Discontinued M2 Vision Pro Not Available for Trade-In

[Michael Rebar]

I use the AVP for work everyday so to me just a tool. If the trade in is "0" then there should be a deflation of the remaining version 1 devices which will create a good secondary market for repair and maintenance. Apple will still need to support with Apple Care.
I expect more adoption of folks using version 1 as a result of deflation. That would create a nice surge of development. Sort of like the path of the Newton.

 

[xraydoc]

There's nothing the M5 version can do that the M2 version can't do just as well... since there's nothing to do on it to begin with.

I'm kidding, but only partly (unfortunately). And I own one.

Hoping that maybe the upgraded version will spur some development of something useful. Right now, the only really good use cases I can come up with is for watching movies alone and using it as a virtual ultrawide display for one's Mac.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Hoping that maybe the upgraded version will spur some development of something useful.

Development interest hasn't been hampered by hardware constraints.

This M5 spec bump will do nothing.

 

[Bigbuddy1]

Except that Apple’s offers are always extremely low and it would be insultingly low for such a pricey device, and I can’t imagine anyone on this forum complaining about that.🙄

I do find it reassuring that most of the forum members that actually own the AVP seem to have little issue with this. Those complaining most about it are the ones that would never buy an AVP anyway, as they seem to enjoy spending their time talking about how they never, ever think about the AVP.

There is fundamentally no way that everyone who has bought the Vision Pro actually uses it for it’s intended purpose
its not about complaining about the AVP it’s simply this the AVP for me perfectly sums up Tim cook’s strategy at apple

 

[Zorn]

I think Apple really doesn't want us to buy the OG M2 version. They want to raise baseline to M5 as soon as possible, with double RAM. If they accept trade-ins they will have to sell them as refurbs. Which means there will be some people buying the M2 version instead of M5.

Looks like they are not upgrading the RAM at all per the latest front page story, still at 16GB. I think it has more to do with wanting to end production on the M2.

 

[urtules]

Looks like they are not upgrading the RAM at all per the latest front page story, still at 16GB. I think it has more to do with wanting to end production on the M2.

Same people say that they made them more that they can sell, in this case why manufacture more? And also why they still keep Mac Pro with M2?

 

[turbineseaplane]

Same people say that they made them more that they can sell, in this case why manufacture more? And also why they still keep Mac Pro with M2?

Another product nobody is buying .. maybe not even worth changing until they run out of M2 stock?

Perhaps moving AVP off M2 frees up remaining M2 stock to keep MPs fed?

 

[LogicalApex]

I don't know why people see this as a burn - IMO as a Vision Pro owner, there is literally no reason for me to upgrade. I spent $3,500 18 months ago and it *still* is not really outdated by any new model. That's a *good* thing for early adopters, not a bad thing. If you would trade your M2 AVP in on a $2000 loss just to upgrade the CPU alone, you have more money than sense anyway.

If they put R2 and revised passthrough pipeline, I would want to upgrade. But just for extra CPU headroom? M2 does struggle sometimes, but for what is basically a home theater system my M2 model is just fine.

This is upgrade/refresh entirely driven by Apple desire to sunset M2 manufacturing and transition all their current products to new chips to leverage economy of scale for M5 manufacturing runs.

Far too early to reach that conclusion.

Future upgrades and features maybe severely limited based on the weaker CPU of the M2 AVP.

Could very well end up like the Series 0 Apple Watch.

 

[ransoms.chines-9a]

I might have traded in. But as the Who said “won’t get fooled again”.

I was going to but then saw no trade in option which is nuts. Not sure why they did this. Seems like a forced obsolescence. When apple changed to apple silicon they let you trade in intel ones..

 

[turbineseaplane]

Could very well end up like the Series 0 Apple Watch.

WOOF!

Now there is a performance dog 🐶

 

[SteveDmbp]

I know some people who bought 1TB and 512GB models and they say they like to download larger movies. But I am rarely have time to watch more then 2 hours of a content in a row and I am fine with deleting cached movies and TV shows of the device. I am also do not planning to rip 4K 3D Blue-Ray disks. I am not planning to store my music library which is stored on Mac. Most of the time I am going to use the headset in Xcode which is not even installed on the device and will run on my 1TB MacBook Pro. So why I need an extra space? I mean £200 is not a small amount of money. I can get the official carrying case for this price.

Buy this case instead and upgrade your storage with the £ saved 😎

Syntech Hard Carrying Case for Apple Vision Pro and Accessories, VR Gaming Headset Case with Lens Cover, Multi-layer Protection Case, Suitable for Travel and Home Storage, Gray

Syntech Hard Carrying Case for Apple Vision Pro and Accessories, VR Gaming Headset Case with Lens Cover, Perfect fit, Multi-layer Protection Case, Suitable for Travel and Home Storage, Gray

www.amazon.co.uk

 

[lilkwarrior]

Apple cancelled development work on their more mainstream headset due to the disappointing sales of the Vision Pro, so regardless of what they learned it was bad enough that they changed their future plans regarding “spatial computing”

I do think Porsche Taycan (correct spelling) buyers care that they experienced some of the highest first year EV depreciation on record regardless of how much money they may or may not have. I’m sure they also weren’t over the moon about the multiple recalls their vehicles had as regardless of wealth, it’s very inconvenient to have to keep returning your car to the dealership for non ota updates and hardware changes.

If you want to use automotive comparisons do a little research first.

I’m sorry you were triggered by my comment on the Vision Pro but your snarky use of wealth as a guide to reinforce your point (unsuccessfully) really does say a lot more about you than my comment does about the Vision Pro.

Sounds like you're in your feelings with your tangent strawmans (who the heck is talking about wealth, why would you associate what I said as being snarky so dogmatically, and what relevancy is deprecation on whether the sales of high-end cards being a sensible measure of the state of the category?) and your pointless ad hominems.

It's also grossly naive to state your interpretation of rumors as fact.

First and foremost it totally makes sense and is not unprecedented for Apple to only operate at the prosumer level for the headset product category: They already do this for desktop towers (Mac Pro) and their monitor business (Pro Display XDR and Studio Display) without making an overly compromised mainstream version.

Similar to the Mac Pro compared to the Macbook Pro and Macbook, it totally makes sense for the Vision Pro to exist as their sole standalone headset option and have tiered glasses. I wholly agree with this strategy.

Note forums aren't an echo chamber to frame people 'in their feels' because they don't respectfully agree with your sentiment, statement, or opinion.

 

[MNWildFan]

Wow, talk about a giant middle finger to the customer

 

[lilkwarrior]

Wow, talk about a giant middle finger to the customer

Various manufacturers that sell much more in several product categories than Apple don't even offer trade-ins for their prosumer goods.

Various Apple products had many generations pass before they had a trade-in option.

Monitors that cost much more or as much as the Vision Pro don't have direct- trade-in by Apple either such as the Studio Display or the Pro Display XDR I have.

Awesome if they do announce a Vision Pro trade-in later, but Apple isn't obligated to already executing above and beyond most manufacturers when it comes to that.

It’s arguably enough they’re willing to sell products with industry-leading/innovative quality execution like the Vision Pro and Pro Display XDR to give prosumers computing users an option to create and consume in the matter such products allow compared to the competition.

This usually translates to years of invaluable advantages that was part of the assessment of procuring the device at its asking price in the first place.

 

[bgillander]

There is fundamentally no way that everyone who has bought the Vision Pro actually uses it for it’s intended purpose
its not about complaining about the AVP it’s simply this the AVP for me perfectly sums up Tim cook’s strategy at apple

Apple has a long history of introducing new products that initially had mediocre receptions. Most introductions, really. The iPad is the only intro I recall almost everyone being positive about. Many of those went on to become very successful products, many didn’t. Apple’s main reason for success is that they kept introducing new products.

And Apple initially succeeded in a large part because people didn’t use the Apple II for its intended purpose. The Apple III failed at its intended purpose, as did Lisa and Newton. Even Jobs’ vision of the iPhone was to only allow web apps. “Intended purpose” is practically the antithesis of success for new paradigm introductions at Apple (though I hate the word paradigm, as it was flogged beyond comprehension by the computer industry in the 90s.)

These days it seems like everyone has this weird memory of a perfect golden age that never really existed.

 

[lilkwarrior]

There's nothing the M5 version can do that the M2 version can't do just as well... since there's nothing to do on it to begin with.

I'm kidding, but only partly (unfortunately). And I own one.

Hoping that maybe the upgraded version will spur some development of something useful. Right now, the only really good use cases I can come up with is for watching movies alone and using it as a virtual ultrawide display for one's Mac.

That's nonsense. M2 doesn't even have hardware-accelerated ray-tracing and AV1 decoding that is huge for creatives and devs.

Also being 3 generations older than an iPad Pro is problematic as the Vision Pro runs iPad Pro apps (and better able to do so for various multi-tasking tasks able to run those apps spatially).

3 generations old chips is conventional time needed for updates for productive computer users as well as at agencies and enterprises.

The most notable nitpick about the Vision Pro was its M2 chip.

For manufacturing efficiencies and to not inconvenience its own prosumer hardware ecosystem for prosumers having m2 stuck on the hardware needing the latest chips the most as far as portables to work alongside each other, it overall makes sense the M5 transition.

 

[bgillander]

Far too early to reach that conclusion.

Future upgrades and features maybe severely limited based on the weaker CPU of the M2 AVP.

Could very well end up like the Series 0 Apple Watch.

And perhaps Apple will then offer a trade-in at that point. I doubt it, but it is far too early to reach that conclusion.

I would think Apple believes it isn’t enough of an update to encourage people to upgrade and then risk their being disappointed at the lack of difference, especially for the massive loss owners would take with Apple’s low trade-in amounts.

 

[bgillander]

The most notable nitpick about the Vision Pro was its M2 chip.

Did you specifically choose nitpick to not say complaint? Most of the complaints I’ve heard have been price, weight, external battery, form factor, and very concept itself.

So, yeah, I guess the M2 would be a nitpick in that context.

 

[bgillander]

Another product nobody is buying .. maybe not even worth changing until they run out of M2 stock?

Perhaps moving AVP off M2 frees up remaining M2 stock to keep MPs fed?

I’m pretty sure no model of AVP was destined to have M2 Ultra chips.

 

[bgillander]

That's nonsense. M2 doesn't even have hardware-accelerated ray-tracing and AV1 decoding that is huge for creatives and devs.

Also being 3 generations older than an iPad Pro is problematic as the Vision Pro runs iPad Pro apps (and better able to do so for various multi-tasking tasks able to run those apps spatially).

3 generations old chips is conventional time needed for updates for productive computer users as well as at agencies and enterprises.

The most notable nitpick about the Vision Pro was its M2 chip.

For manufacturing efficiencies and to not inconvenience its own prosumer hardware ecosystem for prosumers having m2 stuck on the hardware needing the latest chips the most as far as portables to work alongside each other, it overall makes sense the M5 transition.

Are there iPad apps that currently work much better on the M5? I’m typing this on a M2 Air and haven’t really gone looking for any limitation.

I agree with you that the M5 upgrade of the device itself makes sense, but I expect any user upgrading wouldn’t notice enough of a difference to justify the expense without an app that specifically targets the M5. That is just my guess until I actually try the new model, but I can understand Apple not wanting to even hint that current users should want to upgrade. And I expect they learned not to drop the price after the original iPhone price drop complaints. Basically, they are damned if they do or if they don’t.

But developers should want the newer M5 model in the hope that they can come up with an app that DOES use all the new processor features and is so wanted that it actually does make the M2 version obsolete.

That is the normal cycle that has happened for 50 years with Apple now, despite current opinions.

Edit: I forgot to say that while I agree with your points, the OP actually said he was kidding and was hopeful that the M5 would spur development, so it wasn’t really nonsense.

 

[Bigbuddy1]

Apple has a long history of introducing new products that initially had mediocre receptions. Most introductions, really. The iPad is the only intro I recall almost everyone being positive about. Many of those went on to become very successful products, many didn’t. Apple’s main reason for success is that they kept introducing new products.

And Apple initially succeeded in a large part because people didn’t use the Apple II for its intended purpose. The Apple III failed at its intended purpose, as did Lisa and Newton. Even Jobs’ vision of the iPhone was to only allow web apps. “Intended purpose” is practically the antithesis of success for new paradigm introductions at Apple (though I hate the word paradigm, as it was flogged beyond comprehension by the computer industry in the 90s.)

These days it seems like everyone has this weird memory of a perfect golden age that never really existed.

No
It’s a headset and that’s the problem
This genre doesn’t last & it never will

 

[xraydoc]

I wonder which would have been the right move -- adding the M5 and keeping the price the same, or sticking with the M2 and cutting $1000 off the price.

 

[bgillander]

No
It’s a headset and that’s the problem
This genre doesn’t last & it never will

Cool. I have a Quest 3 and am a fan of VR, but even I think headsets are a pain to wear and I cannot see them becoming mainstream considering how many people balk at wearing even lightweight passive 3D glasses for movies.

But you were saying this perfectly summed up Cook’s strategy at Apple, and I was just pointing out that Apple has always tried new things, many that failed. It has worked out for them much better than just repeatedly making the same widget, as such stagnancy almost always leads to decline.

We can’t want Apple to keep trying something new, but then just complain when they try something new that doesn’t appeal to us. The AVP has been out 20 months in the USA and barely over a year many other places. It could be like the Watch where they slowly try to grow it or the Newton where they kill it and use the techniques learned elsewhere, but it isn’t like they dropped everything else and forced us to buy an AVP if we want an Apple product. They are simply trying to grow a new branch on the Apple tree, and those attempts are what keep them interesting.

 

[Bigbuddy1]

Cool. I have a Quest 3 and am a fan of VR, but even I think headsets are a pain to wear and I cannot see them becoming mainstream considering how many people balk at wearing even lightweight passive 3D glasses for movies.

But you were saying this perfectly summed up Cook’s strategy at Apple, and I was just pointing out that Apple has always tried new things, many that failed. It has worked out for them much better than just repeatedly making the same widget, as such stagnancy almost always leads to decline.

We can’t want Apple to keep trying something new, but then just complain when they try something new that doesn’t appeal to us. The AVP has been out 20 months in the USA and barely over a year many other places. It could be like the Watch where they slowly try to grow it or the Newton where they kill it and use the techniques learned elsewhere, but it isn’t like they dropped everything else and forced us to buy an AVP if we want an Apple product. They are simply trying to grow a new branch on the Apple tree, and those attempts are what keep them interesting.

Let me just clarify by that comment that this sums up Tim cook’s approach at apple
Meaning that as a company they do a wait and see approach
Like this they generally wait to see what the competition does then when it catches on that’s when they implement it and this headset is a perfect example of this
However it’s a mistake and I personally wouldn’t read to much into the fact that apple have launched a refreshed AVP as a sign that it’s getting kept long term
Because software support w different to hardware refreshes

Plus that’s my point headsets and glasses generally don’t work long term in tech companies have consistently launched things like this for decades and they keep getting discontinued because it turns out that the mainstream public don’t actually agree with it long term

 

[lilkwarrior]

Let me just clarify by that comment that this sums up Tim cook’s approach at apple
Meaning that as a company they do a wait and see approach
Like this they generally wait to see what the competition does then when it catches on that’s when they implement it and this headset is a perfect example of this
However it’s a mistake and I personally wouldn’t read to much into the fact that apple have launched a refreshed AVP as a sign that it’s getting kept long term
Because software support w different to hardware refreshes

Plus that’s my point headsets and glasses generally don’t work long term in tech companies have consistently launched things like this for decades and they keep getting discontinued because it turns out that the mainstream public don’t actually agree with it long term

…It’s always been inevitable just like ray-tracing catching on towards it being significantly more viable to succeed pure rasterization as always intended.

Thanks to major tech breakthroughs, spatial computing is more viable to be mainstream more than ever, which is only a good thing (more varied forms of computing for civilizations).

Thinks like navigating around, multi-tasking with application windows, live captions/translations, capturing media on-the-go/hands-free, and even FPS games were ALWAYS intended to be most conveniently done functionally on spatial computing devices.

That’s why private businesses involving live events have welcomed glasses being more beneficial for them than the use of smart phones as people are more active and have their hands-free not obstructing the view of others and have their hands more free to buy their food/drinks.

Spatial video, audio, apps were always intended to be more premium and complementary of the forms people have come accustomed to much more predominantly because of technology constraints to have parity with the progress of status quo…

This isn’t changing. It’s always been continually pursued of being viable that is of course being primitive in execution than traditional computing being extremely hard to do.