At $3,500, will you buy a Vision Pro?

[Appleandy]

Why are people acting as is this is a new idea? Other headsets are on the Market which already do the majority of the features

Windows Mixed Reality - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[Abazigal]

Why are people acting as is this is a new idea? Other headsets are on the Market which already do the majority of the features

Windows Mixed Reality - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

There's doing it, and doing it well.

Just like the iPad (and every tablet before it), the Apple Watch (and every smartwatch and fitness tracker before it), and AirPods (and all other wireless earbuds before it).

I am excited to see Apple's implementation, and how they use their control over hardware, software and services to iron out all the pain points and deliver a refined experience.

 

[Appleandy]

There's doing it, and doing it well.

Just like the iPad (and every tablet before it), the Apple Watch (and every smartwatch and fitness tracker before it), and AirPods (and all other wireless earbuds before it).

I am excited to see Apple's implementation, and how they use their control over hardware, software and services to iron out all the pain points and deliver a refined experience.

Personally I'm expecting a flop. Dev's aren't interested and the cost to buy it is absurd for a commercial purchase

Looks doomed, let's hope the 2.0 version is under $1000

 

[Abazigal]

Personally I'm expecting a flop. Dev's aren't interested and the cost to buy it is absurd for a commercial purchase

Looks doomed, let's hope the 2.0 version is under $1000

It's ridiculous to expect the price to suddenly drop by 75% within the span of a year. Especially when we know that supply will be extremely constrained at launch, and looks set to stay that way for the next couple of years at least. So I expect Apple to easily sell every unit they make (to the early adopters at least).

It will be hard to gauge whether said product is a success or a flop initially at least.

 

[Yourbigpalal83]

I got to say, it would take me almost HALF A YEAR to save up that kind of money...but boy am i tempted. I was there for the first iPad, and Apple Watch, and i really want to be there for this...but it is a MASSIVE amount of money and i get the feeling this is not really meant for a guy like me with very little disposable income....

BUT BOY OH BOY DO I WANT IT BADLY!

Im still debating on if i want to save up for months on end to get this (I'm guessing it would come out in March/April) but it looks amazing!

Im still going back and forth if i wana save up for this long!

 

[Basic75]

BUT BOY OH BOY DO I WANT IT BADLY!

What for?

 

[Yourbigpalal83]

What for?

To experience it of course! You cant tell me that doesnt look amazing if it works they way claim it will. is it practical or cost effective? HELL NO! Its basically a Ipad/Mac strapped to your head and yes, i totally agree with alot of people saying its a solution in search of a problem. But then again...so was the iPhone and the Ipad. Did any of us NEED a smart phone with a touch screen interface and all these apps and cameras? NO. We wanted it! Same with the Ipad, it was basically a keyboardless touch screen giant Iphone, but it sold!

Now to be fair, both were alot cheeper then this! but new technology always comes out at a high cost!

I heard all these arguments with every single tech product that came out from apple and other companies. Do you think the first telephones or cars or tvs were cheep?

Why watch tv when you can listen to the radio...hell why listen to a radio when you can just go out and see a band play somewhere?

Why make a phone call when you can just send a letter? Why buy a car when you could just ride a horse? Why ride a horse when you can just walk?

All extreme examples granted, but a fair argument! Do i think the apple vision pro will change everything over night? No i dont. It will be a decade before something like this is perfected, and mass adopted and you see people walking around in public with a glasses like version of this, and even then it will have limitations!

But you got to start somewhere, and the starting price is going to be 3500 dollars and in all fairness, this very well may tank hard.

This may be apples next newton! But then again, how many generations of the newton was there before they killed it off and used more advance tech learned from that in modern devices?

Im only 40 years old and yet ive been down this road before over the past 20 years of my life with various tech like the smart phone, the tablet, the smart watch, etc.

Im there now with the foldable phone! I want an apple foldable phone but it might be a few years before i get one! I hear the same thing with that like "Isnt a normal smart phone enough or why not just buy a tablet and a phone" etc.

Point im trying to make is, we all say apple doesnt innovate anymore, and when they do with this, we moan about the price and say its a solution for a non existant problem.

you cant have it both ways!

I think it looks cool and would be amazing to use and i want one! Im going to try to get one next year if i can if not for any other reason to say i was there and had one of these things when it came out!

Thats why i love tech! Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesnt! But im glad im around to witness such things in the modern age, for good or ill!

 

[Piggie]

Here's a question that's a pretty fundamental one.

Is Apple doing this is the right or wrong direction?

Generally when a product is made, you start with something that you can sell to consumers and then as time goes on and you build a customer base you do a few things:
1: Year on year (or a bit longer) make the product better technically.
2: As this happens you are able to gradually raise the price.
3: Software evolves and can get better due to the hardware improving.
4: The customer base grows due to all of the above.

Apple did this with virtually all of it's products, and, other than a few exceptions, it's pretty common across industry to build products this way.

One could look at Meta, with the Quest 1, then the Quest 2, and in a few months the Quest 3 that they are following this path with the devices getting more advanced with each iteration and it gives them time to see what works with customers, what the devs find useful or not, and what the most important features to improve on the next model should be their main focus to upgrade.
We all know Meta has various advances prototypes in-house and will be planning the early stages of what they will want to see the Quest 4 to be able to offer.

One could reasonably say this is the best idea, the only real challenge is of course keeping customers and gaining new customers who wish to be along for this evolving ride.

Apple however are going completely the opposite approach and one they (and most companies) almost never do.
Start with a product as a "Showpiece" that almost no-one can afford or thinks they want, and over the years try and work backwards, reducing aspects of the product, and working to lower the price, down and down and down, hoping to keep potential "years from now" customers interested that when they are finally (and this might be 5 or even longer) years from now, it's eventually down to a price point where your intended customers are at last willing to pay out the hundreds of dollars to at last own one.

And remember this is not a typical you trap a customer and make them a long term one buy selling an affordable product they start to enjoy and then year after year offer them a better product at a slightly higher price so they come with you for the ride.

I will admit I'm very unsure if this reverse concept is a good one.
I have a Quest 2 (only bought a few months ago) as it was affordable and if I'm honest very impressive for the actual price, and I shall without doubt be getting a Quest 3 as right now I'm more than happy to "stay for the improving ride"

I'm 100% sure Meta will gain sales due to Apple's decision to try and make a desirable product that's financially out of the question. It will be interesting to see over they years which strategy pays off as I've no doubt Meta's product will get technically better year after year, while others hope Apple's current product will get cheaper and cheaper year after year.
Will the products kind of meet in the middle I wonder eventually?

It's going to be interesting to see two very different approaches on how to market a product most people don't have and most people don't think they really want.

 

[Expos of 1969]

Currently no interest at any price. In a few years and hopefully with many refinements I will revisit the decision.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

Here's a question that's a pretty fundamental one.

Is Apple doing this is the right or wrong direction?

Generally when a product is made, you start with something that you can sell to consumers and then as time goes on and you build a customer base you do a few things:
1: Year on year (or a bit longer) make the product better technically.
2: As this happens you are able to gradually raise the price.
3: Software evolves and can get better due to the hardware improving.
4: The customer base grows due to all of the above.

Apple did this with virtually all of it's products, and, other than a few exceptions, it's pretty common across industry to build products this way.

One could look at Meta, with the Quest 1, then the Quest 2, and in a few months the Quest 3 that they are following this path with the devices getting more advanced with each iteration and it gives them time to see what works with customers, what the devs find useful or not, and what the most important features to improve on the next model should be their main focus to upgrade.
We all know Meta has various advances prototypes in-house and will be planning the early stages of what they will want to see the Quest 4 to be able to offer.

One could reasonably say this is the best idea, the only real challenge is of course keeping customers and gaining new customers who wish to be along for this evolving ride.

Apple however are going completely the opposite approach and one they (and most companies) almost never do.
Start with a product as a "Showpiece" that almost no-one can afford or thinks they want, and over the years try and work backwards, reducing aspects of the product, and working to lower the price, down and down and down, hoping to keep potential "years from now" customers interested that when they are finally (and this might be 5 or even longer) years from now, it's eventually down to a price point where your intended customers are at last willing to pay out the hundreds of dollars to at last own one.

And remember this is not a typical you trap a customer and make them a long term one buy selling an affordable product they start to enjoy and then year after year offer them a better product at a slightly higher price so they come with you for the ride.

I will admit I'm very unsure if this reverse concept is a good one.
I have a Quest 2 (only bought a few months ago) as it was affordable and if I'm honest very impressive for the actual price, and I shall without doubt be getting a Quest 3 as right now I'm more than happy to "stay for the improving ride"

I'm 100% sure Meta will gain sales due to Apple's decision to try and make a desirable product that's financially out of the question. It will be interesting to see over they years which strategy pays off as I've no doubt Meta's product will get technically better year after year, while others hope Apple's current product will get cheaper and cheaper year after year.
Will the products kind of meet in the middle I wonder eventually?

It's going to be interesting to see two very different approaches on how to market a product most people don't have and most people don't think they really want.

Great post and one that asks many of the questions I have too. Apple going in for the high end niche to start with and the assumption they’ll make additional options at a cheaper price point is definitively an interesting approach. As a consumer, if I saw the £3.5k all singing Vision Pro and then a very slimmed down, feature lacking standard model, it might not be as appealing as other manufacturers who offer more for the money. I agree, Apple should build this up, not downgrade to make it more popular. In true Apple style we all know we’ll eventually see a very feature starved option at a higher price point for the masses, powered by its brand and marketed via attractive colours and people dancing in front of white backgrounds.

This is a product I am very sceptical about at this point and that is very much driven by the eye watering launch price. I just can’t see this becoming part of the average Apple using family home yet.

 

[Night Spring]

I will admit I'm very unsure if this reverse concept is a good one.
I have a Quest 2 (only bought a few months ago) as it was affordable and if I'm honest very impressive for the actual price, and I shall without doubt be getting a Quest 3 as right now I'm more than happy to "stay for the improving ride"

And I had no interest in the Quest, because all I heard about it was that it was for gaming, and not much else. Apple grabbed my interest because they showed I could use the VP for reading and writing texts, and that iOS apps will work on it from day one. How good is the Quest at regular productivity tasks right now? Does it make you feel like it could potentially replace your computer? Because that's how watching the VP presentation made me think -- that several generations down the line, a VP could be my main computing device, replacing my iPad and my Mac. If it can do that, then $3500 is what many full computer systems already cost.

I don't think Apple will take away functionality from the VP to being down the cost. When they made low-cost versions of iPhones and Apple watches, none of the low-cost versions had less functionality than the first gen versions of these products. I expect the VP to follow a similar pattern. I think any cost reduction will come from production technology and process improving over time.

 

[Piggie]

And I had no interest in the Quest, because all I heard about it was that it was for gaming, and not much else. Apple grabbed my interest because they showed I could use the VP for reading and writing texts, and that iOS apps will work on it from day one. How good is the Quest at regular productivity tasks right now? Does it make you feel like it could potentially replace your computer? Because that's how watching the VP presentation made me think -- that several generations down the line, a VP could be my main computing device, replacing my iPad and my Mac. If it can do that, then $3500 is what many full computer systems already cost.

I don't think Apple will take away functionality from the VP to being down the cost. When they made low-cost versions of iPhones and Apple watches, none of the low-cost versions had less functionality than the first gen versions of these products. I expect the VP to follow a similar pattern. I think any cost reduction will come from production technology and process improving over time.

It's true that Meta has chosen to currently aim it's product at those looking more towards the entertainment side of VR.
The real world reality it that it involves effort and inconvenience to place any headset strapped onto your face, so the pay-off / benefit / experience has to be great enough to put up with doing this.

A VR world you can enter and remove yourself from reality and enter "another world" whilst still being in the comfort/safety of your home is a pretty BIG experience and even for me, it can really make you feel you are enjoying some experience that can be extremely engaging without the need to leave your home.

If we step away from Entertainment as an experience, we do of course have a few options for fitness/exercise which I know many do enjoy. Supernatural of course being probably the most notable

Or course if you wish you can always enjoy a BIG Screen movie type of experience with a number of apps to give you the feeling of a GIANT screen when you pay be sitting on a plane, in bed or some busy family-home type situation where you wish to take some time out (with earbuds)

Then of course for your computer you can use the superb Virtual Desktop app which wirelessly streams your computer screen to your VR headset, again at any size in multiple environments.

Note: Visually is this as good as the Apple Vision Pro. No of course not.
The device was launched to the public three years ago, and the Vision Pro has not yet launched and it's going to cost TWELVE TIMES as much plus tax.
We of course have the Quest 3 launching in a few months time as a slightly higher price, but vastly better pass-thru (including other improvements)

Honestly for the current $299 to get the VR experience it's one hell of a bargain for what it can do.
Or just go onto a local site and pick up a pre-owned one if that's too much.

Honesty unless you are 100% anti the whole deal, I'd rather pay this and enjoy what it can do now as opposed to waiting 5+ years for Apple to perhaps offer me something more affordable.

 

[Night Spring]

The real world reality it that it involves effort and inconvenience to place any headset strapped onto your face, so the pay-off / benefit / experience has to be great enough to put up with doing this.

A VR world you can enter and remove yourself from reality and enter "another world" whilst still being in the comfort/safety of your home is a pretty BIG experience and even for me, it can really make you feel you are enjoying some experience that can be extremely engaging without the need to leave your home

You are right about the payoff/benefit needing to be good enough. And for me, I have no interest in entering "another world," even for $300. If I bought a device that does that, I'll use it a few times for the novelty, then it will sit on a shelf collecting dust.

You say the Virtual Desk lets you stream your computer screen to the Quest. But do you actually use it often? If not why not?

Can I bring Quest with me on a trip, and stream my home computer screen to it? If not, what productivity apps are available for it?

In order for the VP to be successful, it has to give you a very good experience with productivity tasks, as good or better than doing them at your computer or iPad. We won't know whether Apple has achieved that until the VP is released and people get to use it in their daily lives. But if the VP at $3500 does achieve that level of usefulness for productivity tasks, and Quest at $300 is still aspiring to reach that level, and lets say in 5 years, both Apple and Quest manage to offer a VR/AR headset that's good at productivity tasks for between $1000-$2000?

I think Apple would have an advantage, having built up a reputation at being superior to the Quest on productivity. Of course it would be different if Quest manages to offer comparable productivity experience with VP quicker and cheaper. It'll be very interesting to see how these headsets develop over the next few years.

 

[Piggie]

You are right about the payoff/benefit needing to be good enough. And for me, I have no interest in entering "another world," even for $300. If I bought a device that does that, I'll use it a few times for the novelty, then it will sit on a shelf collecting dust.

You say the Virtual Desk lets you stream your computer screen to the Quest. But do you actually use it often? If not why not?

Can I bring Quest with me on a trip, and stream my home computer screen to it? If not, what productivity apps are available for it?

In order for the VP to be successful, it has to give you a very good experience with productivity tasks, as good or better than doing them at your computer or iPad. We won't know whether Apple has achieved that until the VP is released and people get to use it in their daily lives. But if the VP at $3500 does achieve that level of usefulness for productivity tasks, and Quest at $300 is still aspiring to reach that level, and lets say in 5 years, both Apple and Quest manage to offer a VR/AR headset that's good at productivity tasks for between $1000-$2000?

I think Apple would have an advantage, having built up a reputation at being superior to the Quest on productivity. Of course it would be different if Quest manages to offer comparable productivity experience with VP quicker and cheaper. It'll be very interesting to see how these headsets develop over the next few years.

Sure and we all set our own value on things. If you don't even wish to consider a pre-owned device, let's say $200 to experience one could argue was at least an enjoyable VR experience, then it probably shows your level of interest in the whole concept is pretty low indeed. Even if it was to have the experience and then sell it on if it was not for you.

The virtual desktop app, I use to stream SteamVR to the headset.
As I said, part of this is to stream your computer display to be a floating flat or curved screen at any size you like floating in front of you to do computing on.
But it's not something I have much interest in doing, and something I actually strongly feel Apple is going to realise is something most users don't want to do either.
Can it have some uses? Sure, but your normal person is still going to prefer not wearing anything on their face, and being in the "real world" looking at real monitors to get work done, or just at home with the family with their computer. Yes there are some uses you can think of, but I'm sure this is not going to be a mainstream use.

To your question, No you can't go on a trip with just your quest 2 and stream your computer to it.
And neither will you be able to with your Apple vision pro because connection speeds are just not good enough to do that type of work, so both devices would then need to rely on their onboard capabilities.

I do agree with you that currently Apple are pushing productivity with their device and officially totally ignoring entertainment. Which is odd as right now the only real sizable market for all these devices is entertainment.

I can't say I'm totally sure ignoring the only current market is the best idea. And I would have liked them to try and appeal to both markets. Not just the sad lonely person in their fictional super tidy home using the product alone market. There was pretty much no "fun and enjoyment with the family" aspect shown, just a cold and bleak style of dystopian future.

It will for sure be interesting to see how this all works out.
Mum, Dad and the two children all sitting at home together with AR/VR all sharing a fun experience together in a fantasy scenario could be one future, but not if that currently means $14,000 to make than a reality

Honestly. If the Vison Pro "Only" did the things Apple showed to the public during their presentation and it cost $500 I'd not buy it, and I'm sure "normal consumers" would not buy it either.
It needs to offer something so great that they can't experience it without owning the product to get normal people to pay for and wear these devices.
As I said at the beginning, Entering and experiencing a "Virtual World" that cannot be experienced in any other way or with any other type of device "IS" a reason many are willing to put up with the inconvenience of wearing it.

I love "Walkabout Mini Golf" as it's an experience I am unable to get in any other way so I will put up with wearing my headset to enjoy "being somewhere else" that does not exist in the real world

 

[Night Spring]

The virtual desktop app, I use to stream SteamVR to the headset.
As I said, part of this is to stream your computer display to be a floating flat or curved screen at any size you like floating in front of you to do computing on.
But it's not something I have much interest in doing, and something I actually strongly feel Apple is going to realise is something most users don't want to do either.
Can it have some uses? Sure, but your normal person is still going to prefer not wearing anything on their face, and being in the "real world" looking at real monitors to get work done, or just at home with the family with their computer. Yes there are some uses you can think of, but I'm sure this is not going to be a mainstream use.

And yet, Apple has bet that productivity is the use case that will attract more users to VR computing, and there is at least one user -- me -- who feel that way.

To your question, No you can't go on a trip with just your quest 2 and stream your computer to it.
And neither will you be able to with your Apple vision pro because connection speeds are just not good enough to do that type of work, so both devices would then need to rely on their onboard capabilities.

I may not be able to use Mac apps while on a trip, but I could use iOS apps with just the VP, right? That would let me be very productive on the VP while on a trip. Will working on a VP be so much better than working on the iPad that it makes it worth it to bring along the more bulky device? That's where VP will succeed or fail.

I do agree with you that currently Apple are pushing productivity with their device and officially totally ignoring entertainment. Which is odd as right now the only real sizable market for all these devices is entertainment.

I can't say I'm totally sure ignoring the only current market is the best idea. And I would have liked them to try and appeal to both markets. Not just the sad lonely person in their fictional super tidy home using the product alone market. There was pretty much no "fun and enjoyment with the family" aspect shown, just a cold and bleak style of dystopian future.

I think an entertainment-focused device has a limited market, and apparently that's how Apple is thinking about it too.

I wouldn't say Apple totally ignored entertainment uses, at least one reviewer who got to try the VP demo was wowed by the 3D clips, especially the NBA game, and said he'd buy a VP if he could get to watch sport games in 3D.

Yes, the presentation ended up showing sad person using the VP alone, despite all the efforts Apple made to make the VP not isolating. One thing I know I can't do easily with a VP is, when I see something interesting and want to show it to another person in the room with me, with an iPhone/iPad I can just pass them the device, and on a computer I can call them over and tell them to look at my monitor. That's not possible with the VP. Like you say, buying $3500 headset for every person in the family isn't feasible for most households.

As I said at the beginning, Entering and experiencing a "Virtual World" that cannot be experienced in any other way or with any other type of device "IS" a reason many are willing to put up with the inconvenience of wearing it.

I love "Walkabout Mini Golf" as it's an experience I am unable to get in any other way so I will put up with wearing my headset to enjoy "being somewhere else" that does not exist in the real world

And if I ever get a VP, I'm sure I'd enjoy those kinds of experiences, as well as the productivity aspects. But for me, entertainment alone isn't enough to get me interested in wearing a headset. And Apple seems to be betting that there is more of people like me than people like you.

 

[ckurt25]

This is going to be a high end toy for drug users, including me.

Joking aside, I could see this used in therapy sessions with psilocybin and other hallucinogens.

 

[Wandersonsc]

Right off the bat, i can tell you NO! 3.5k? That is a lot of money for a fist-generation device. Apple does know how to make awesome hardware, but fist-generation devices tend to suck. Maybe Vision Pro 3.0

​

 

[AL2TEACH]

An only you can see version of "the Minority Report".
To think this will only be used by a consumer wanting entertainment is to be very short sighted. This could open a whole new era for software developers in real estate, interior design, engineering and etc...Of course, Apple could kill off this era with its wall garden on steroids approach which would be more than sad. Hopefully, there could be a way to protect the ecosystem stuff and have software people do their thing with the other stuff. Or maybe, I'm a forward thinker when it comes to software 🤣

I and many others would like to get our hands on the Vision Pro. Some people are happy getting a new iPhone every year and some think that's kind of dumb.
Some can't wrap their heads around the idea that some want the Vision Pro and I for one can't wrap my head around those that don't want one😀

 

[ArkSingularity]

This could open a whole new era for software developers in real estate, interior design, engineering and etc...Of course, Apple could kill off this era with its wall garden on steroids approach which would be more than sad.

Hopefully the platform is more like the Mac and less like the iPhone in this regard. If software developers (for example) end up using this for some of their everyday workflows, they're going to want to have sudo access, and iOS obviously doesn't offer that.

 

[Djones96]

Don't get me wrong, it looks interesting, but it's a definite no from me. Especially at $3,500. I don't have an extra $3,500 to throw at a first generation product.

 

[AL2TEACH]

more like the Mac and less like the iPhone

Lol, it's almost to the point where I'm getting sick of the iPhone iOS infecting the OS.

 

[Bodhitree]

At first glance, I have to say I don’t like the Vision Pro’s chances as a productivity based computing platform, except perhaps in specialised areas like 3D content creation, CAD, medicine and a few others. Given the limited volume they will probably be selling, those markets may be enough to saturate the production capability.

But for a consumer device there needs to be a significant draw, and I doubt that that yet another computing platform can be that. Apple first went small, with the iPhone… then they went bigger with the iPad… of course the Mac has always been there at desktop size… now we see at room sizes if there is a need for compute.

 

[Yourbigpalal83]

Let me ask you all of this...Realistically though, if we were to buy one, (walk into an apple store and offer them money for it, since apparently you wont be able to do it online cause they got to scan your head for measurements) What are the chances we would be able to get one within a reasonable time frame!

Just curious cause heres my deal...

Say i save up all fall and winter, and come early next year, i finally have enough to get one around launch. I walk into the apple store, debit card in hand, say i want one, im here to get scanned for my fittings...will i be able to walk out that day with one, or have one within 2 weeks...or will it still be hard to come by?

Is this product really meant for off the shelf consumer purchases or no because regardless of the price, if i go into ANY store willing to pay for a product at any price, and they cant promise me it within a reasonable time frame, thats a huge issue for me and the product itself.

Lets not kid ourselves here, apples goal since day one is to sell products to coustmers to make a profit off of! Period. Otherwise they would not exists as a company.

If you make this big deal about this new product, offer it to the general public despite its high price, and they cant reasonably deliver on it in a short time frame, its dead in the water.

Im not going to save up for 6 months for this thing, only to pay for it and have to wait another 6 months just to get what i paid for.

I want to support apple in this new product line. I want to have faith in a company ive stayed loyal to for over a decade and spent tens of thousands of dollars on!

this will be hands down the biggest purchase (if i do indeed decide to get it) from them ive ever made or am likely to make unless i hit the lotto or something.

Yes its not their most expensive product. I believe the Pro XDR Displays and high end configurations of some of their macs exceed the cost (the Pro XDR Display is 6000 bucks and idk if that accounts for the thousand dollar stand or not which is stupidly sold sepretly)

But it is its most advanced and complex to build and manufacture. Fine...got to start somewhere right...

My main concern beyond price is this...if i do have the money and decide to buy it, will i get it reasonably soon, and 2, will it be supported beyond just apple apps.

If i want to watch netflix or amazon prime in AR/VR 3D will there be an app for that? If i want a augmented 3d model of a product im going to buy off Amazon, can i do that?

Can i show the 3d movies i record on this thing on other devices in 2d or on some social networking app on the device?

Will i be able to create and render 3d objects in real time and space using just my hands and then share those items with other people?

for 3500 dollars i damn well better be able too...and i think these questions and more are all fair questions to ask before i spend the money on it!

 

[ckurt25]

I love that there are so many comments about how heavy and uncomfortable the AVP is. This coming from people that have used it...? You know what was heavy? The original iPad.

If you don't want one, don't buy it. Stop making things up to make yourself feel better because you can't afford one. Yes, it's a luxury item. What else was a luxury / high end item when it first came out? iPhone, iPad, Apple TV, Apple Watch, HomePod, AirPods, all their monitors, Mac Pro, etc.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

If you don't want one, don't buy it. Stop making things up to make yourself feel better because you can't afford one. Yes, it's a luxury item. What else was a luxury / high end item when it first came out? iPhone, iPad, Apple TV, Apple Watch, HomePod, AirPods, all their monitors, Mac Pro, etc.

How do you know people discussing the weight are doing so because they ‘can’t afford one’? That’s a rather presumptuous statement.