Gurman: Apple Vision Pro 2 at Least 18 Months Away

[Le0M]

My interest in not looking like an idiot in public with a screen wrapped around my face is definitely surging.

You're gonna have to wait for apple glasses, then. Or just wait for the public to familiarize seeing people using the vision pro, so that you won'd feel stupid doing the same.

 

[The Game 161]

I’m guessing Apple has seen massive returns, and will see a steady decline in purchases with overall flat numbers going into the next 12-18 months. They will need to make a market adjustment to a more affordable device if they want mass adaptation. Otherwise this will be a niche product adored by a small % of Apple faithful and ultimately abandoned if they keep the same strategy.

Actually they haven’t

only ones really returning are YouTubers

 

[nfl46]

It’ll probably end up in a drawer or on eBay soon enough 😂

I’d be too afraid to put it on eBay with it being such a high price item and it being hard to determined if it’s broken or not. For all they know, when they put the headset on, instead of the visionOS Home Screen appearing, it could a Chinese version of it.😂.

But naw, the software updates from Apple and new apps will keep everyone intrigued. The hardware is already there, we just need the apps.

 

[Zwhaler]

Gurman noted that Apple is keenly interested in the reasons why customers who choose to return the first-generation Vision Pro headset do so, ultimately passing feedback from retail stores to the company's headquarters to help perfect the next version of the device.

Because people would rather get paid ~$4000 to exit the beta test. Not an AVP hater.

 

[ovrlrd]

Because people would rather get paid ~$4000 to exit the beta test. Not an AVP hater.

Wait, we can get paid to return it? I wasn’t aware of that. Last I checked you only get a refund.

 

[Square-Eyes]

I’m guessing Apple has seen massive returns, and will see a steady decline in purchases with overall flat numbers going into the next 12-18 months. They will need to make a market adjustment to a more affordable device if they want mass adaptation. Otherwise this will be a niche product adored by a small % of Apple faithful and ultimately abandoned if they keep the same strategy.

I reckon there’ll be two main waves. A first lot who had to have it asap, and a second lot who will wait to read about the experience if the first lot.

Then very low sales until Christmas.

 

[turbineseaplane]

My prediction -- not only is it years away, but the next AVP will be so different it might as well have a different name

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Think quest 3 running vision os. Adding the required tracking for eyes of course. Apple can still sell lcd screens. Only the pro gets oled 4k+.

So basically make a big cut at the quality of the "vision" part of the name: 4K down to 1080p and assume the Meta margin of Quest 3 is as much as the Apple target margin. I have read more than a few times that Meta is not even trying to profit on Quest... but we very well know that Apple would not go there.

In other words, I don't think Apple could sell the actual Quest 3 at Quest 3 pricing. Why? Because Apple would want that incredible, "another record quarter..." margin on top.

But again, I'll hope right with everyone that this "much cheaper" Vision NOTpro can come. And if it does, I'll be curious to see how interested "we" are with all of the required cuts to specs. In general, I notice that when Apple chops to deliver lower prices, we tend to ridicule the "inferior" version. See countless threads about too little RAM, too little SSD, too inferior of a screen, "why does a MB PRO have a baseline M-series chip?", half-speed SSD choices, etc.

 

[qCzar]

We all keep slinging this idea of a Vision NOTpro for $1500 but nobody seems to be describing how the price gets way down there. Describe the many cuts that will be necessary to do it and then let's see how interested we are in that Vision Cheaper product.

Obviously $1500 is just speculation. You're right, it's hard to still make the Vision an attractive device; the features I'd cut also make the Vision Pro iconic, such as the outward screen. I could see a Vision headset being released that has a lower screen density, no automatic IPD adjustment, and the hardware that drives Personas left out.

I also feel like Personals are relevant to spatial computing and interacting with others virtually.
Apple is way to design conscious to leave manual adjustments on the device for IPD.

It'll probably go the route of the iPhone SE where it's internal hardware is a bit older in order to hit a lower price target. I don't think an Apple Vision is coming anytime soon. If I were to bet, I'd say around the 3rd generation of the AVP. This way the older chips and hardware are established and cheaper to produce, and that Apple will have the data on what other features and hardware to forgo for a cheaper headset.

 

[Square-Eyes]

The key thing about Gurman’s prediction is that it is mentioning the Apple Vision Pro 2 not any other version. While I don’t think there is a cheaper “non-Pro” version launching before 18 months, I think it’s a lot easier to say the second Pro version will be at least 18 months away.

Here is my short list of features that I want to see improved:

1. Ergonomics: Weighs less, better strap options
2. Display: Higher resolution, brighter, less image persistence, higher refresh rates
3. Optics: Higher FOV, less glare, larger edge to edge clarity
4. Cameras/Sensors: Higher resolution, better low light tracking, better eye tracking, >30hz hand tracking
5. Software: Multiple screens for Mac Virtual display, more RAM so inactive apps don’t need to suspend
6. Eyesight: Drop it completely or make it way way better, anything but one of these two scenarios is unacceptable for v2
7. General performance upgrades (newer processors)

I think within 12 months Apple can probably improve the software and general performance, but those are low on the list of improvements that would really make for a significant upgrade. I would honestly be pretty disappointed if that’s all they manage to accomplish in the next version.

From a supply chain perspective, there are newer displays from Samsung that are coming which should be drop in upgrades for Apple, but it’s pretty obvious since we haven’t heard of mass production yet that this is easily a year away. I feel like that one plus few more components (cameras, optics) would make for a significant enough new version when combined with upgraded software and performance.

So with that in mind, I would be shocked if there was a proper upgraded model (in my opinion) before 2026.

The one thing huge thing I would want is multi-user. I’m not going to buy four but I would have already bought one if it had multi-user. Or they reduce the price to $900…

No way I’d buy one that my boys can’t (properly) try out.

 

[75Batt]

Gurman forever stating the obvious and trying to pass it off as some kind of insider info.

 

[Someyoungguy]

Describe the feature set of a "regular VP" for $1500. A price cut of 58% means a LOT is going to have to go. So what goes to make that happen?

We all keep slinging this idea of a Vision NOTpro for $1500 but nobody seems to be describing how the price gets way down there. Describe the many cuts that will be necessary to do it and then let's see how interested we are in that Vision Cheaper product.

I love the idea of much cheaper Vision NOTpro too until the cut features list is laid out.

And while we're at it, I'd like a $350 new iPhone, a $150 new iPad and a $500 Macbook.

They said AV for $1500, not AVP.

A different model could have reduced specs while keeping the software-based “Apple magic”, if we can ever figure out what these are for. Every component could be cost-reduced, or do we think only Meta can figure that out?

 

[ipedro]

Obviously $1500 is just speculation. You're right, it's hard to still make the Vision an attractive device; the features I'd cut also make the Vision Pro iconic, such as the outward screen. I could see a Vision headset being released that has a lower screen density, no automatic IPD adjustment, and the hardware that drives Personas left out.

I also feel like Personals are relevant to spatial computing and interacting with others virtually.
Apple is way to design conscious to leave manual adjustments on the device for IPD.

It'll probably go the route of the iPhone SE where it's internal hardware is a bit older in order to hit a lower price target. I don't think an Apple Vision is coming anytime soon. If I were to bet, I'd say around the 3rd generation of the AVP. This way the older chips and hardware are established and cheaper to produce, and that Apple will have the data on what other features and hardware to forgo for a cheaper headset.

Personas are determined based on the inside infrared cameras capturing eye movement (and eyebrows in the periphery), a fundamental part of visionOS and the outside down-facing cameras, used to track hand movement, another key component of the experience. Neither of these are going anywhere.

It's also debatable whether the Eye Sight display will be excluded since it's an important part of maintaining connection with the outside world both ways. Isolation has been the reason why VR headsets never took off. Vision Pro is not there yet but it's made strides towards breaking the isolating feeling. You put it on and it defaults to the outside world and people see your eyes when you're addressing them.

Apple will bring the cost down based on mass manufacturing. Many of the sensors in Apple Vision Pro have already been made a commodity through the billions of iPhones and iPads that have been sold with TrueDepth array for Face ID. At first, they were only available in the much more expensive iPhone X and eventually made their way into the cheapest iPhones. The same will happen with Apple Vision Pro and eventually just Apple Vision, using established techniques and assembly lines paved by the more expensive devices and kept going for the entry level SKUs.

 

[DoctorMesmer]

So what are the main reasons for returns (besides those who wanted to give it a try but never intended to buy it in the first place)? I read that some people just didn’t think they’d use it, but there must be other, more specific reasons.

I realise Apple wouldn’t be making this information public, but if anyone has any insights, I’d be interested to read them.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Obviously $1500 is just speculation. You're right, it's hard to still make the Vision an attractive device; the features I'd cut also make the Vision Pro iconic, such as the outward screen. I could see a Vision headset being released that has a lower screen density, no automatic IPD adjustment, and the hardware that drives Personas left out.

I also feel like Personals are relevant to spatial computing and interacting with others virtually.
Apple is way to design conscious to leave manual adjustments on the device for IPD.

It'll probably go the route of the iPhone SE where it's internal hardware is a bit older in order to hit a lower price target. I don't think an Apple Vision is coming anytime soon. If I were to bet, I'd say around the 3rd generation of the AVP. This way the older chips and hardware are established and cheaper to produce, and that Apple will have the data on what other features and hardware to forgo for a cheaper headset.

I easily see the $2999 price for the "cheaper one"... as refurbs of this version if Apple will go about 15% off.

As to Personas, if I was in charge, I think I'd build a device for in-store "Pro Persona" creation that works like devices in Dental Offices that can scan a mouth in 3D and then take the owner of that mouth into and up close to every tooth and every side of every tooth. I could envision some kind of MRI-like device that can scan (only) the outside of someone's head from every angle. For those with longer hair, scan, lift hair, scan again, etc. Then, scan many images asking person to show expressions of about every emotion. Then, scan eyes looking up, down, left, right, etc. Basically, do what they are trying to do in a quick DIY way but on a pro level... to make it as realistic as similar scans to inject fantasy creatures in movies that look just as real.

Take all of those scans to render a thoroughly detailed Persona Pro. Maybe offer to digitally "fix" any flaws, hide some aging lines, address that odd mole, remove that unfortunate tattoo choice from college, straighten that one tooth, etc to achieve user-judged perfection. If they like it, they pay Apple some price (to cover the machine) and it becomes their Vpro avatar... and their iDevice Messages stickers faces too. I imagine this looking like one of those old photo booths where a couple of friends could get in and make a few faces and it spits out a series of "selfies" before people could shoot such things themselves.

While they are in store and waiting for Pro Persona and My* Stickers to be finalized, pitch them a few other Apple offerings.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

They said AV for $1500, not AVP.

A different model could have reduced specs while keeping the software-based “Apple magic”, if we can ever figure out what these are for. Every component could be cost-reduced, or do we think only Meta can figure that out?

And I agreed by referring to it as Vision NOTpro. So name those spec cuts to shave 58% off the $3499 for the "Pro" version. I'm not so sure the "magic" can be persisted with the amount of reduced specs necessary to hit that price. For example, if resolution is cut to Oculus and XReal equivalents (which seems essential to have any chance at a significantly lower price), there will be a noticeable change is clarity of everything seen in it. Can we want lower resolution... the same crowd who will passionately argue for 5K monitors over 4K monitors because "retina" is absolutely essential and our super-sensitive eyes can definitely notice a difference?

Cut some of the many cameras to get the price down? Those cameras are key to seeing the hands to make these work.

Here's my best crack at doing what I'm asking:

• Drop the eyesight thing completely. My best guess is that shaves maybe $200 off the MSRP.
• Drop the audio completely- leave that to AirPods. That's not really a price cut because someone would need AirPods too... but getting audio out of there maybe shaves another $200 off MSRP.

After that, I'm shaky on more tech cuts... certainly not going from 4K per eye to 1080p like in the cheaper alternatives. If me, I'd want MORE cameras to capture 360˚ spatial video instead of only a smallish spatial view out front... but that seems like it would require increasing price. Drop the metal structure for plastic (which leads to many of "us" ridiculing the plastic as 'cheap-looking' when Apple does this with other products). Make EVERY accessory including essential ones a "sold separately" purchase?

The OTHER thing I would do to create the illusion of a price cut is make a cellular model and then offer it with the approx. $1000 phone subsidy applied... with contract. Paired with the 2 bullets above, that could yield $3099 minus $1000 or $2099... which could look like a big price cut, though most of that is only an illusion. Nevertheless, a cellular version could fit much like there are cellular versions of iPad and Watch... and that subsidy is sizable so that one can get a "free* iPhone."

So there's a seemingly-logical path to a price (to prominently show) as low as maybe $2099* without very tangible cuts to hardware that seems to matter for that "magic." Most of it is price trickery but that seems like the ONLY way to even approach the $1500 price so often slung around like people believe it could actually arrive. That Vision 2 would then be priced $300 LESS than baseline MBpro and only a few hundred more than a loaded iPhone Pro MAX... very close to the traditional "starting at..." price of iMac 27"

And for a bit more mental trickery, offer it on 24-month terms at 0% and even with highest U.S. sales tax, it could hit a < $100/month payment proposition with $0 down and even $0 down and zero payments for the first month and then < $100/month for the other 23 months thereafter in some places. For the monthly payment-minded people, the proposition would be walking out with a Vision 2 for free*.

 

[aaronbear]

So what are the main reasons for returns (besides those who wanted to give it a try but never intended to buy it in the first place)? I read that some people just didn’t think they’d use it, but there must be other, more specific reasons.

I realise Apple wouldn’t be making this information public, but if anyone has any insights, I’d be interested to read them.

I am entering the second week of owning an AVP and I am seriously considering returning it in the next couple of days. I mainly bought it for development purposes, I don't have any AR ideas so I am just porting my existing iOS apps to it and it's so uncomfortable to wear that I can never make any meaningful progress on the AVP version of my app because I am so distracted by the discomfort and end up having to take it off after 30 minutes or so.

I have had two additional fitting sessions at the Apple Store after my initial fitting at pickup, I have swapped the light seal twice and swapped both bands to a different size. All this has made it slightly more comfortable and got me from 5 minutes up to 30. Unfortunately that's not enough, I can't keep it if I can't use it without pain. If they release a new headband or something I will buy another one to try it again but I am extremely bummed that this one isn't working out, I'll probably just be doing any AVP development in the simulator until v2.

 

[thewill586]

Apple isn’t going to produce glasses. If that was the case, they would have already released them because other companies are producing compelling true AR products (XReal, Brilliant Labs, ASUS, etc.) TODAY. Apple will be producing the AVP formfactor (goggles) for YEARS to come. Apple won’t go from what the AVP is now to a set of glasses in a year or even two.

I think glasses would just have the same feature set as google glasses; just overlaying windows over real pass-through. There wouldn’t be an immersed experience to watch movies in a dark environment.

 

[Mr_Ed]

They said AV for $1500, not AVP.

A different model could have reduced specs while keeping the software-based “Apple magic”, if we can ever figure out what these are for. Every component could be cost-reduced, or do we think only Meta can figure that out?

The bold (I formatted) is, of course, the critical question. Some are willing to part with their hard-earned money to help a multi-trillion dollar corporation come up with an answer that may or may not result in a useful future product. To each, his own, I guess. 🤷‍♂️

 

[thewill586]

The one thing huge thing I would want is multi-user. I’m not going to buy four but I would have already bought one if it had multi-user. Or they reduce the price to $900…

No way I’d buy one that my boys can’t (properly) try out.

+1. I demoed my AVP with extended family this weekend and it was tough.

My personal hotspot speed wasn’t high enough and the immersive content couldn’t load. That content should be stored on the device. How can AppleTV content be watched in travel mode?

AVP should have multi-user just like on Mac. I already bought a 2nd solo band and will probably follow up with a different light seal to get the comfort better for a family member.

Also, for customized comfort because everyone’s head shapes are so different, there should be a removable nosepiece to finish sealing out ambient light and take on some of the headset weight for those with flatter noses.

 

[thewill586]

AVP certainly won't get much cheaper, a regular AV could be in the $1,500 range. Which is still expensive but far better than $3500.

I doubt Meta will drop out of AR/VR as it's a very broad market and room for multiple devices

Just watch. Zuckerberg is selling the Metaverse. Imagine the quality of the Metaverse on AVP. Investments would focus on software instead of chasing advanced chips, displays, and cameras. Semiconductors take 18-24 months to develop a new chip.

 

[vartanarsen]

Ouch 54 months of headaches

 

[lovehateapple]

This first version will need more work to refine and bring the price down before they get into an annual release cadence. We'll likely see the next Vision Pro shown off at WWDC 2025 and released in September of the same year.

I agree apple will probably announce the next Vision and / or Vision Pro at a WWDC, but I doubt they will release it at the same time that year's iphone comes out. Vision or Vision Pros are more suited for an Oct or Nov release date in time for Christmas.

Also, there's no need for an annual update to the headset. I would much rather see fewer updates with bigger jumps in technology than more frequent ones with smaller advances in the specs. Besides, apple knows consumers can get upgrade fatigue so they have to give people a compelling reason to open their wallets. It's part of the reason why apple is seeing its customers use their iphones longer rather than upgrading every year or even every other year.

 

[lovehateapple]

Gurman noted that Apple is keenly interested in the reasons why customers who choose to return the first-generation Vision Pro headset do so, ultimately passing feedback from retail stores to the company's headquarters to help perfect the next version of the device.

I would think equally important is why some customers are waiting to buy. Obviously price is a factor, but for me it's more about what the headset can and can't do. If I could watch 360° video I've shot with my Insta360 camera on it as well as 360° video on YT on it, I would buy one today. I hope apple is reading these posts to gain insight in what people are saying.

 

[jigzaw]

Here’s what gen 2 will be: Better battery life, more improved EyeSight on front with wider screen for “eyes”, greater FOV. Will it be lighter? Maybe. BUT barely. Would Apple go from producing a product made from glass and aluminum to all plastic? No.

And here's the thing. As much as I love the glass/metal design of iPhones/iPads, this is one device I wish they'd go plastic on because I think it would reduce the weight dramatically. I returned the AVP because I sadly learned that Gen 1 ain't for me, and grabbed a Quest 3 to tide me over til Gen 2, and I'm finding the Quest more comfortable and lighter as well as it's nice to not feel like I'm handling a priceless fragile artifact like the AVP felt like. I'm sure the AVP is more durable than it seems but that all-glass front had me being very delicate in handling it.