and hardware expertise, to make it a reality. I'd even explored a version of the idea with the GM of Filmstruck, Jenn Dorian. But at the time, licensing was a big obstacle. We were trying to build the thing, and Apple already has been quite successful at making things that get you to the things. I do think it's extremely relevant what the long game is here, because the short one is not "Apple Vision SE".

"People who are really serious about software should make their own hardware" - Alan Kay​
 
Last edited:
It seems well-executed, but sadly gimped by its lack of I/O... par for Apple.

The lack of a video input eliminates many uses for which this would be a great product. Then there's the predictable but dumb lack of a headphone jack, and no mention of how much storage this thing has for media or how to get files onto and off of it.

I also thought it could be an interesting laptop replacement, but again with no video input how are you going to get the computer's video image into the goggles without latency and compression? Does anyone think that Apple has invented some kind of magical uncompressed zero-latency wireless video-transmission method for these goggles... that can be added to the millions of computers and other devices out there?
In their video, the guy opened up his laptop, and the laptop screen popped up in his headset and he started navigating around his laptop's home screen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SFjohn
In other words, “I can’t defend this disaster and instead want to talk about a fantasy version that may or may not ever exist.”

Sounds exactly like what people have been saying about AR/VR for over a decade. “Just wait! In a year or two everyone will be using this to do everything inside it!”

It’s highly amusing.
You’re moving the goalposts. Our whole conversation was about what may or may not exist. We were talking about potential applications that haven’t been created yet. Remember?
 
I just realized, Vision “Pro” implies there will be a cheaper, less advanced version down the line. And if it’s more similar to a pair of glasses, “Vision Air” would be a perfect name.
 
The price is fine, the battery pack is whatever, especially if spares are affordable and available. I think it really is the next thing, but especially at its price, it needs to be the device that bridges the gap between macOS and iOS/iPadOS. Needs to be capable of replacing my iPad Pro for artwork, and replace my MacBook Pro for desktop apps (looking at you blender). I don’t see any reason why it couldn’t run even a virtualization of macOS in a floating window, and pair with a keyboard and mouse/trackpad right along with it’s native apps, and run iPad apps as well. It could even use its own version of an Apple Pencil to draw virtually on real surfaces, or paint on 3d models as procreate does. It has all of the potential to be the next big computing device, but non of the software to make it happen, yet.
Exactly -
Also, one thing that wasn't really touched on, was if (and how) this could be used as an advanced input device with the programs you are currently running on your iPad, iMac, iWhatever.
 
I will admit that it looks like that they topped every existing headset as far as tech and design go. The only thing that comes close is the Quest Pro. However, they always miss a large part of the market...

Sure, they made tools to port Unity games over with more ease, but no one wants to play Apple Arcade games. I'm surprised enough people subscribe that Apple hasn't shuttered the service yet. The vast majority of the existing popular VR games require motion controllers. It will support bluetooth console controllers, but not motion controllers. They missed a huge chunk of the market by alienating gamers. I get they are not aiming for the gaming market and it's for "professional use", but it wouldn't have been too much more for them to support some of the existing market. Gamers are largely the ones interested in AR/VR experiences. The Quest Pro is also geared more towards the professional market, but it still supports all of the content before it and improved on the motion controllers and hand tracking.
 
It is absolutely mediating your life. You can't do your massive, expensive, mission critical work without that screen.

I'm sitting behind a pair of monitors right now that are mediating my work and life experiences.

Hold it in your hand, hang it in front of your field of view, strap it to your face-- different solutions that bring different benefits. Strapped to your face you can overlay data that is registered to objects in your visual field. That's a significant advantage. If your massive, expensive, mission critical Photoshop project is a billboard, or an art installation, you can visualize it in situ.

Oh please. Your arcane rationalizations are silly. My field of view is not entirely encompassed by a screen when I look at my monitor. Your analogy failed. Doubling down on it is a mistake.
 
Infinite virtual screen space at the cost of an ugly, off putting face mask that wraps around your head, makes you look like a troll and is basically an anti-social means to consume and or create content that’s predicated on social behavior. It would be ironic if it wasn’t so sad.
You’re all over the place here. It’s no more antisocial than staring at a screen.

You’re acting like you have to wear it all the time. It’s a tool that you can choose to use.

and by far the least affordable headset.
It’s the same starting price as HoloLens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SFjohn
You’re all over the place here. It’s no more antisocial than staring at a screen.
Yes it is. It covers your face.

You’re acting like you have to wear it all the time. It’s a tool that you can choose to use.
I’m just observing the use cases that Apple presented. If you think they don’t want you to wear this for hours on end you’re fooling yourself.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If you follow Jobs' philosophy, he would have killed the project. It doesn't solve a problem which was his number 1 focus.
If things only got greenlit because they "solve a problem" the would be a hella boring world I wouldn't want to be a part of. I'll never understand this boring, strictly analytical thinking. And I'm so happy I cant relate. Truly.

Invoke Jobs all you want. He wasn't always right and made plenty missteps.

I'm glad I can enjoy things that are just fun to use for no other reason than that. No problem needing to be tackled, no dilemma needing a solution; no reason for existing, just because it can and it's fun to use; and a nice distraction that (potentially) can pave the way for future, better ideas. Even if it leads to nothing - new, fresh ideas are never a bad thing.

I'm gonna play some Xbox now, I know it's pointless to exist, as it doesn't solve any problems in the world but Im gonna enjoy the hell out it anyway (unless I lose, than slightly less so 😏).
 
  • Like
Reactions: nevesis
In my humble opinion the groundbreaking feature is the ability to control it with your eyes. That is beyond amazing and an absolute game-changer for people with disabilities.
Not ground breaking. Canon was using eye tracking in their cameras back in 1992.

 
Not ground breaking. Canon was using eye tracking in their cameras back in 1992.


Conceptually? Yes. In practical use here's what that article had to say about it:

As I recall, there were generally two sets of users when it came to this technology: those for whom it worked, and those for whom it absolutely didn't. There weren't many in between.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Godspeed8230
Did they say anything about addressing VR nausea? That's an important hiccup that nobody seems to have solved yet. I wonder if the better resolution / lens instead of glasses gap creates a more stable view?
 
Personally, I'm looking forward to this and am glad Apple has left an open-ended question of what people can do with it. Let imaginations run wild with creative uses. I can see near-endless possibilities to what can be done with this device and any future iterations. The question on its future success is whether enough people still have an imagination, or if they're going to sit around grousing about how Apple didn't explicitly tell them what to do with it while failing to see the incredible number of opportunities it presents.
 
I’m not against the headset at all. I think Apple did an amazing job with the groundbreaking technology. You can tell they put a lot of research into it. They went wrong pricing it at $3,499.
Not at all. Vision Pro XR does not compete with Meta VR, they are not even in the same tech range and target market. Vision Pro is a direct competitor for Varjo XR3 which is also eye tracking, hand gesture only and the best XR before Vision Pro. Varjo XR3 costs $7000 (Euro 6495) + XR subscription (about $2000/yr) and Apple beat it by half with even much better resolution, zero latency and extreme high quality pass though.

 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.