Here's a First In-Person Look at the Apple Vision Pro

[SpectatorHere]

I would have guessed that Apple would go with aesthetically pleasing, but limited glasses, rather than the whole ski goggle path. I think there is a still a big opportunity for more limited heads up display limited AR. I think too many will be put off by the huge goggles. I realize that sunglass-size displays couldn't do nearly what these will be able to at the moment, but it's glasses--not goggles--that will get people to jump on AR. ...of course Apple's soft launching this with a huge price because they know it isn't ready for mass market adoption, but still, I wonder about this decision.

 

[Azeroth1]

The fact that people can’t demo it bothers me. It makes me think it wasn’t or isn’t ready.

 

[FlyGuyDEN]

I've already got a savings plan to buy these on day one, and in a city with no sales tax.

 

[SpectatorHere]

I still remember the last time I had just gotten a new iPhone and someone saw it and was all "Whoah, you got the new iPhone! Can I see it? It's so cool and sleek looking!"

That was the iPhone 5. It took a few years but eventually iPhones became boring. AirPods became boring too.

I bet it will take a while for the AVP to become boring, but it will, and there will be competitors. It's only a matter of time before the tech gets cheap and small enough that you'll randomly see people walking around with AR/VR goggles.

It will happen. I likely won't be one of them, at least not in public.

These are pretty unlikely to ever become widespread...just too cumbersome. When they shrink to the size of glasses, then they'll get ubiquitous.

 

[ApplesAreSweet&Sour]

Does it have fans?

View attachment 2213110


View attachment 2213111

Yes, me.

 

[SpectatorHere]

I would have guessed that Apple would go with aesthetically pleasing, but limited glasses, rather than the whole ski goggle path. I think there is a still a big opportunity for more limited heads up display limited AR. I think too many will be put off by the huge goggles. I realize that sunglass-size displays couldn't do nearly what these will be able to at the moment, but it's glasses--not goggles--that will get people to jump on AR. ...of course Apple's soft launching this with a huge price because they know it isn't ready for mass market adoption, but still, I wonder about this decision.

BTW, if I had to guess why they went with the Ski-Goggles they know won't sell that well, I'd wager they figure the OS and getting developers onboard must be worth more than just selling lots of limited utility heads-up AR glasses they could probably churn out today.

 

[TKSX]

I don't think it is a working model. It is probably a concept model so that's why people can't demo it.

If I was presenting I would have demo / shown off the heck out of this new gadget instead of showing just a fixed unit.

 

[amaze1499]

The battery. The battery! The battery?

 

[Kierkegaarden]

“Incredibly expensive”? Don’t you think that is subjective? Is the Mac Studio Ultra “incredibly expensive” at $3999, or the Mac Pro at $6999? The Magic Leap and HoloLens both start at what Vision Pro starts at. And the Varjo XR-3 is priced at €6495, plus a subscription is required of €1495. Is this “incredibly expensive”? The Vision Pro looks much nicer and is about half the price, plus it doesn’t require a subscription. I find the writing of this article to be incredibly lazy.

 

[User 6502]

This is the first time Tim Cook says he is excited to introduce some product or feature and actually looked excited. You can tell he really wanted to be the one to do it, like he knew releasing this product while heading Apple will be his long term legacy. Long after we stop carrying physical phones in the future we will still be using some version of this, even if we can't see it and it's built into our eyeballs or brains somehow.

I thought we were past “Steve jobs would never” comments like…10 years ago? Guess not

Why would we be past that if anything decent apple offers came from him and anything released afterwards was either an update of existing product or an uninspired and soul less money maker?

 

[User 6502]

I ll write it again... When in a couple of years half of the DJs will play music with these beauties on and half of the influencers will make memes with these cool things on, you 'll cringe with what you are writing now

Beauties 🤣🤣🤣.
Gosh, who needs apple fake reality visor when one has such embedded rose painted glasses 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

 

[Red Oak]

Who cares. No one who wastes their time on MR forums can afford such a device!

 

[Ghost31]

Why would we be past that if anything decent apple offers came from him and anything released afterwards was either an update of existing product or an uninspired and soul less money maker?

Apple Watch and AirPods never happened huh?

 

[Soi Dog]

i am surprised at how close last years mock-up renders were to the real thing. Otherwise i expected a much less bulky product. will have to wait half a decade for that. i won't buy it as many others. But a product needed to be out to develop the new os and apps and control the market in some way.

 

[CarAnalogy]

I guess it's debatable whether enough people will part with $3500 for these ugly goggles to make it worthwhile for developers to create application for it and, hopefully, create a kill app - which Apple didn't have for this device - that then drives more demand for this ugly thing and, hopefully future less ugly things.

Years ago, Tim Cook expressed his enthusiasm for AR and, specifically, AR glasses. It's unbelievably disappointing to find that after all these years and effort, all Apple could come up with is these ugly ski goggles - with a friggin' tether! Steve Jobs is turning over in his grave as we speak :-(

I ask this simple question: why isn't all the heavy-duty processing - which is the cause for the ugly goggles and the tethered battery - done in the iPhone??? People already have one of those in their pockets and Apple has the know-how to make the networking to nearby AR *glasses* fast enough to have those glasses project transmitted images and send sensor data back. We could have had AR *glasses* instead of this contraption.

There was a big debate internally (apparently) about which approach to take.

Apparently the answer is that wireless communication is just not there to handle the bandwidth. Even wired communications. For this many sensors and this display and the low latency requirements, it has to be done all on-device.

 

[dork]

Hardwiring the cable into the battery pack seems like an epically bad idea.

 

[twolf2919]

Hard disagree. Wearing the AirPods in public for the first time was weird. There was nothing like it and people stared.

Yes, AirPods were derided a bit for looking like q-tips sticking out of your ear - but that was it. They just looked a bit different than the wireless earbuds that were already on the market. But these goggles have no social predecessor - and are ugly and socially unacceptable on a whole different level. For one, they cover more than half your face - yes, even if you count that weird semi-transparency that's apparently built in. AirPods didn't cover any part of your face. Also, Apple made such a big deal out of losing the wires with AirPods - and now they suddenly think wires are good again?

Apple is a hugely profitable company. Hopefully they can convince application developers to jump on the wagon - despite there not being any market whatsoever - just based on faith that Apple will eventually shrink down this monstrosity both in weight and price - enough so that it'll eventually find a mass audience akin to the iPhone.

 

[dannyyankou]

Do I see a USB C port on the power bank? I wonder if you can plug in accessories to it.

 

[CheffyDude]

Fact: Ready Player One was only a movie until today.

 

[sw1tcher]

Apple's Vision Pro headset will not be available for purchase until early 2024, and it will be incredibly expensive at $3,499.

This comment didn't age well

Apple's mixed-reality headset could launch as late as the fourth quarter of 2023 or early 2024, according to Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo.

Kuo is a known shitehawk and can't be trusted.

🤣 🤣 🤣

 

[rp2011]

They look good. I bet they will be fun to use. Good job, Apple.

 

[Rogifan]

Do we know who all got a hands on? So far I’ve only seen MKBHD, Ben Bajarin and Neil Cybart.

 

[twolf2919]

There was a big debate internally (apparently) about which approach to take.

Apparently the answer is that wireless communication is just not there to handle the bandwidth. Even wired communications. For this many sensors and this display and the low latency requirements, it has to be done all on-device.

I guess it all depends on *what* you're trying to achieve. Perhaps wireless communication isn't there to drive 2 4k displays at low enough latency to not give the user a headache in a *VR* experience, but there's plenty of wireless speed to allow for a great AR experience. So the problem is really Apple insisting on a product capable of immersive VR - even when its stated goals for the future were to create a product for AR.

Google Glass - now nearly 10 years old - had a decent AR experience already (using wireless tech)! You'd figure in 10 years time, Apple could have come up with an awesome AR experience given 10 years of miniaturization, the advent of their awesome M2, etc.

 

[tomtad]

Just in case people were wondering about the 2-hour battery life. It's 2-hour of battery use and unlimited use when plugged in to an outlet. Also, the price point reminds me of what Apple did with the iPhone 1. It was $600 which was overpriced compared to other "smartphones" that were available at the time. Eventually, other companies caught up to to that price point making the iPhone 3GS look like a deal. We'll just have to wait and see how this pans out. I'll hold my breath.

I'd certainly hope I'd get all-day use when plugged in!

I also wonder if the battery pack factors into $3500 being a 'starting' price. Will the entry level model just come with a power lead?

 

[tomtad]

I guess it all depends on *what* you're trying to achieve. Perhaps wireless communication isn't there to drive 2 4k displays at low enough latency to not give the user a headache in a *VR* experience, but there's plenty of wireless speed to allow for a great AR experience. So the problem is really Apple insisting on a product capable of immersive VR - even when its stated goals for the future were to create a product for AR.

Google Glass - now nearly 10 years old - had a decent AR experience already (using wireless tech)! You'd figure in 10 years time, Apple could have come up with an awesome AR experience given 10 years of miniaturization, the advent of their awesome M2, etc.

I'm not sure this in my top right field of vision is what I'd call a decent AR experience