$3k is completely reasonable--heck it will seem cheap if the device fulfills the dream. If iPhones were the only smartphone and priced at $3k, I bet the adoption would be almost identical, with longer upgrade cycles.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple's Mixed Reality Headset to Feature iOS-Like Interface, Advanced Hand Tracking, and Will Work as Second Display for Mac
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm certainly buying one even if it comes in at $3k. I'd probably go up to $3500, but anything above that would be hard to justify.
If they start the base model at 3k, I could see myself pushing the upper limits of my wallet to spec it out. Hopefully I’m composed enough during the release to keep my self under control.
Using it as an external display, aha, that explains the two TB ports at the front of the Mac Studio. That makes me want to wait for the next Studio instead of going for the Mini Pro.
I have about as much idea as any of us armchair experts on the forum (probably less) but supposedly the Apple headset will feature 4k tall screens.
Most current headsets have about 2k tall screens and and offer around 20 PPD. (Pixels Per Degree of vision)
(If viewing on your mobile, request desktop site in safari on this wiki page, it messes up otherwise)
Now, I assume (I'm bad at maths) that the PPD scaling from a 2k screen to a 4k screen would be linear since we're talking about degrees not area - so this headset *napkin maths* should be about 40 PPD.
(please correct me if this is totally wrong)
Apples own marketing states their "retina" definition is anything over 57 PPD.
SO, sorry for that long and winding road ... you are likely going to perceive pixels on this, but it's gonna be about double what's currently on the mass market. 6k tall screens will likely get us to 'retina' quality VR.
(This Varjo headset cleverly uses a small higher resolution screen at the centre of your FOV with a lower resolution for the periphery)
As for your current monitor that you might be staring at, use this handy PPD calculator to see what PPD you're experiencing at your current seating distance.
Last edited:
Definitely at risk of falling into Glasshole catagory if people use the AR functionality outside of their office. I'm still going to save my $3000 for Apple's AR glasses when they are finally able to make them not look geeky.
Siri, or Alexa? Sorry guys, but you are behind the curve. The upcoming implementations of Chat-GPT 4.0, if integrated with voice and voice control, will make Siri look as inadequate as we've always believed it to be. Please Apple, buy into this tech before we are all stuck with dull Microsoft phones that actually answer what we want to know.
Siri, or Alexa? Sorry guys, but you are behind the curve. The upcoming implementations of Chat-GPT 4.0, if integrated with voice and voice control, will make Siri look as inadequate as we've always believed it to be. Please Apple, buy into this tech before we are all stuck with dull Microsoft phones that actually answer what we want to know.
I have no interest in VR. I want less screen time and more reality. If anything I like the simplicity of Apple products because it just works without messing with the settings. IMO VR will not move humanity forward.
I don't find wearing glasses with the Quest 2 to be particularly onerous, personally, but I also wouldn't necessarily object to a solution which obviates the need for my glasses. I have briefly considered getting contacts again, but it just hasn't been nearly big enough of an issue to bother. So while your opinion on that particular point seems debatable, the notion that lens inserts are "absolutely" the answer is very flimsy indeed.
First off, even the cheapest of these devices still aren't particularly "cheap." As such, it's not that uncommon for multiple users to share the use of a single device. In my own household, I share our Quest 2 with three of my kids. I am extremely nearsighted. None of my kids inherited that; thankfully they got my wife's excellent vision. Thus, if Apple were to go with the lens insert option, it has to be easy and quick to swap out the prescription lenses for standard lenses. Otherwise, it becomes an annoyance every time someone else wants to use the goggles. As it is with our Quest 2, all I have to do is take it off and hand it to the next person; no-muss-no-fuss.
Secondly, it's not an exclusively either/or situation. When I was younger, I once used an old-gen VR headset at an arcade which did not make any allowances for wearing glasses at all, but rather it included a built-in mechanism for enabling the user to manually adjust the focus to match their vision requirements. As I recall, it worked pretty well; I could see what was going on without difficulty.
Optometrists used to have even more sophisticated focusing tools at their disposal. If you've ever had the old-style glaucoma "puff" test performed, you might already know what I'm talking about; the testing equipment itself somehow measured your eyes and adjusted the focus for you. It was really a very peculiar experience, and you only got to appreciate the effect for about a fraction of a second before the machine ruined it all by puffing air at you to complete the test... but the point is that this technology exists and has for many years.
Now, I'm not expecting Apple to come out with an automatic optometry level solution, even at the premium price that they are rumored to target. I'm also not necessarily expecting them to show us a pair of goggles in its "final form" right out of the gates. But with all of their experience with iPhone camera lenses, something like that arcade's solution should be well within reach for them.
And just wait for the cost of different coloured straps.........
AR mode might be great for someone who uses reading glasses: Built in lenses are constant diopter unlike progressive glasses that have fairly narrow focus band. Everything you see would again be in focus 🤓
I start to think that this might actually be better than a high end display for us glass-wearers (writing this on Apple 6K display).
I start to think that this might actually be better than a high end display for us glass-wearers (writing this on Apple 6K display).
I think they'd be more likely to go wireless display extension (a la Sidecar on iPad) vs. a physical USB-C connection though, right? Wonder if it will require the newer machines with Wi-Fi 6E or Bluetooth 5.3 for the 120Hz VR.
At $3k for something that will no doubt see oodles of improvements in the 2 years later model, it's just a whacky oddity. What they should do is give it to everyone and then charge a higher priced subscription.
Right but then you have to wear it on your head all day every day? Not for me. Even the airpods max hurt after a bit. Now I'll have a 2 pound weight on my face triggering all new interesting chiropractor issues years from now? Nah.
Should come with a tractor trailer of Excedrin.I got a little migraine and headache watching that. So are we NOT supposed to be purchasing Apple's External Display?
I’d hope to have the option for wired so that it doesn’t have to rely on battery packs. The majority of the time I imagine I’ll be using this with my laptop.
I'm floored. Obviously, when they say it could be used as a second display, they mean INSTEAD of the main display, rather than in parallel to your main display. You obviously wouldn't look through your AR glasses to look at your other display!
Engineers, scientists, architects, doctors, even some designers.
Consumer headsets for engineering and medical professionals?
Even Microsoft’s multi billion dollar research and contracts fail at this level.
The fail stories never seem to end.
The Army's futuristic new goggles actually make soldiers less lethal, Pentagon weapons tester says
“Soldiers hit fewer targets and engaged targets more slowly with IVAS 1.0 than with their current equipment on the buddy team live fire range."
taskandpurpose.com
If you’re using it as a display extension, the headset would still be rendering the overall scene locally, but would update the image on the virtual screen as it gets updates over wi-fi or Bluetooth. So it wouldn’t need any more bandwidth than sidecar or airplay. It’s fine for the virtual display image to only update at 60Hz, or even miss a few frames, because the position of the virtual screen is still being updated at 90Hz or 120Hz to match your head’s movement.
High bandwidth is only needed if you want to render the whole 3D scene on the Mac because it’s too complex to be rendered locally.
I get that perspective but Apple doesn’t generally lower prices with new versions. Anyone who thinks this thing will drop significantly in price with the next version is dreaming in my opinion. Furthermore, what incentive is there to develop for it if it’s very expensive and out of most users’ reach? It’s a bit of a chicken and egg problem. Unless it sells well, developers have little incentive to develop for it and without apps, consumers have little incentive to buy it. I hope Apple surprises us with the price. I think the rumored $3K price will make it very hard to sell beyond the built-in fanboy market.
I think whether or not $3k is a good value will depend on what it delivers (eg it cures cancer). The rumored absolute price point is not out of reach for Apple's generally more affluent customer base. In fact it's hardly even that expensive relative to the product portfolio. This is a company that finds a viable market for $6500 MBP's, $1000 monitor stands, $5K monitors, $50K+ Mac Pros, and $20 polishing cloths. The company finds demand for $1600 phones when very good alternatives exist at a fraction of the price. Every time something is released the reaction to pricing is always the same but the products are always in high demand. For sure at the rumored price the product will not be mass market any more than Pro Display's are but I think that's understood. Unlike competitors Apple has the ability to create a low cost mass market spec product by leveraging the enormous volume of everything in the BOM - displays, sensors, silicon, etc. - even if the product itself is initially low volume.