Neither iMac nor iPod nor iPhone were particularly cheap products when launched.
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.
At $3,500, will you buy a Vision Pro?
- Thread starter KPOM
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Neither iMac nor iPod nor iPhone were particularly cheap products when launched.
This has been my argument about it from the start - headset based computing carries a significant cost in terms of wearing a headset. That cost is worth paying, if you can use your architectural CAD software in the immersive 3D space - not looking at a 2d screen floating in the air, but standing in the model, and walking around inside it, so you can get eye-lines, and feel the gaps between doorways, tables etc.
A 3D workspace, where you do 3D work, that's the benefit you expect, for the cost of wearing a headset, because that's the thing you can't do on a flat display.
eg with rhino:
Or with a Voxel sculpting tool like Kodon (Z-Brush equivalent), where you can move the tools three dimensionally in three dimensional space:
I'm not convinced that the Apple-centric developer community is culturally inclined to the task of making these sort of tools, and more importantly, I'm not convinced that the sort of people who make these sort of tools are culturally inclined to make Apple-Only solutions, or deal with the sort of hassle that is Apple's App Stores.
So we get back to what does the Vision Pro do well, that makes use of stereoscopic projection as its fundamental utility - looking at an OmniPlan chart? Notes.app floating in space?
Head mounted displays real innovation, the fundamental killer app function of them, is the Z-Index, and Apple seem to be regarding that as a UI novelty. 🤷♂️
Yes because Apple had a tendency to make very expensive stuff and was a niche player in the computer market at best plus of course that predictions back then were a bit of a guesswork at the time. The idea that Steve Jobs somehow represented an era of cheap Apple products is a far fetched theory in my opinion.
To 16 year old me at the time, the first generation intel iMac with the AMD graphics card was the dream. I worked 3 summers to save enough to buy an iMac. I can see how kids today look at $3500 as insurmountable to reach but if you save your money and work hard it's just as attainable. Minimum wage was less in my day.
I’m beginning to think of the Vision Pro as an iPad successor for myself. No idea if that will bear out, but since I have an M2 iPad, I’m in no rush to upgrade. Perhaps a future Vision device will ditch the uncanny external display, become much sleeker, and replace the device I’m typing on now…
I'm mostly sold on it for the immersive experience it looks to be. And yeah, mostly for entertainment. I can't even fathom how I'd use it for work except as an extra monitor, but as most are saying I don't think I'd want to wear it for 8-10 hours a day, plus I'm concerned about the eye-health impact of wearing screens this close to your eyes for a long time.
One factor is I live alone, so there is no partner or kids to get annoyed with me cloistering myself off with this thing. It would be a different story if I had a wife I had to justify the expense to, or was so busy with kids that most home time was family time. This may change in my future, but for now I've got the time to play with this machine.
This is not cheap, but I can afford it. Not breezily with no concern.. I don't lightly spend this kind of money and have moved from my compulsive 2-year iPhone cycle to more like 3 or 4 years to save money. But it wouldn't break me.
The hardest part of the decision for me is factoring in future-proofing. I'm usually leery of first-gen Apple products because the 2nd gens tend to be really big improvements with features that actually should've/could've been on the first version.
I'll boil it down to this- If AVP is going to be a yearly-upgraded device like the iPhone or the M chips, I could wait until early 2025 for a big jump in Gen 2. But if it's going to be more like the iMac or Mac mini and not come for another 2-4 years, then screw it life's short and I'm in my mid-40's and want to play with this thing after long-fantasizing about what a great AR/VR experience would be like.
One factor is I live alone, so there is no partner or kids to get annoyed with me cloistering myself off with this thing. It would be a different story if I had a wife I had to justify the expense to, or was so busy with kids that most home time was family time. This may change in my future, but for now I've got the time to play with this machine.
This is not cheap, but I can afford it. Not breezily with no concern.. I don't lightly spend this kind of money and have moved from my compulsive 2-year iPhone cycle to more like 3 or 4 years to save money. But it wouldn't break me.
The hardest part of the decision for me is factoring in future-proofing. I'm usually leery of first-gen Apple products because the 2nd gens tend to be really big improvements with features that actually should've/could've been on the first version.
I'll boil it down to this- If AVP is going to be a yearly-upgraded device like the iPhone or the M chips, I could wait until early 2025 for a big jump in Gen 2. But if it's going to be more like the iMac or Mac mini and not come for another 2-4 years, then screw it life's short and I'm in my mid-40's and want to play with this thing after long-fantasizing about what a great AR/VR experience would be like.
I am retired and can't wait to get this and play around with it!!!
It you want immersive the quest 3 is much cheaper and has a number of games or entertainment options. The avp will be barebones for awhile.
Quest gets your feet wet at a fraction of price and wait and see what happens with avp.
There is no more health impact from the screens being close to your eyes than there is from the lenses in a pair of glasses being close to your eyes.
The focus distance of the screens is more distant than is typical for any of Apple's other devices with screens.
It's possible you could experience some eye fatigue from the properties of the optics of the device, but I don't really see any mechanism for any long term impact to your vision.
2 hour tethered battery, bulky, strap on, mid audio experience, completely fine existing without one. Prolly not going to get one.
Haha interesting, I don’t have the YouTube app on any of my devices, I prefer using a web browser (I like tabs and saving to my bookmarks).
Every time I get myself close to convinced that I need/want the Vision Pro, I force myself to remember that VisionOS is mostly like iPadOS. I often question why I paid $1500 for my iPad Pro when it there are just some productivity tasks it can't do well due to OS limitations (filesystem, lesser than productivity apps). Paying $3500 for a Vision Pro that will have the same productivity limitations for work is a deal breaker. Like the iPad, it's a fantastic consumption device and breaks new ground that 2D computing just can't do but $3500 is just too much. $2500 is my max for a device for this.
Given the technology and manufacturing processes involved, for version one, will definitely No for me.
Yes I understand wholy where you are coming from!
I have an iPad Pro and do not use it at all as I use a Macbook Pro, Air or my favorite Mac Studio desktop.
More productive using a Mac instead of iOS IMO.
At least I can try out the AVP for 2 weeks and see if it's what it's cracked up to be....
The whole pitch in the keynote was the iPad was Apple's response to netbooks which were popular at the time. Netbooks were cheap, hence the price positioning with the iPad.