Here's What Tim Cook Thinks About Apple's Vision Pro After Low Sales

[MacRumors]

Apple CEO Tim Cook remains bullish on the Vision Pro, despite reports of low sales since the mixed-reality headset launched nearly 18 months ago.

"I was thrilled with the release from the team on visionOS 26," said Cook, on Apple's earnings call on Thursday. "It includes many things in it, like Spatial Widgets to enable users to customize their digital space. The Personas took a huge increase, they're much more lifelike. And of course there's new enterprise APIs for companies as well."

"We continue to be very focused on it," added Cook. "I don't want to get into the roadmap on it, but this is an area that we really believe in."

Bloomberg's Mark Gurman has already leaked the apparent next step in that roadmap. Last month, he reported that Apple plans to update the Vision Pro as early as this year. He expects two key upgrades over the current model, including a faster M4 chip, and a new head strap that makes it easier to wear the headset for extended use.

Apple launched the Vision Pro in the U.S. in February 2024, with pricing starting at a lofty $3,499. The current model is equipped with an M2 chip.

Some of the customers that did buy the Vision Pro said they regretted spending so much money on a device that they ultimately used so little. And some users have complained about the device being too heavy to wear comfortably for long periods.

Cook previously admitted that the Vision Pro is not a mass-market product due to its high price.

"At $3,500, it's not a mass-market product," he said last year. "Right now, it's an early-adopter product. People who want to have tomorrow's technology today—that's who it's for. Fortunately, there's enough people who are in that camp that it's exciting."

Research firm IDC estimated that Vision Pro sales would be under 500,000 units in 2024, and it is probably safe to estimate that sales remain below 1 million as of today.

Gurman said that Apple plans to release a redesigned Vision Pro that weighs significantly less — and hopefully costs significantly less — in 2027.

In addition, Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo expects Apple smart glasses without built-in displays to enter mass production in the second quarter of 2027. Similar to the Meta Ray-Bans, he said that Apple's glasses will allow users to take photos, record videos, and listen to music, with both touch and hands-free voice control.

Eventually, Gurman and Kuo expect Apple to release true augmented reality glasses, but such a product likely remains many years away.

Article Link: Here's What Tim Cook Thinks About Apple's Vision Pro After Low Sales

 

[Dwalls90]

As an owner of the original Apple Watch and iPhone, both of those were pretty average products (slow, not great battery, limited functionality), but paved the way for what are now today incredible products. While price is a huge barrier to entry for Apple Vision, I think they will get it right in the long-run.

 

[cicalinarrot]

I knew it'd be a niche product.
But I also expected a much cheaper and improved second model to boost adoption and development, like it happened with basically all other Apple products.

 

[Ctrlos]

All it ever needed was a marketing pivot to industry rather than consumer. I want to be able to see a CAD model in AR simultaneously with other AVP users so that we can manipulate it between ourselves in realtime, editing faces etc and everyone gets the same view. I don't need to put a clock on my wall.

 

[nfl46]

I am fully aware that we, the first-generation AVP owners, serve as “testers” for the future, and that is perfectly acceptable. Considering the current economic climate and the price of $3,499, I understand why it failed to sell millions of units. To achieve widespread adoption, the price needs to be significantly reduced, possibly to under $2,000. While the Pro model may not see such a price drop, the Air model might.

Considering the circumstances, it was probably best that it didn’t achieve widespread adoption because the VisionOS App Store wasn’t ready for it. Although it’s getting better, we’re still a couple of years away from it being truly decent.

 

[vertsix]

He could've dropped the price much like Apple did with the original iPhone with low sales.

But he didn't. There's also little progress (seemingly, based on rumors) about making it lighter.

Seems like they're scrambling on what to do with it, but publicly they must say they're still passionate about it.

 

[matt_and_187_like_this]

This is at best a dev test product for some AR device in the future.

 

[EugW]

Maybe I’ll buy the smart glasses 👓 in 2035.

 

[CharlesShaw]

It certainly manages expectations about what current technology can do, even with all their money. That said, I feel like something must have been learned or advanced from the making of this product.

 

[unregbaron]

Reminds me of the G4 Cube.

 

[spaxxedout]

It’s a niche, beta product and that’s precisely what I like about it. Opening up front camera access to devs would help a lot as it would be a great test-bed / preview for multi-modal AR.

 

[gleepskip]

So, exactly how dusty is Tim's own AVP at this point?

 

[turbineseaplane]

If it was half the price, I might be interested in a pre-owned one (for even less).

They need something way cheaper for those of us that just want content consumption.

Personally, I would also like a version that could at least optionally work tethered to a Mac or an iOS device.

That’s where I already have all of my content and apps and I don’t really want an entirely new App platform that gets barely supported.

 

[barkomatic]

It still needs compelling, high end first party VR games. The Vision Pro could be the best gaming VR headset of all time while still being developed for work applications. They just won't do it though.

 

[vertsix]

It still needs compelling, high end first party VR games. The Vision Pro could be the best gaming VR headset of all time while still being developed for work applications. They just won't do it though.

It needs apps in general. And for apps, you need a user base. Without a user base, there's little investment in apps. It's exactly how hardware fails, such as the Blackberry and Windows Phone.

That's why the price drop of the original iPhone and lower price of the iPhone 3G was strategically important when the App Store was unveiled. Arguably, the iPhone succeeded not for the hardware and innovation, but because of apps.

 

[NoSoup4U]

I am fully aware that we, the first-generation AVP owners, serve as “testers” for the future, and that is perfectly acceptable. Considering the current economic climate and the price of $3,499, I understand why it failed to sell millions of units. To achieve widespread adoption, the price needs to be significantly reduced, possibly to under $2,000. While the Pro model may not see such a price drop, the Air model might.

Considering the circumstances, it was probably best that it didn’t achieve widespread adoption because the VisionOS App Store wasn’t ready for it. Although it’s getting better, we’re still a couple of years away from it being truly decent.

Yeah, it's an "almost" product.

Almost light enough, almost cheap enough, almost enough users to drive software & content development.

And almost understood. It's a portable face computer, with multiple "monitors" built-in (or an immersive IMAX+ screen), the mouse/trackpad is replaced by your eyes, and the keyboard is (eventually) replaced by your voice.

If you have a multiple monitor set-up, or travel, the AVP is *almost* killer. A couple generations out, and nobody even flinches at $3999 (fully loaded with eye inserts).

 

[Taq'aix]

No one really wants that bulky scuba-diving device strapped to their head, except for those early tech adopters.

It’s time for Tim to set sail on the tranquil waters of his well-earned retirement.

 

[radus]

For me it is going to become better and better. If we get an updated one this year I will buy it. Mostly to use it as a remote Disply for the Mac - so I can get rid of the Pro Display XDR and the desk, can use it outdoors and on a trip.

 

[thiscatisfat]

As an owner of the original Apple Watch and iPhone, both of those were pretty average products (slow, not great battery, limited functionality), but paved the way for what are now today incredible products. While price is a huge barrier to entry for Apple Vision, I think they will get it right in the long-run.

Even if they do, this isn't a product for the masses. The iPhone and Watch were/are usefull for the majority of people, Vision Pro or VR headsets in general are not. People won't be walking around with a headset any time soon. The iPhone succeeded because of year-to-year evolution of the product with updates that made sense, everyone wanted to have an iPhone. The Vision Pro is a flop, nobody cares about the product and Timmy is delusional if he thinks this will catch on. AR glasses same thing, not everyone wears glasses and most people who do wear them wear them because they have to, not because they want to. They should've ditched the Vision pro two years ago it's just a waste of money. In other words - no, Vision Pro is not and never will be "the iPhone" of 2020s.

 

[thiscatisfat]

It needs apps in general. And for apps, you need a user base. Without a user base, there's little investment in apps. It's exactly how hardware fails, such as the Blackberry and Windows Phone.

That's why the price drop of the original iPhone and lower price of the iPhone 3G was strategically important when the App Store was unveiled. Arguably, the iPhone succeeded not for the hardware and innovation, but because of apps.

This is exactly what I wanted to say about Vision Pro, it's the Windows Phone of today's Apple.

 

[jayducharme]

The "spatial computing" concept is brilliant, as is VisionOS. The hardware is what's holding it back at the moment. But given more development, that should improve substantially.

 

[jole]

All it ever needed was a marketing pivot to industry rather than consumer. I want to be able to see a CAD model in AR simultaneously with other AVP users so that we can manipulate it between ourselves in realtime, editing faces etc and everyone gets the same view. I don't need to put a clock on my wall.

Pro device needs pro capabilities. AVP (or iPad Pro for that matter) is not there. Let’s add them.

That said, this needs to remain a general purpose device to serve as guide light towards the next platform after smartphones. Something like MS HoloLens or Magic Leap is not able to do that.

 

[WarmWinterHat]

It needs a few things. Multi-user options... truely different accounts on the same device, not just a "guest mode", lose the straight-up creepy front eyes, and allow external input in form of hdmi or similar..not just apple proprietary inputs. Even then, I could never imagine myself wearing this. I always watch tv, movies and sports with friends and/or family.

Something like is niche, and will always be niche. There is nothing wrong with niche; it's just not a phone/laptop replacement and will never be the majorities primary computing platform.

My local Apple store isn't even promoting it. There is nothing except a picture of someone wearing it, but they took down the displays of the actual device late last year.

It's also just dorky as hell. Wish that part away all you want, but it is, and when it comes to a wide audience, it matters.

 

[attila]

As an owner of the original Apple Watch and iPhone, both of those were pretty average products (slow, not great battery, limited functionality), but paved the way for what are now today incredible products. While price is a huge barrier to entry for Apple Vision, I think they will get it right in the long-run.

Yeah, just like iPod Hi-Fi and Pippin.

 

[anakin44011]

Many people keep forgetting that there is a limited supply of certain, unique components of the AVP. I think the 8k screens are the main ones.

It is a chicken-and-egg situation where the investment required of suppliers to 10x the supply doesn't yet make financial sense...at least not yet. So Apple really isn't trying to sell 5 million units...because it can't.

Two years in...Apple has enough in the field to supply developers and early-adopter/testers. Heck, Blackmagic just started shipping the $35k camera to make immersive video. The footage I've seen is really, really good - but $35k makes the AVP look like an inexpensive add-on.

And I'll keep saying this until Apple hears me - the real killer app is telepresence. When I visit places in the AVP (with footage shot via Canon R5 or better), my brain thinks that I've been there. There's only so much time, money, access to travel to all the places I want to be -- telepresence via AVP makes it relatively inexpensive, easy, and convenient.

Last week, I rode a camel in the Sahara without getting hot or dirty...or smelling the camel. That was 'good enough' for me. It is not the same as actually flying to Africa and doing it - but so, so much cheaper and faster and easier.

And it is A LOT better that viewing the same thing on a flat screen. To me - it is night and day. I've never watched a movie and thought "I've been there". With AVP, I feel like I have.

On top of that, the Apple Immersive content is simply stunning - much of that is something I could never experience myself, regardless of time or budget.

And finally, I can do it all for 15 minutes at a time.