Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
interesting how few outlets appear to be noticing how Apple's headset is priced like Microsoft's Hololens 2, with similarities around the feature set (AR...).
 
Hmm... I wonder what you might be saying in 10 years' time.
It's unlikely that monitors are going away, even in 10 years. It is much more likely that monitor tech will evolve and we'll see the sleek holographic-type displays that have littered scifi movies for decades.

It would be very surprising if headsets replace monitors/TVs. Headsets can't be shared. You can't invite friends over for movie night unless everyone has a headset. And even then, why bother if everyone is sitting around with a huge helmet covering his or her face?

Monitors will still very much be a thing in public places because they are (and will remain) lowest common denominator tech. The biggest obstacle that headsets face is the most obvious one. You have to wear them. While Apple's launch video was very impressive, I'm not remotely convinced that people want to wear a bulky space helmet all day.
 
Not sure how I feel about these headsets. It's just one more layer of separation between actual human contact. I do find the demonstrations of using facetime with this a bit funny. Everyone the wearer is seeing is showing their full face, but the wearer is wearing this headset, so what do the other participants see of the wearer? What's the point of facetime if we are all wearing these headsets and can't see each others faces?
Matt, my understanding is that a FaceID-like process constructs a synthetic image that others will see in FaceTime -- great idea if you're having a good-hair day when that image is built. My guess is that many of the heads-down/spooked-by-elevator-smalltalk/still-wearing-a-mask-for-anonimity-sake generation will love hiding behind goggles.
 
View attachment 2213856

It's just some Apple trickery. Just an outward display. You scan your face when setting it up and internal cameras do the rest.
Did you catch all-day use when plugged in 🤩

1686068295720.png
 
Most of the initial impressions I’ve read say it’s the best compared to what’s out there right now but none of them said what problem they think it’s solving. Apple didn’t say it either. They just pitched it as a general purpose computing platform on your face. But who wants to wear big, clunky googles on their face all the time?
 
Not a single Apple video that I saw showed someone with a headset walking around real people except the Dad who was using it as a video camera (Just as isolating as the dad with the giant camcorder in the 1980s).

People keep saying apple will have a hard time convincing people to wear it around others....but I dont think apple is planing that at all. Thats peoples view of AR and VR from sci-fi. Apple is sci-fi but not yet at that level.

I have seen other reviews. Basically people who use it are freaking out.

I told a fellow employee about it and he wasn't even surprised by the price because he was comparing it to a work laptop. If it's a laptop replacement the price is steep but reasonable. If it's a toy...sure it's absurd for all but the richest. If I get one...it will be as a laptop replacement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SFjohn
HoloLens has had this for years. Hasn't moved the market or developed a widely needed consumer use case to justify these types of devices. There are some good use cases in the enterprise space.
I’ve seen so many first takes focusing on Facebook/Meta but what about HoloLens? How different is Vision Pro to that product? Does Microsoft even talk about HoloLens any more?
 
  • Like
Reactions: arkitect
Most of the initial impressions I’ve read say it’s the best compared to what’s out there right now but none of them said what problem they think it’s solving. Apple didn’t say it either. They just pitched it as a general purpose computing platform on your face. But who wants to wear big, clunky googles on their face all the time?
Entertainment doesn’t solve any problems and does not need to.
 
Most of the initial impressions I’ve read say it’s the best compared to what’s out there right now but none of them said what problem they think it’s solving. Apple didn’t say it either. They just pitched it as a general purpose computing platform on your face. But who wants to wear big, clunky googles on their face all the time?
Again, I think there was a clear problem that it addressed. Limited screen real estate. Especially when traveling. Plus the privacy aspect of not having your screen visible in public.
 
This seems great for singles or for work but my BF is already getting annoyed when I flip too much on my iPhone. Now I am supposed to be completely isolated watching a movie on my own? Rip relationships 😅

I am also still trying to see what problems it is supposed to solve like I can already flip through multiple windows with different programs without wearing glasses or talk to people „face to face“ without even needing an „avatar“
 
Reminds me of the Sifi movies where they illuminate the insides of space helmets so you can see their faces, which of course would blind someone to the outside, but hey it's Showbiz!

Everything has a compromise. As amazing as Tony's setup was — it was also not immersive, nor mobile — so you were tied to a square light table. Tony's experience was designed for the 3rd person viewer, not the user.

You folks get it. These visions of the future are designed to look good on screen. Functionality isn't important. When I look at Tony's setup, I see a digital mess. It's a bunch of visual clutter made to look impressive/futuristic on screen, but who would actually want to work that way?

I think it's very telling that the vast majority of scifi does not imagine a future where VR is common and most visions of the future that incorporate VR are completely dystopian. They still use monitors in Star Trek and completely skipped over the isolating space helmet VR headset vibe in favor of the far more social and fun holodeck vision of the future.
 
Gee I wonder how much additional cost was the 'eyes in front' feature?

Reminds me of the Sifi movies where they illuminate the insides of space helmets so you can see their faces, which of course would blind someone to the outside, but hey it's Showbiz!
that feature will not make it to gen 2 or even the consumer model. Too creepy....but it does try to solve a problem it's just a very expertise way. A simple green or red light would do it.
 
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.
Apache and F35 helmet/targeting tech have entered the chat. 😁

But yes it is finally good to be moving away from 100 physical input required. Will also enable new ways of multitasking
 
Really excited for comments surrounding this headset to age like the original iPod thread. Be sure to quote people with the worst takes so when they edit them they're preserved for future giggling.

If a future headset addresses the shortcomings of the current headset, were the people pointing out the current headsets shortcomings really wrong?

Do you also go back and look at the keynote where Apple presented the Apple Watch with a dedicated button for accessing your contacts because they thought that's what people wanted from a watch? Apple gets stuff wrong all the time. The fact that they often iterate their way to something better doesn't make all criticism levelled against them invalid.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.