Cheaper Apple Vision Headset Likely to Launch by End of 2025

[neuropsychguy]

You're still not catching a glance from me unless you go under $500 or so.

You'll be waiting a long time then. Also, you're here commenting on a story about the Apple Vision so you're already glancing.

 

[floral]

You'll be waiting a long time then. Also, you're here commenting on a story about the Apple Vision so you're already glancing.

I sorta meant the checkout page, and yeah, I'll keep dreaming ;3

 

[Iconoclysm]

They're basically the same word, so it's not surprising that people get confused. They really should have come up with more distinctive terms for the different technologies.

There are, micro-OLED is actually OLEDoS (OLED on Silicon) but Samsung wants to market this with a term that will muddy the waters. Similar to what they did with QLED - completely confusing the actual technology with their branding of a different technology.

 

[Iconoclysm]

You're still not catching a glance from me unless you go under $500 or so.

And you're never going to see that while still having a viable product, at least not within a decade.

 

[floral]

And you're never going to see that while still having a viable product, at least not within a decade.

I know. I'm looking at such a low price because I don't need it, it would just be fun to play with at most.

 

[subjonas]

Unlike what Gurman thinks, EyeSight might be sacrificed. While preventing isolation is a part of their philosophy, price minded people will be fine without it. It's an expensive non essential component.

If you watch the Gruber show/interview, the Apple execs go on about how core EyeSight and what it represents is to the product and to Apple. They can’t exclude it on any headsets now. Maybe a cheaper solution but the essence has to remain.

 

[dugbug]

You can give up the eyesight but keep the pop-in whatever thats called where folks around you enter your AR/VR space.

That gives up both weight, cost. I know the article quotes this is unlikely to be given up but I disagree. A flat aluminum panel with some low-cost gfx indicator like the top of the homepod could change patterns that you have the wearers attention is ok.

 

[coolbreeze2]

Basically these predicters have no evidence of anything and are trying to cash in on the hype AVP. Geesh, they are like TV preachers.

 

[Iconoclysm]

Apples version of the failed Nintendo virtual boy😂🤣

There was no market for the virtual boy, no competitor really entered that space. Its implementation was also poor but still outsold devices like the Atari Lynx...but Gunpei Yokoi built the Virtual Boy with the philosophy of using "withered technology", cheap stuff that is old but can perform just well enough. That truly makes the Vision Pro nothing like it at all. Unless you're just trying to say something failed that doesn't exist yet...which is pointless.

 

[Iconoclysm]

Basically these predicters have no evidence of anything and are trying to cash in on the hype AVP. Geesh, they are like TV preachers.

They were practically spot on with the prediction of this device, going back many years. And they also mentioned another device, similar to Google Glass that I will not be surprised to be part of this product family some day.

 

[Iconoclysm]

You can give up the eyesight but keep the pop-in whatever thats called where folks around you enter your AR/VR space.

That gives up both weight, cost. I know the article quotes this is unlikely to be given up but I disagree. A flat aluminum panel with some low-cost gfx indicator like the top of the homepod could change patterns that you have the wearers attention is ok.

Why would you think the weight of a lower cost display like in homepod would be less?

 

[Iconoclysm]

The “One” is the issue. They’re already stuck with the Apple Vision part, but adding the one makes no sense give their current mishmash of different naming conventions. It doesn’t match the way they number products (iPhone 13, 14, etc) and it doesn’t fit with how they use One (Apple One, a group of subscription bundle options).

It’s like someone chopped up all their existing product names, put them in a hat, and just drew a random one to tack onto the end.

And that’s not even to mention that by that point the Vision One would be their second Vision product. Bad naming. Bad, bad, bad.

It actually fits with the Watch product names to give this a number moniker, especially a 1 after the "zero". It's likely only internal anyway.

 

[boss.king]

It actually fits with the Watch product names to give this a number moniker. It's likely only internal anyway.

It doesn’t. There’s no Apple Watch Eight. It’s the Apple Watch Series 8. Maybe if they called it Apple Vision 1.

 

[MacWiz_007]

Please go back to posting the render that was peddled on MR for years. It was much better from a design standpoint (sadly) and also didn't include the creepy weirdo fake eyes. Thank you in advance!

 

[nwcs]

Vision Pro Lite? Vision Lite? Vision Pro SE? Doesn’t matter too much to me, though. I won’t get one until it’s priced so low as to be a novelty addition.

 

[Ctrlos]

If you watch the Gruber show/interview, the Apple execs go on about how core EyeSight and what it represents is to the product and to Apple. They can’t exclude it on any headsets now. Maybe a cheaper solution but the essence has to remain.

They could include a free pair of stick-on googly eyes with every purchase.

 

[cicalinarrot]

You're still not catching a glance from me unless you go under $500 or so.

Just like Ferrari is never getting my money unless they sell a car under $15000 or so.

 

[maerz001]

Several hundreds less? What are we talking here? $2500? $2000? $1500? All those still seem out of reach for most

He’s talking about several hundreds not thousands

 

[klasma]

Going by the Face ID vs. Touch ID distinction for the iPads, it'll probably be gloves instead of a headset. And going by the iPhones, the non-Pro version will be less heavy and less bulky.

 

[CapitalIdea]

Several hundreds less? What are we talking here? $2500? $2000? $1500? All those still seem out of reach for most

Apple as a company has really never targeted customers who have trouble affording higher end tech. They avoid the downmarket segment for a reason.

 

[klasma]

I already have very little faith in Apple's naming ability, but if they call the lesser headset Apple Vision One instead of just Apple Vision then someone over there needs to lose their job.

They could call it Apple Vision Impaired.

 

[klasma]

Apple Vision One sounds really bad. I miss when Apple was minimalist when choosing names. Apple vision is way better.

Maybe it'll be just one-eyed? Then the naming would make sense.

 

[syklee26]

I cannot believe AVP at $3500 generates almost no profit. What components would cost so much to make it non-profitable?

 

[klasma]

My understanding was that the screens in this monstrosity of a device were OLED.

They are microOLED, actually, so it's a typo. MicroOLED is a different manufacturing process than normal OLED.

 

[klasma]

This is German, I have 10% confidence in this.

I don't think Gurman is German.