It looks super cool, no denying that. But what I'm wondering is what benefit it provides. A cooler way to look at my panoramic pictures? That's not worth $3,500. If the resolution is what they're claiming can this virtually replicate multiple monitors off of on Mac? That's something I can see making monetary sense. I feel like there's big potential here but I can't quite put my finger on what exactly it is.
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.
For the doubters/haters, is it that the Vision Pro device falls short or that you doubt the concept of Augmented reality as a whole?
- Thread starter Stevenyo
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Honestly I think they're marketing it to the wrong people. The Vision Pro pricing puts in line with the Mac Pro market, not the iPad Pro. With this in mind I think its an incredibly sophisticated piece of industrial equipment with a lot of uses.
As a piece of home entertainment it is lousy. WatchOS has shown us that even a large userbase does not equate to premium app success. A developer trying to make a living off of a niche headset audience is insane. The first year of apps will be floating iPad windows and ports of titles like Beatsaber or Superhot already available on cheaper platforms.
It will end up in a cupboard.
As a piece of home entertainment it is lousy. WatchOS has shown us that even a large userbase does not equate to premium app success. A developer trying to make a living off of a niche headset audience is insane. The first year of apps will be floating iPad windows and ports of titles like Beatsaber or Superhot already available on cheaper platforms.
It will end up in a cupboard.
I think wearable tech like this is niche; what Apple demoed, doesn't seem to justify the price.
Example: life is dynamic. When I'm at home and I need to respond to an email, look up a recipe etc, it is easy to pick-up my iPad and do this 5 minute activity. Then, I can easily put my iPad down and resume life. This can be done several times throughout an evening and I can get back to whatever I was doing. Apple Vision Pro is more of an investment of time...I need to dedicate time to strap this device on and spend time with it, and then take it off. It's a tiny hindrance, but enough to make you just use your iPhone/iPad instead.
The concept also falls short for actually work (ex. Excel), etc. I don't know how this enhances that experience overall.
I like the idea of AR with games/activities for short periods of time (ex. less than an hour), but for $3,500, that's a tough sell. As this evolves, I'm sure my opinion will to, but at its current state/price, this is why I have doubts.
Example: life is dynamic. When I'm at home and I need to respond to an email, look up a recipe etc, it is easy to pick-up my iPad and do this 5 minute activity. Then, I can easily put my iPad down and resume life. This can be done several times throughout an evening and I can get back to whatever I was doing. Apple Vision Pro is more of an investment of time...I need to dedicate time to strap this device on and spend time with it, and then take it off. It's a tiny hindrance, but enough to make you just use your iPhone/iPad instead.
The concept also falls short for actually work (ex. Excel), etc. I don't know how this enhances that experience overall.
I like the idea of AR with games/activities for short periods of time (ex. less than an hour), but for $3,500, that's a tough sell. As this evolves, I'm sure my opinion will to, but at its current state/price, this is why I have doubts.
I just doubt it because I don't see a use for AR. I have no idea why anyone would buy this product. What do you do with it in a better way than just using a monitor/keyboard/mouse? It's cool no doubt, but many things are cool...
I still have a Google Glass, it's kindof working (they turned off some services and the battery life is really poor), it had a massive advantage is that it was very wearable and you could cycle with it and take photos, get your notifications in the visual field.
With this Apple product, I have no idea what it is for.
I could see a good use case for working from home. For example, I am typing this from my laptop on my couch. It would be pretty cool to bring my work station into this environment, working from my couch with multiple displays. That is something I cannot recreate from this position.
I love the idea and the possibilities down the road. Like others said, if this product ever became available it glasses form, it could truly revolutionize productivity. I'm on the fence on whether or not I will buy this first gen product, but the above example is one way it could be used and actually be useful.
This product is DOA.
VR has already failed to catch on. And they come late to market, to introduce a VR set with a laughably high price tag. unbelievably arrogant. Then you see comments of lap dogs online soaking it up as if this will transform the world. It’s all just so silly.
Anyone who sees this for what it is feels like the kid telling everyone the Emperor isn’t wearing any clothes.
VR has already failed to catch on. And they come late to market, to introduce a VR set with a laughably high price tag. unbelievably arrogant. Then you see comments of lap dogs online soaking it up as if this will transform the world. It’s all just so silly.
Anyone who sees this for what it is feels like the kid telling everyone the Emperor isn’t wearing any clothes.
For me...it's the first generation thing. I like the idea (with a catch).
The catch is I like the "X number of years from now" potential. When it could potentially just be the size of my glasses, battery life is less of an issue, stuff like that.
It's a product where I'm not interested in what it is at the "now", but I REALLY like where it could be in...let's say 10 years. I'm a HUGE technology geek. I love sci-fi, futuristic, you name it. And this IS that, in my opinion. But in goggle form, I will not be indulging my "geekness". It's an absolute 100% no-go for me in its current form. If/when it's to the point where it's just like putting on a pair of glasses and the number of use-cases is potentially way up there...I'd buy it!
The catch is I like the "X number of years from now" potential. When it could potentially just be the size of my glasses, battery life is less of an issue, stuff like that.
It's a product where I'm not interested in what it is at the "now", but I REALLY like where it could be in...let's say 10 years. I'm a HUGE technology geek. I love sci-fi, futuristic, you name it. And this IS that, in my opinion. But in goggle form, I will not be indulging my "geekness". It's an absolute 100% no-go for me in its current form. If/when it's to the point where it's just like putting on a pair of glasses and the number of use-cases is potentially way up there...I'd buy it!
One more thing to add.
”Opinions | Optimize your dating life with our incredibly ugly and expensive headset
With our augmented-reality goggles, life has never looked so good. And you've never looked so stupid.”
Comic Strip by Edith Pritchett
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/06/08/edith-pritchett-cartoon-apple-vision-pro/
😎
Enjoy!
A product that is so easily mocked will never succeed.
“A mind is a terrible thing to waste…”
”Opinions | Optimize your dating life with our incredibly ugly and expensive headset
With our augmented-reality goggles, life has never looked so good. And you've never looked so stupid.”
Comic Strip by Edith Pritchett
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/06/08/edith-pritchett-cartoon-apple-vision-pro/
😎
Enjoy!
A product that is so easily mocked will never succeed.
“A mind is a terrible thing to waste…”
Could be, but I doubt I could type while wearing that thing on my head. It wouldn’t revolutionize my productivity, quite the contrary.
If I have to work on a laptop, I can connect a large monitor (or several, as I do). Even on the move, I take my iPad and Sidecar it as a 2nd screen.
Looking at the AR features of the iPhones, they were also talked up quite a bit unless I’m mistaken, and I personally have no use for them.
Would really like to see more on the virtual keyboard. I'm envisioning my laptop just sitting on my ottoman, and only wearing the headset and nothing else to achieve the multiple monitor set up. An iPad with sidecar isn't a comparison, IMO.
I doubt I could type in the air. It’s probably made for voice input and this will only work for native English speakers, and only some of those.
I think the difference is that it is more AR and not VR. Very different things with very different use cases. Meta wants to get the AR part down, but that is the hard part.
You wouldn't have to type in the air, you could type on your lap.
I'm also thinking that a small Bluetooth keyboard shouldn't be that much of a hassle to use with Vision Pro on the couch.
You could be right but I really doubt that use case.
For me, VR is all about games - which can be amazing. This Apple device and the Apple ecosystem in general doesn't seem geared towards high end, graphics intensive gaming.
I haven't found a use for AR outside of Google Glass, which worked because it was very simple and very weareable.
When Apple lowers the price to $429-1599, improves head/eye comfort and increases battery life of 2hrs then I could see it selling 1/3rd of a billion units annually.
I do not see this occurring until the 2030s at the earliest.
Apple needs to be ahead of the next big thing like with the iPhone, iPod and Mac to stay being $3 trillion company.
With its current limitations I see it being as popular as any Mac Pro.
I do not see this occurring until the 2030s at the earliest.
Apple needs to be ahead of the next big thing like with the iPhone, iPod and Mac to stay being $3 trillion company.
With its current limitations I see it being as popular as any Mac Pro.
Well, the reason I wasn't interested in VR before is it was all about games. Apple's presentation made me feel like Vision Pro could be a productivity tool. We'll have to wait and see how it actually works, but that's the main reason I'm interested in VP.
I think that’s very fair and probably the reason why this product left me scratching my head. Your expectation is just fundamentally opposed to mine, I see no reason to believe this is a productivity enhancer (for me), and it just doesn’t seem to be, despite the price, a high-end VR entertainment device, which would have been my expectation.
What would a high-end VR entertainment device do that the Vision Pro doesn't? I'm asking this out of pure curiosity, as I have zero experience with VR systems.
But isn't that a question of whether the developer would port the game to Vision OS? Do you have any reason to think Vision Pro isn't capable of running that game, hardware-wise?Play Half-Life Alyx perfectly, I guess
I don't know, can it do high end 3D graphics? Not for zooming in photos and scrolling stuff, but for rendering worlds?
Typically you tether your VR headset to the PC, then your high end graphics card, like an RTX, will do the job.
This Apple device seems to render everything by itself. Can it be connected to a PC? I'm not aware of Apple VR games and Apple Arcade isn't what I mean by "gaming".
It *is* rendering worlds, only the world it renders is the room you are sitting in. Go to https://daringfireball.net/ and read his account of watching an NBA game. All that is rendered by the Vision Pro. It has 2 M2 chips plus an R chip, which I understand is the graphics chip. Sounds like plenty of processing power to me.
I read it, interesting, I don't think we're talking about the same thing. It seems to be really good at mapping camera footage to your view. Rendering a made up world is difficult and as far as I understand, Apple silicon is far behind nVidia when it comes to graphics.
Well I do hope Apple manages to attract some developers to make VR games for the VP platform. I'd like to see what it can do, and while it won't be my primary usage, I do enjoy a well-made game.