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

[klspahr]

I made a comment earlier basically praising the technology.

But I probably will not buy one. For one thing I’d have to get one for my wife if we wanted to watch something together. (It would feel a little weird too.) It doesn’t sound like you can share it with another, especially if you have different prescriptions. Can you imagine if you had a house full of teenagers and how persecuted they would act if they each didn’t get one!

Now if I was a single guy living alone I think the chances of me buying one would be greatly increased.

 

[Piggie]

Unapologetically so. Familiarity across devices is what has made Apple, was it is today. From Apple Watch and Apple TV to iPhone and Apple CarPlay, the learning curve is not steep.


Decreasing the price is an option. However, they don't have to because there is no competition.

My worry is this is another Home Pod.
As you say, no need to decrease the price as there was no competition.
Apple put Quality first and priced the Homepod for the Audio and it failed as people were happier with a lower quality at a far more affordable price. But Apple thought it knew better and thought people would pay.

I have always been worried they have failed to learn and are doing the exact same thing again.
Going all out for quality and expecting people to pay.
It will be cancelled after a while and a much cheaper (but good enough) version will come out.

Let's be honest, irrespective of "normal people's" views about META and in reality the normal/general public don't care about all the fanboy/hate stuff, they just buy a product that works for them.
The Quest 3 for what it delivers for $500 is jaw dropping/amazing value.
Is it as good in every respect that the Vision Pro is going to be? No, of course not. But that is SEVEN TIMES the price.

Meta can over the next generations Quest 4, Quest 5, Quest ? Pro? Gradually build up as most products do over the years including Apple with iPads, Watches, iPhones etc.
And you can take customers along for the ride upgrading at each generation.

Apple had to build down, and down in a MASSIVE way to even approach a consumer price point.
Put it this way, Meta could triple the price/tech of a Quest 3 in the future, and still be less than half the price of the Vision Pro.

I honestly don't know what Apple are thinking, and I do feel they get so wound up in their own PR and "can do no wrong and everyone loves us" they lose track of reality sometimes.

Either way, I'm super happy that the Quest 3 and Vision Pro are going to exist together over the next year or two and will be great to see what happens with Meta building up for their next model and Apple building down for their next model. And seeing if in 3 / 5 years time we sort of all meet at some mid-way point.

 

[Macalicious2011]

My worry is this is another Home Pod.
As you say, no need to decrease the price as there was no competition.
Apple put Quality first and priced the Homepod for the Audio and it failed as people were happier with a lower quality at a far more affordable price. But Apple thought it knew better and thought people would pay.

I have always been worried they have failed to learn and are doing the exact same thing again.
Going all out for quality and expecting people to pay.
It will be cancelled after a while and a much cheaper (but good enough) version will come out.

Let's be honest, irrespective of "normal people's" views about META and in reality the normal/general public don't care about all the fanboy/hate stuff, they just buy a product that works for them.
The Quest 3 for what it delivers for $500 is jaw dropping/amazing value.
Is it as good in every respect that the Vision Pro is going to be? No, of course not. But that is SEVEN TIMES the price.

Meta can over the next generations Quest 4, Quest 5, Quest ? Pro? Gradually build up as most products do over the years including Apple with iPads, Watches, iPhones etc.
And you can take customers along for the ride upgrading at each generation.

Apple had to build down, and down in a MASSIVE way to even approach a consumer price point.
Put it this way, Meta could triple the price/tech of a Quest 3 in the future, and still be less than half the price of the Vision Pro.

I honestly don't know what Apple are thinking, and I do feel they get so wound up in their own PR and "can do no wrong and everyone loves us" they lose track of reality sometimes.

Either way, I'm super happy that the Quest 3 and Vision Pro are going to exist together over the next year or two and will be great to see what happens with Meta building up for their next model and Apple building down for their next model. And seeing if in 3 / 5 years time we sort of all meet at some mid-way point.

Meta has price, tech and usability optimised. IMO Zuck should give Ocolus the best chance of success by signing content/use-case deals with Microsoft for:
-Xbox gaming streaming
-Office 365
-Google Workspaces

Content producers and software developers will unlikely want to produce custom content for Vision and Ocolus. Therefore Meta better hurry up before Ocolus is made obsolete by Vision in 2–3 years.

 

[Piggie]

Meta has price, tech and usability optimised. IMO Zuck should give Ocolus the best chance of success by signing content/use-case deals with Microsoft for:
-Xbox gaming streaming
-Office 365
-Google Workspaces

Content producers and software developers will unlikely want to produce custom content for Vision and Ocolus. Therefore Meta better hurry up before Ocolus is made obsolete by Vision in 2–3 years.

I agree.
Both companies I feel have benefits.
Apple has a very loyal, mostly American I'd say, fanbase, and it is easy for them to charge a premium to a certain extent, but not a GIGANTIC premium.
People who are into Apple will pay more for Apple products to a point.
Apple can't sell the Vision Pro to normal people at that price.
To be honest, even if it was $1000 I'd not see normal Apple buyers really going for it, simply due to the current form factor.
Apple needs to REALLY sell the benefits to normal people (I'm sure they are confused right now about gaming as they know it sells VR, but are trying to pretend they are not very interested in that area to keep their current message separate. It will be interesting to see if this changes over time.

Meta has the benefit of an established audience that can grow.
They have a MASSIVE price advantage and will probably gain sales due to Apple showing off a "Similar" device that normal people can't afford.

EG. If I did not have a car and Ferrari showed off an amazing car which I would like but could not afford, but I saw that Ford also sold a car which to me pretty much did the same type of thing for seventh the price I may buy a Ford due to Ferrari's advertising.

I'm sure we all know Meta is working on many in-house prototypes, and will be watching how Apple does very closely.
Meta I'm 100% positive will be working hard to vastly improve pass-thru quality even more on the Quest 4.

They have a LOT of room to work with price wise before coming close to the Vision Pro.

Tech (for everyone) will continue to advance.
Apple needs to build down to make cheaper. Meta needs to build up to make visual quality even better.

I'm not sure which scenario I'd prefer to work in.
I have a nice product, I need to slash the price on, without making it too much worse, perhaps to at least one third it's current cost.

Or I work in the situation where I have a pretty good (not perfect) product already selling to normal people at an excellent price and I need to select which areas to improve upon without going crazy on component costs.

I'd say, it's probably nicer to work up and make your product better over years, taking your customers along for the ride, as opposed to having something that they are not buying and trying to make it worse? till it's cheap enough they will buy it.

I'd just so happy Apple is in the picture now as it's going to benefit everyone.
Unless Apple totally crashes and burns and kills this in 2 to 3 years time as the negative press will probably harm other companies in the mind of the consumer.

I'd say one of the main problems for Meta is not what THEY are unable to do, it's more that we are stuck with what Qualcomm are able to do with their mobile chipsets.

 

[Macalicious2011]

I agree.
Both companies I feel have benefits.
Apple has a very loyal, mostly American I'd say, fanbase, and it is easy for them to charge a premium to a certain extent, but not a GIGANTIC premium.
People who are into Apple will pay more for Apple products to a point.
Apple can't sell the Vision Pro to normal people at that price.
To be honest, even if it was $1000 I'd not see normal Apple buyers really going for it, simply due to the current form factor.
Apple needs to REALLY sell the benefits to normal people (I'm sure they are confused right now about gaming as they know it sells VR, but are trying to pretend they are not very interested in that area to keep their current message separate. It will be interesting to see if this changes over time.

Meta has the benefit of an established audience that can grow.
They have a MASSIVE price advantage and will probably gain sales due to Apple showing off a "Similar" device that normal people can't afford.

EG. If I did not have a car and Ferrari showed off an amazing car which I would like but could not afford, but I saw that Ford also sold a car which to me pretty much did the same type of thing for seventh the price I may buy a Ford due to Ferrari's advertising.

I'm sure we all know Meta is working on many in-house prototypes, and will be watching how Apple does very closely.
Meta I'm 100% positive will be working hard to vastly improve pass-thru quality even more on the Quest 4.

They have a LOT of room to work with price wise before coming close to the Vision Pro.

Tech (for everyone) will continue to advance.
Apple needs to build down to make cheaper. Meta needs to build up to make visual quality even better.

I'm not sure which scenario I'd prefer to work in.
I have a nice product, I need to slash the price on, without making it too much worse, perhaps to at least one third it's current cost.

Or I work in the situation where I have a pretty good (not perfect) product already selling to normal people at an excellent price and I need to select which areas to improve upon without going crazy on component costs.

I'd say, it's probably nicer to work up and make your product better over years, taking your customers along for the ride, as opposed to having something that they are not buying and trying to make it worse? till it's cheap enough they will buy it.

I'd just so happy Apple is in the picture now as it's going to benefit everyone.
Unless Apple totally crashes and burns and kills this in 2 to 3 years time as the negative press will probably harm other companies in the mind of the consumer.

I'd say one of the main problems for Meta is not what THEY are unable to do, it's more that we are stuck with what Qualcomm are able to do with their mobile chipsets.

The problem with Meta is that they are obsessed with data and control over it. Understandable as they are probably the second biggest data business after Google. This is probably a big barrier to opening up Quest as a platform to Google, MS and Xbox. Meta would want to harvest and monetise as much of the data as possible.

At $3,500 Vision Pro is 6 times more expensive than PSVR and Quest. That’s a big delta! However the latest Apple Watch and Airpods are 5-9 times more expensive than alternatives on Amazon which are nowadays REALLY good.

However, I believe that Apple will lower the price of the Vision if required. Like Zuck, they have invested tens of billions into their VR and will unlikely walk away from it at the first try. I’m curious about Vision but need to try it and wait for the eco-system of content to grow before buying one. I did the same with the Apple watch and iPad.

 

[Piggie]

The problem with Meta is that they are obsessed with data and control over it. Understandable as they are probably the second biggest data business after Google. This is probably a big barrier to opening up Quest as a platform to Google, MS and Xbox. Meta would want to harvest and monetise as much of the data as possible.

At $3,500 Vision Pro is 6 times more expensive than PSVR and Quest. That’s a big delta! However the latest Apple Watch and Airpods are 5-9 times more expensive than alternatives on Amazon which are nowadays REALLY good.

However, I believe that Apple will lower the price of the Vision if required. Like Zuck, they have invested tens of billions into their VR and will unlikely walk away from it at the first try. I’m curious about Vision but need to try it and wait for the eco-system of content to grow before buying one. I did the same with the Apple watch and iPad.

I don't really disagree with anything you have said.
Personally I don't feel negative towards Meta/Mark when it comes to privacy issues as I've always been someone who feels than anything I post online is up for grabs anyway.
I have had a Facebook account for probably 20 years, but apart from a few photo's and the odd "Happy birthday" message I have no data there, and I don't share stuff there.

Regards price difference, yes, I do agree, but of course, a $50 cheap watch vs a $300 expensive watch is very VERY different than a $500 headset vs a $3500 headset.

I don't agree with the remark about Apple will lower the price if required, it WILL be required.
There is no way a headset it going to become a consumer item at that price point.

I'm not really into Apple. Not due to the products, but due to the way they try and extract money at every opportunity.
But that said if the Vison Pro v3 is amazing and at the right price I may buy one.
It all depends what the software can do (and it allowed to do by Apple) by then.
If it's too locked down to spoil it that will be sad, so I hope they don't do that.

I could see them killing it, and then a relaunch 2 / 3 years later with vastly cheaper model.
Their problem is going to be how to make normal people want to wear a headset.

 

[MarkNewton2023]

It is not for me. I am not a game player. The battery only lasts about 2 hours. This is a very first version which generally will have issues. The size is ridiculously big.😬 All of these might be okay for others. I wish all who purchase it enjoy it 😊

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

I don't really disagree with anything you have said.
Personally I don't feel negative towards Meta/Mark when it comes to privacy issues as I've always been someone who feels than anything I post online is up for grabs anyway.
I have had a Facebook account for probably 20 years, but apart from a few photo's and the odd "Happy birthday" message I have no data there, and I don't share stuff there.

Regards price difference, yes, I do agree, but of course, a $50 cheap watch vs a $300 expensive watch is very VERY different than a $500 headset vs a $3500 headset.

I don't agree with the remark about Apple will lower the price if required, it WILL be required.
There is no way a headset it going to become a consumer item at that price point.

I'm not really into Apple. Not due to the products, but due to the way they try and extract money at every opportunity.
But that said if the Vison Pro v3 is amazing and at the right price I may buy one.
It all depends what the software can do (and it allowed to do by Apple) by then.
If it's too locked down to spoil it that will be sad, so I hope they don't do that.

I could see them killing it, and then a relaunch 2 / 3 years later with vastly cheaper model.
Their problem is going to be how to make normal people want to wear a headset.

Indeed, two companies greedy in totally different ways, one for data and the other for money. As someone who uses Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp though, I’d be inclined to try Meta’s product if it’s vastly cheaper, despite being an Apple consumer. Apples price point is absurd and will likely come down, but doubt it will ever be aimed at the mass consumer. They’d have to take nearly 3 grand off the price tag for that and I could never see them doing that.

 

[rkuo]

P

Indeed, two companies greedy in totally different ways, one for data and the other for money. As someone who uses Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp though, I’d be inclined to try Meta’s product if it’s vastly cheaper, despite being an Apple consumer. Apples price point is absurd and will likely come down, but doubt it will ever be aimed at the mass consumer. They’d have to take nearly 3 grand off the price tag for that and I could never see them doing that.

Nah, if AR and VR find a mass market feature set, Apple will be there on the very high end of acceptable. I think it’s smart for them to not try to subsidize adoption before the market fit is there.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

P

Nah, if AR and VR find a mass market feature set, Apple will be there on the very high end of acceptable. I think it’s smart for them to not try to subsidize adoption before the market fit is there.

For mass market appeal, it will be largely a leisure device and options for the more niche sector who want it for productivity. Apple aren’t going to conquer the leisure sector with a product at £3500, or even £1500. It needs to be affordable enough for people to think ‘ooh i’ll try that out’. We are in an era now where everything we buy and do is expensive and products like this are not seen as necessities like iPhones and iPads, and are perhaps bordering on gimmicks at this point. I’m sure serious developers will disagree with that statement, but that’s why it’s niche. I can’t see myself trying it in all honesty as VR/AR has never been something that has exited me yet.

 

[mobiletech]

VR/AR is a "Hyper Luxury" item. For starters you need the real estate space to have the fun, you also need that space free of obstacles. Most of the industry purposes are curtailing to the rich, like watch your supercar get hand built. Tour these gold coast mansions you can afford. The really cool and immersive AR/VR gear is very expensive as well. @ $3500 many people can buy a 4k tv, a PS5 with VR2, and still have enough left over for a full mortgage payment.

 

[lovehateapple]

This is a flawed poll. The fourth option should be: Maybe, I want to try / test it out for myself at my local apple store.
(I don't really care about the reviews, I trust my ability to make a purchase decision after experiencing the product myself)

For me, it depends on share-ability. How much are additional prescription lenses for other members of my family going to be? How much are extra batteries going to be? How many third party apps are going to be available and what can I do with them? If I can virtually "attend" live sporting events or concerts (for example) with a real enough "you are there quality" feeling it would become an almost automatic purchase for me. Other applications I'm interested in are golf and flight simulation, travel vlogs, 360 degree event capture, which is supposed to be a built in feature, among others.

 

[lovehateapple]

VR/AR is a "Hyper Luxury" item. For starters you need the real estate space to have the fun, you also need that space free of obstacles. Most of the industry purposes are curtailing to the rich, like watch your supercar get hand built. Tour these gold coast mansions you can afford. The really cool and immersive AR/VR gear is very expensive as well. @ $3500 many people can buy a 4k tv, a PS5 with VR2, and still have enough left over for a full mortgage payment.

I've been saying for some time, someday we're all going to need to have or want to have dedicated VR rooms with padded walls in our homes. I tried a VR game a few years ago and would have walked into a standing light if the demo attendant hadn't stepped in and saved me.

 

[richinaus]

I've been saying for sometime, someday we're all going to need to have or want to have dedicated VR rooms with padded walls in our homes. I tried a VR game a few years ago and would have walked into a standing light if the demo attendant hadn't stepped in and saved me.

my 9 year old kid smashed a LG 24" 4K monitor to the floor playing a tennis game on the quest a few years back !

 

[Itsedstech]

ive saved up $2000 in discounted apple gift cards, wether through the amazon half price glitch sale a few weeks ago or here recently buying up the $85 with a plan iPhone SE 3rd gens from Walmart and trading them into apple for $155-$160 in gift cards each. Will pretend I don't have that money for a few months then when the headset comes around only spending $1500 plus tax won't hurt as much lol color me excited! if I end up not using it as much as I thought, im sure the resale market will be decent given the u.s. only release at first.

 

[ericwn]

ive saved up $2000 in discounted apple gift cards, wether through the amazon half price glitch sale a few weeks ago or here recently buying up the $85 with a plan iPhone SE 3rd gens from Walmart and trading them into apple for $155-$160 in gift cards each. Will pretend I don't have that money for a few months then when the headset comes around only spending $1500 plus tax won't hurt as much lol color me excited! if I end up not using it as much as I thought, im sure the resale market will be decent given the u.s. only release at first.

I’d be careful making guesses about resale for something that needs personalised inserts in order to work properly.

 

[AlastorKatriona]

Perhaps not in v1, but I can see something like this essentially replacing large monitors, particularly for traveling or personal use. Apple was definitely pointing out the 4K-equivalent screen.

But what you describe is not just a v2 feature, it's an entire product concept, and that was not Apple's concept for this product. I feel like we're back to pre-announcement with some of these discussions.

Allowing you to use a fancy version of screen mirroring from a Mac to a vision Pro headset is a far cry from replacing large monitors. The thing would have to be running macOS and Mac Apps natively, to truly take advantage of the unlimited real estate that such a product could offer. But it can't, and it doesn't, and it won't.

Apple's vision for this product is the same as that for iPad...that baby computing can perhaps replace computing for a large enough segment of the population to be profitable. Except with Vision Pro you have a large and uncomfortable headset to wear, while iPad doesn't have that problem.

 

[Macalicious2011]

Apple's vision for this product is the same as that for iPad...that baby computing can perhaps replace computing for a large enough segment of the population to be profitable. Except with Vision Pro you have a large and uncomfortable headset to wear, while iPad doesn't have that problem.

The iPad has been cannibalised by large iphones. Computing for the average person is nowadays done on their phone. No need to wait until the evening to sit at a desk or on the couch to do life admin. Instead, we access banking apps, amazon, holiday booking sites and do video editing on the go. I can transfer money quicker on my phone than it would take to walk to another room to pick up a Vision Pro.

You can go on a holiday for 1-2 weeks without bringing a laptop as all computing. Almost all personal computing can be done on an iPhone. Therefore, I think that spatial computing will appeal more to professional and creative mac users, than the average consumer.

I think media consumption is the area where Vision Pro can Innovate. Apple has great relationships with musicians. Concerts and interviews recorded in 3D with Spatial Audio would be an epic combination. It wouldn’t be like watching an IRL performance but more immersive than watching a replay on YouTube.

 

[wonderings]

VR/AR is a "Hyper Luxury" item. For starters you need the real estate space to have the fun, you also need that space free of obstacles. Most of the industry purposes are curtailing to the rich, like watch your supercar get hand built. Tour these gold coast mansions you can afford. The really cool and immersive AR/VR gear is very expensive as well. @ $3500 many people can buy a 4k tv, a PS5 with VR2, and still have enough left over for a full mortgage payment.

I would not say VR is a hyper luxury item. It was stupid expensive to get into VR at the beginning with Oculus. You had to have a beefy PC to start before you even bought the headset... that did not come with hand controls, only came with an Xbox controller. I jumped on this at the beginning as I had wanted VR for a very long time. The experience was cool, but was early days. Jump to now with the Quest 2/3 and it is completely affordable for an incredible VR experience without a computer or cables and a super easy way of making out a room for dangers. Apple's version is that hyper luxury item that I can't see many people buying simply because of the price point. I also wonder what people are really going to do in the Vision Pro, how many apps will there be on release day? It took a while for quality social apps to come out for VR. I am sure Apple will grab a couple of developers for some big release just before the headset actually starts selling, they still have an uphill battle after that to get developers to create for a platform that most people can't afford. This is also different then they iPhone and iPad original release, they were not out of whack with what was selling at the point so it just made sense to flock to Apple an their amazing new technology at the time.

 

[MapleBeercules]

Count me as a maybe. It’s expensive, but it seems like Apple has put of a lot of fancy technology in it and may have some new use cases for it.

rule of thumb with any apple new innovation is to wait for the second generation. As the user testing takes place during first generation devices and they update the second generation based upon the results of the first generation.

I'll probably wait for second generations just because of horrible battery life on the first.

 

[Piggie]

rule of thumb with any apple new innovation is to wait for the second generation. As the user testing takes place during first generation devices and they update the second generation based upon the results of the first generation.

I'll probably wait for second generations just because of horrible battery life on the first.

Honestly I'd say 3rd Gen.

1st Gen = we had to finally put something out the door to see how it goes.
2nd Gen = we learned a lot from the 1st gen, whilst making it, and have had time to fix most of the 1st gen drawbacks.
3rd Gen = We know what we are doing, had plenty of feedback, ironed out the issues and now have a good polished product.

 

[Flowstates]

Just purchased a quest 3 to scratch that itch until the release (euro so Q3 2023). Let's just say that If Apple can bring that incremental perfectionnism to the space, they will have a product segment that will at the very least match wearables, not to speak of up-selling high-value customers to services. It would seem that we are finally getting there technology wise although I do want to know how good that retina moment will be for VR. If they can bundle up generative Ai as a service effectively the future will be wild.

 

[ericwn]

Just purchased a quest 3 to scratch that itch until the release (euro so Q3 2023). Let's just say that If Apple can bring that incremental perfectionnism to the space, they will have a product segment that will at the very least match wearables, not to speak of up-selling high-value customers to services. It would seem that we are finally getting there technology wise although I do want to know how good that retina moment will be for VR. If they can bundle up generative Ai as a service effectively the future will be wild.

Yes, high value singles who enjoy being entertained alone. I don’t see many families buying 3 or 4 of them to enjoy anything together. Devices probably cannot even be shared as different inserts are needed to operate. How this is supposed to resonate with mass market anyway more than products like the watch or iPad is currently beyond me.

 

[Flowstates]

Yes, high value singles who enjoy being entertained alone. I don’t see many families buying 3 or 4 of them to enjoy anything together. Devices probably cannot even be shared as different inserts are needed to operate. How this is supposed to resonate with mass market anyway more than products like the watch or iPad is currently beyond me.

You overestimate the shared experience within the household, this kind of virtual meeting is best suited for the enterprise market with tax deductible expenditure budgets. This would be perfect for on-boarding contractors that are not valuable enough to warrant on-site summoning.

Another eye opener has been my discovery of the following Lumalabs - Genie I was aware of the existence of generative ai for point clouds, but seeing this already shipped really hit home.

This message has been written in horizon worlds (the native virtual desktop w/passthrough on the oculus) btw , the only thing missing is better resolution and some clever image processing to make the passthrough less noticeable.

What a brave new world we are walking into, and given that the accelerationists recently won the ethical battle in the valley, you have to act accordingly.

 

[ericwn]

You overestimate the shared experience within the household, this kind of virtual meeting is best suited for the enterprise market with tax deductible expenditure budgets. This would be perfect for on-boarding contractors that are not valuable enough to warrant on-site summoning.

Another eye opener has been my discovery of the following Lumalabs - Genie I was aware of the existence of generative ai for point clouds, but seeing this already shipped really hit home.

This message has been written in horizon worlds (the native virtual desktop w/passthrough on the oculus) btw , the only thing missing is better resolution and some clever image processing to make the passthrough less noticeable.

What a brave new world we are walking into, and given that the accelerationists recently won the ethical battle in the valley, you have to act accordingly.

Can't wait for the first enterprise to have a use case for a main stream audience.
I don't overestimate the shared experience, I live in reality. I don't think it resonates with families, or real social people. This has no sharing capacity in the family outside of buying 4 of them to make that happen.