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.
Here's What Tim Cook Looks Like Wearing Apple Vision Pro
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I assume there is a tinge of homophobia anytime based on posts every time Tim Is mentioned based on the responses I read
I don’t know, it just looked like a surface device when I zoomed in. Maybe the colour and shape.
Call it a sixth sense.
These are also the same types who get mad every June about a pride emoji or even more hilarious some dude got bothered that iOS has a pronoun category in creating new contacts despite the fact he didn’t have to use that field 😂
There were also tons of people who were impressed with the simple user interface, the innovative design, and of course the combination of an ipod, phone, and internet browsing device. It was in a league of its own. And you know, it solved an obvious problem for lots of people because they no longer needed to carry all these separate devices around.
The AVP doesn’t really solve any problems. Aside the problem some people apparently have of wanting to watch Ted Lasso on a big screen projected onto their ceiling in virtual space. I mean, it’s not even particularly portable.
what a well-thought-through response. I think the target market here is the business class flier who already is used to spending time in the air alone and trying to get work done. This headset would be a remarkable purchase for that specific customer. For the rest of us scrubs, it's another story.
This headset is not portable. Apple devices normally fit into a pocket (ipod/iphone) or at least into a slim backpack. This headset requires its own carrying case. I don't carry around a DSLR for the same reason; it is just not convenient to bring in every situation.
I find it hypocritical and ironic that they say that they "pulled this device out of the future" and that they couldn't innovate it further at this time, when this product is actually remiscent of something rushed to the market. Why they would jump on the VR bandwagon in an awkward way before foldable phones is beyond me. They thought foldable stuff was not market-ready, but this scuba mask is?
Give me an iPhone with an extendable screen so that it can be pocketed and can be used for more than just quick and easy, lazy stuff. I want a device that can do everything, but I don't want it sitting directly on my face.
If it's screen space you want, which gives more? A phone that can be unfolded to double its screen space, or a headset that effectively turns your entire field of view into a giant display which dwarves even the largest TV you can buy?
Short-sighted article: needs are created (even Steve Jobs said so). What do we really need that we use daily and cannot do without? (too bad the generations before us lived happily without it). Statements like this have always been made when new products have come out that have never been seen before. Among other things, people forget that in the next few years it will come down to just a pair of glasses. Augmented/virtual reality is here to stay.This article sums up my feelings on VP. It’s a solution in search of a problem. There is no clear use case. It exists to please Wall Street. Tim Cook isn’t going to be using this on a regular basis. My guess is not many at Apple will (outside of those working on the product).
Apple's Vision Pro lacks any real vision
The company’s headset exists to placate investors, not serve users’ needsdisconnect.blog
Lol, VR is barely here to visit, and AR hasn’t even arrived.
Right, someone was wrong in the past and so no Apple device could ever not catch on. That makes sense.
The vast majority cares but doesn't know about it. There's a difference.
Again, I don't need to cut off my arm to know that it hurts.
How do you know it's far from fact? Do you have data to back it up?
Apple Mouse, HomePod (it even had to be discontinued before relaunching, let's see how long they can hold their breath this time), Butterfly Keyboard, Ping and countless "gate"-infected products where Apple's excuses were so laughable that they became memes on the internet.
Oh I read it. You are missing the point again: It is irrelevant what limitations technical specs have (by your given point, even 1900 over 2000 mHz would be a "problem") because those are limitations and not problems which is why I used the word "problems" in its correct meaning vs you folks using it to put lipstick on a pig. I will say it again: There is not one actual problem that this product is solving. It has been in development since, what, longer than the Apple modem, and they didn't even have the skill or brainpower to come up with one single app that made anyone say "Oh yeah, I finally have a reason to buy it".
The reason why people still mention Steve's keynotes is because he was able to show off plenty of use-cases and solving actual problems with e. g. the iPhone, or the Watch, or the iPad and Mac. Mac vs PC guy was also about that, it was 100% practical and 0% theoretical, and that's why it was called innovation.
Feel free to enjoy the wait time. Some people also enjoy waiting for Jesus. This is by fact a product which has no current purpose and that purpose may come or it won't. The shareholders go fed up that Apple dumped too much money into the project with nothing to show off, that's why it was released and everybody knows it. That's the same reason why project Titan got reduced to a dustball. Because there is not even a checkpoint they reached which they set for themselves.
^This. Apple has all the money in the world to advertise and glorify its product and yet failed to even communicate one good enough use case for people actually wanting to buy it. I can't imagine anyone here wanting to buy it and I don't think that many are here who cannot afford it.
Short-sighted because it is not praising it?
When it comes down to just becoming glasses, then of course it would be different because then, you won't obstruct your environment like that anymore. Many use-cases for mere glasses having AR features built-in easily come to mind, like seeing information about the building in front of you, seeing the bus behind some houses to know if you need to run in order to get it, etc. But the VP? Zero.
Last edited:
Short-sighted because they look at the finger instead of the moon.
Are they though? Because you just seem to say it because it sounds cool but there is nothing to suggest that this points to a fact rather than an accusation.
It amazes me how the fanboys who have never even used a VR helmet have the opposite opinion. Let the returns begin!
I hope you're not talking about me, because I have explicitly reserved judgement on the whole thing. At 48 years old, I know what I don't know.
I remember when Tim Cook said the wrist was interesting and people only wore glasses because they have to. Now big, bulky googles on your face is the future? Please. Cool tech in and of itself isn’t a product. VP is the ultimate tech for tech’s sake product.
I read Gruber’s review and and basically watching movies was the only thing VP really excelled at. But even that…you’re still wearing big, bulky googles on your face. I wonder what the commentary was like here back when Google Glass first came out. My guess is a lot of it was snarky. Even now I’m seeing plenty of pro-Apple analysts throw snark and shade at Meta yet are completely bullish on VP. Metaverse is a joke but spatial computing is the future even though both are just BS company marketing terms.
For me that’s it in a nutshell. Undoubtedly a technical marvel and impressive achievement, but I personally think it’ll be a commercial failure in the context of “the next big thing”.