Apple Vision Pro Weighs Almost as Much as a 12.9-Inch iPad Pro

[doelcm82]

No, everyone wanted one cuz it was the web in your hands without having to break out a laptop. Doesn’t sound like much in writing but in practice it’s huge.

And as much as I rag on the iPad (Pro) for doing too little for its price, it’s my go-to for web browsing and content consumption. Way more convenient than a laptop. I always have it with me and it takes up almost zero space.

[scoff] $500 for a web browser when you already have one on your phone?

That's not me, that's the kind of answer you'd get if you said that was the reason you wanted an iPad.

Plus, it weighed 680 to 730 grams. More than an Apple Vision Pro and about the same as a 12" iPad Pro.

 

[return2sendai]

Not surprising at all.

In 15 years, we're going to look back on this much like we look at the original Newton MessagePad compared to a modern iPhone.

So in 30 years.

 

[return2sendai]

[scoff] $500 for a web browser when you already have one on your phone?

That's not me, that's the kind of answer you'd get if you said that was the reason you wanted an iPad.

Plus, it weighed 680 to 730 grams. More than an Apple Vision Pro and about the same as a 12" iPad Pro.

And over 1000 bucks for a phone

 

[Polinsky]

I do plenty of that, it just gets applied to gardening, carpentry and playing my instrument. Tech is a tool for work and getting things done, for me...not an outlet for creativity.

You seem to think that "creativity" must involve doing something physical. Creativity most often involves doing something with the mind. When I spend hours perfecting a photograph in Photoshop, I'm being very creative. Writing a program to accomplish a task is incredibly creative and rewarding. I just don't understand your anti-tech comes from.

 

[return2sendai]

I do plenty of that, it just gets applied to gardening, carpentry and playing my instrument. Tech is a tool for work and getting things done, for me...not an outlet for creativity.

I play a synthesiser

 

[svish]

That is a bit of weight. Hopefully it will be comfortable to wear.

 

[WarmWinterHat]

You seem to think that "creativity" must involve doing something physical. Creativity most often involves doing something with the mind. When I spend hours perfecting a photograph in Photoshop, I'm being very creative. Writing a program to accomplish a task is incredibly creative and rewarding. I just don't understand your anti-tech comes from.

No, I'm just referring to me. For others, such as yourself, it can involve tech. 😊

 

[spinedoc77]

"But being reflexively positive about something which may or may not happen in x amount of years may not be totally conducive to that product actually achieving that success."

What? How would someone here on a forum being reflexively positive (I'm certainly not) be "conducive" to a product actually achieving success. That makes no sense.

Success will be a function of Apple delivering a great product that many customers want to purchase.

I think you misread what I said, if you are pie in the sky about a product but stick your head in the sand about its shortcomings, then you don't have the ability to improve on those shortcomings. Many of your posts are lamenting the lack of imagination on the part of those who are bringing up the negative points of the VP. It's not a lack of imagination, it's that these negatives are real and consumers will bring them up. Whether or not that means the VP will be a hit or a dud, I don't know, and most don't necessarily disagree that in 5-10 years this may be something really great. But the key word is "may," because there are a lot of potential missteps here.

 

[spinedoc77]

My analogy is that there are plenty of AR/VR headsets that do incredibly similar things they just aren't as pretty. And if there are more use cases for it than watching movies and doing computing you should let Apple know that since that's all they could really seem to muster even 7 months after showing it off.

This. So far I haven't seen anything new here, and Apple hasn't voiced what direction they would like to take with this. It almost seems as if they are hoping a dev or devs reinvent the wheel and create some revolutionary app or functionality. Sure I can dream about tomorrow and what this *might* turn into, but TODAY this is just a really really nice VR headset.

 

[citysnaps]

I think you misread what I said, if you are pie in the sky about a product but stick your head in the sand about its shortcomings, then you don't have the ability to improve on those shortcomings. Many of your posts are lamenting the lack of imagination on the part of those who are bringing up the negative points of the VP. It's not a lack of imagination, it's that these negatives are real and consumers will bring them up. Whether or not that means the VP will be a hit or a dud, I don't know, and most don't necessarily disagree that in 5-10 years this may be something really great. But the key word is "may," because there are a lot of potential missteps here.

I'm hardly pie in the sky about AVP. As an engineer having been involved in multiple product developments over the years, I know that there are always difficult engineering trades that need to be made. With respect to Apple, that goes all the way back to the first Mac with a 7.5" B&W screen and limited memory. And especially the first iPod/iPhone/iPad/Watch/AirPods/etc., all pronounced as flops by many here.

"Many of your posts are lamenting the lack of imagination on the part of those who are bringing up the negative points of the VP. "

If it were just negative points that would be fine. And I agree that there are limitations with AVP, such as battery capacity, runtime, size/weight, etc.

I also have stated this is a first generation product, which will evolve into further generations of AVPs that are smaller, lighter weight, lower power dissipation (and thus longer run time), and lower cost. That's how products evolve in general, and as demonstrated many times by Apple. All devices will have limitations and flaws knowing that one will never have 100% perfection 100% of the time. It's how those limitations are traded off and managed that result in successful products that have a bright future, and evolving with future generations as the technology becomes more accessible at lower costs.

But many here go much further and point blank say there are no uses for AVP (and thus AR and VR), and as a result it will fail.

For me that speaks to a lack of imagination and not being interested into doing even a tiny bit of research about AR/VR in general, and how it's been used in the past and present in many different disciplines. That refusal to do even a little bit of research speaks to a lack of curiosity.

 

[bgillander]

However, the Meta Quest Pro has a weighted battery pack at the back of the headset's headband to make it much less front-heavy and ostensibly improve comfort.

It seems strange that Meta would add extra weight to the battery pack of a headset. Are you sure they didn’t just move the battery to the back of the headband to use its normal weight as a counterbalance?

 

[spinedoc77]

I'm hardly pie in the sky about AVP. As an engineer having been involved in multiple product developments over the years, I know that there are always difficult engineering trades that need to be made. With respect to Apple, that goes all the way back to the first Mac with a 7.5" B&W screen and limited memory. And especially the first iPod/iPhone/iPad/Watch/AirPods/etc., all pronounced as flops by many here.

"Many of your posts are lamenting the lack of imagination on the part of those who are bringing up the negative points of the VP. "

If it were just negative points that would be fine. And I agree that there are limitations with AVP, such as battery capacity, runtime, size/weight, etc.

I also have stated this is a first generation product, which will evolve into further generations of AVPs that are smaller, lighter weight, lower power dissipation (and thus longer run time), and lower cost. That's how products evolve in general, and as demonstrated many times by Apple. All devices will have limitations and flaws knowing that one will never have 100% perfection 100% of the time. It's how those limitations are traded off and managed that result in successful products that have a bright future, and evolving with future generations as the technology becomes more accessible at lower costs.

But many here go much further and point blank say there are no uses for AVP (and thus AR and VR), and as a result it will fail.

For me that speaks to a lack of imagination and not being interested into doing even a tiny bit of research about AR/VR in general, and how it's been used in the past and present in many different disciplines. That refusal to do even a little bit of research speaks to a lack of curiosity.

I think we are in agreement for the most part. I agree, saying the VP has no purpose is really saying AR/VR in general has no purpose, which is extremely short sighted. But at the same time, today's AR/VR solutions, including the VP, are extremely bulky, have battery issues, and really haven't found any killer applications or functionality. Seems to me that a LOT of the frustration here is that Apple hasn't shown anything beyond just a fancy AR/VR headset. Where is the paradigm shift? Where is the functionality which changes how we interface with AR/VR?

We can pontificate all we want about how "it's coming" and how version 4.3 of the VP will finally give us what we want, but at the end of the day it's just crystal ball waving and assuming Apple will be the one to reinvent the wheel. Meta, for example, is putting billions and billions into this paradigm and at least they have some sort of roadmap between games and their virtual worlds. So why should I put down $3500 on a VP to support a company that isn't even giving me a roadmap of where they are going with this tech? I TOTALLY get the guy who says "I want the best AR/VR unit out there regardless of cost," and if I enjoyed AR/VR more that might even be me. But yeah, I don't think this is going to fail long term, Apple is just going to have to really do a lot more to win over consumers IMO, and it's not even technology at this point but applications and functionality.

Edit: Also wanted to add, much of what I personally say is based on being an Apple shareholder. That changes the perspective a bit and is why personally I value more information so I can make investing decisions.

 

[citysnaps]

But at the same time, today's AR/VR solutions, including the VP, are extremely bulky, have battery issues, and really haven't found any killer applications or functionality. Seems to me that a LOT of the frustration here is that Apple hasn't shown anything beyond just a fancy AR/VR headset. Where is the paradigm shift? Where is the functionality which changes how we interface with AR/VR?

You're going to hate this... but I believe that's coming. And that Apple has likely been working with trusted developers under the radar, and of course internally, for years. My view is Apple thrust with the current AVP device is to primarily get it quickly in the hands of as many developers (current and potential) as possible.

I suspect this is a huge effort on Apple's part. And is taxing, with a lot of moving parts, even for a company of Apple's size. Things don't happen instantaneously, even for Apple.

Also, as you probably already know, Apple has a culture of new device secrecy, for a variety of reasons relating to not releasing too much information, with respect to Apple tech/ideas/techniques/etc ending up in competitive devices from other companies, patents being filed, etc.

Also... many believe Apple being the size it is has infinite resources available to do anything they want, and being able to turn on a dime. I've never found that to be true working for both small and very large tech companies.

 

[spinedoc77]

You're going to hate this... but I believe that's coming. And that Apple has likely been working with trusted developers under the radar, and of course internally, for years. My view is Apple thrust with the current AVP device is to primarily get it quickly in the hands of as many developers (current and potential) as possible.

I suspect this is a huge effort on Apple's part. And is taxing, with a lot of moving parts, even for a company of Apple's size. Things don't happen instantaneously, even for Apple.

Also, as you probably already know, Apple has a culture of new device secrecy, for a variety of reasons relating to not releasing too much information, with respect to Apple tech/ideas/techniques/etc ending up in competitive devices from other companies, patents being filed, etc.

Also... many believe Apple being the size it is has infinite resources available to do anything they want, and being able to turn on a dime. I've never found that to be true working for both small and very large tech companies.

I'd be more inclined to believe this if Apple had even made the effort to revamp their core apps into VisionOS, which for the most part they didn't. I'm sure Apple has some sort of roadmap, but withholding it from consumers just doesn't make sense. Although you're right, this is the development round and really not intended for mom and pop consumers, so I would expect much of this, including core app functionality, to be addressed in the 1-2 years until I assume they will release a consumer version.

It all sounds good, but I don't know, the seat of the pants totally baseless instinct in my head is screaming subfailure here, at least not full failure but something that will be only a tiny segment of their business. But again, that's totally baseless and just my gut. The industry will continue to improve technology and once it becomes sufficiently miniaturized we will see a much more robust consumer reaction. I don't think these will approach the market penetration of say the iPhone, or even the iPad, until they become much smaller, lighter, and cheaper, and possibly never unless they come up with a solid reason to buy them.

 

[citysnaps]

I'd be more inclined to believe this if Apple had even made the effort to revamp their core apps into VisionOS, which for the most part they didn't.

I think that's because of the sheer effort in launching AVP, not just a new product, but a new product category, somewhat timely and not having the internal resources to make that instantly happen - despite Apple's size. IOW, they went with what they had, under a ton of pressure, to meet their internal release deadline. Which I suspect had a lot to do with getting loads of first gen AVPs into developers (or wanna be developers) hands as quickly as possible.

Just a guess, but I think it's well-reasoned.

I don't think these will approach the market penetration of say the iPhone, or even the iPad, until they become much smaller, lighter, and cheaper, and possibly never unless they come up with a solid reason to buy them.

For sure on that. Especially with respect to iPhone.

 

[reyesmac]

All its competitors have games on theirs and leans towards a lower age demographic. It's going to be interesting what the must have experience will be on the Vision Pro as most people use their devices for YouTube and sites from their competitors who are not creating apps for this. The adult industry is going to have to once again lead the charge to make this the must have item by making Apple a forbidden fruit again.
Racing games and shooters are needed on this thing. As well as new AR games that work on the surfaces you have. But with controls being what they are, they would have to create games that only work with this headset making it harder to port hits to other platforms. However, with only one person in the home able to use it due to cost of ownership, all of these experiences are ones you have alone. If they don't create a virtual world to explore where all Vision Pro owners can inhabit and interact with each other, this is going to be Apples most isolating technology yet. The possibilities of what it can do are amazing, but they wont go there. If what it will do is put screens in front of you, at this cost it's cheaper to covert a walk in closet to a virtual world full of monitors.

 

[bgillander]

All its competitors have games on theirs and leans towards a lower age demographic. It's going to be interesting what the must have experience will be on the Vision Pro as most people use their devices for YouTube and sites from their competitors who are not creating apps for this. The adult industry is going to have to once again lead the charge to make this the must have item by making Apple a forbidden fruit again.
Racing games and shooters are needed on this thing. As well as new AR games that work on the surfaces you have. But with controls being what they are, they would have to create games that only work with this headset making it harder to port hits to other platforms. However, with only one person in the home able to use it due to cost of ownership, all of these experiences are ones you have alone. If they don't create a virtual world to explore where all Vision Pro owners can inhabit and interact with each other, this is going to be Apples most isolating technology yet. The possibilities of what it can do are amazing, but they wont go there. If what it will do is put screens in front of you, at this cost it's cheaper to covert a walk in closet to a virtual world full of monitors.

I'm hate to break it to you, but adding a walk in closet would actually cost me more. I'm sure there are a few others that don't simply have spare walk in closets available. If only there was some virtual way to add space.

 

[TracerAnalog]

That's actually better than what I thought it would be. Balancing is gonna be the problem.

Yup. My Pico 4 comes in at 585 grams, but that is very well balanced.