Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Kuo: 2025 Apple Vision Pro to Get M5 Chip and Apple Intelligence

Any thoughts then on if the Ver1 will be limited on the AI features?
That would honestly be a kick in the guts considering the amount one needed to shell out to get this version.
 
I own a Vision Pro. I won’t buy another one for $3500. If Apple offered a significant discount if I traded in my current Vision Pro I’d consider it, otherwise I’m waiting for something much cheaper and closer to glasses.
 
Are the Meta Orion AR glasses that were just released really $10,000? Is that a joke? Makes the AVP seem like a bargain?
 
As anyone who reads many of my posts know, I'm neither Apple "is always right in all things" fan nor ("they are always wrong") hater/troll... but simply a consumer who posts what I actually think vs. doing free PR/Sales work/defending or seemingly existing to only stir the pot. Here's my take on Vpro...

All of the tech companies are trying to solve a tangible problem: how to deliver bigger screens "on the go." Some are experimenting with physical options like folds/rolls and others are trying to virtualize that part of things since "the rest" of a physical device doesn't need to scale larger to match a scaled screen size. For instance, it would be great for some to have a 3X" MB... but the keyboard half would be a whole lot of wasted space (and onerous) weight to align with the size of that lid.

Vpro and similar are consistently one smallish size and always the same weight... while delivering any size screen on the go. That's the very big, very useful solution for all the "what problem does it solve?" people.

I do not foresee phones with even 8" screens (but maybe the slabs will grow to that??? If so, that's still a very tiny screen for some uses). Laptops become just too heavy if built much larger than they are now (can you picture yourself with a MB 24"? MB 30"? Bigger?).

I do the bulk of my computing work on a 40" ultra-wide screen. But when I hit the road, that thing can't go with me... so I downscale to 16" or smaller screens... and immediately feel the tremendous constraints of that. Productivity plummets when the work canvas goes small.

Folds/Rolls/Virtual all attempt to solve THAT problem: let us have any size canvas to do our computing without making someone like me try to fit that ultra-wide physical screen into my travel bag (somehow). Vpro's great advantage vs. fold/roll options is that it delivers ANY size (screen(s)) without scaling up weight or physical size with screen size. For that alone, I think VR options are the best answer for those- like me- who desire bigger screens on the go.

ASD with stand option has readily sold at upwards of $2K/pop. That's a screen likely to be parked in one spot for its useful life. No one is probably trying to carry it with them to use as a mobile screen everywhere. It's certainly not getting used on the plane trip, etc. Vpro lets that screen- along with any other size screen or screens- go with its owner, even onto that plane(s). It is upwards of a theater-size screen that can fit in the travel bag. No other concept does that.
  • "But I already have a big TV..." and it probably never moves from the 1 spot you placed it on day 1.
  • "I would rather buy a MB..." then you probably don't feel the great constraint of working within a 13"-16" screen size... and my guess is that anyone considering a Vpro already owns a MB. If not then yes, they probably need a Mac first.
  • "I don't see any use case" Reread the above: an ANY SIZE SCREEN WITH YOU WHEREVER YOU GO has many very tangible uses... superior to a tiny-size phone, tablet screen or even a 16" laptop screen.
What are some "easy" things Apple could do to make it more appealing?
  • Make it cellular so that the approx. $1000 subsidy from AT&T, Verizon, Tmobile, etc. could be applied, instantly altering the perceived price from $3499 to 2499*... just like iPhone pricing is psychologically altered from $1000+ to free*.
  • Offer a virtual iPhone "latest gen" app to take advantage of the cellular so that one can then opt to buy Vpro instead of multiple iPhones over the life of device. It's easy for even 2 iPhones to hit $2499 out of pocket. Some may be able to make a virtual "my precious" stand in for an actual one. There's already a working iPhone simulator app. Put an iPhone-VR in a cellular-capable Vpro.
  • Allocate an AppleTV+ type budget and dedicated human talent towards the content and app side of things for Vpro. I don't think this can be a "build it and they will come" model. I see this more like game consoles where the dazzling "games" (apps) need to be rolling out every month available exclusively for Vpro. Here's some "simple" ideas mostly leaning on spending money to be realized: NFL-ST-VR, NCAA-F-VR, NCAA-B-VR, MLB-VR, NHL-VR, NBA-VR, Broadway Shows-VR, Live Concerts-VR, Cirque-VR, Olympics-VR, etc. Vpro "content" is king. Apple may have to drive much more of it directly or via subsidy money to third parties to better establish it.
  • Develop a Personas PRO offering that fully models each person so they have more than just a chunk of their "front" (view) to wash out the "ghosts"/phantom nature of it. I envision a 3D scanner "booth" in Apple stores like the old photo booths. Step in, follow instructions to create your pro model, then it transfers to your Vpro or to iCloud to then transfer on to Vpro. Persona PRO then takes over as your persona in all persona things and you no longer look like a phantom. Make Personas look much more like the actual person. Think green bubbles vs. blue bubbles here. Anyone without a PRO persona will soon want one if some other people in VR meetings have one.
  • For the alt-laptop use, do what people are already doing: build a Vpro accessory Mac that is basically the bottom half of a MB... maybe with a bigger battery which can then power BOTH Mac AND the Vpro (for much longer than 2.5 hours) but also directly feed the computing view up the same cable too. If Mac is rendering the view, Vpro could deliver the multi-screen or super size screen(s) experience some want when using it in this way. This can also solve the battery life complaint for some people... and open the door for a stripped-down, cheaper Vpro Jr that might be towards SINGLE PURPOSE use in this way.
  • Make Vpro capable of being a Mac "on our heads" instead of only an iPad. Add bluetooth keyboard and pad/mouse and one has an any-size screen Mac anywhere they happen to be. To paraphrase a classic line from Jobs: "an iPhone, an iPad and a Mac." The market readily spends much more than $3K to buy those 3 products in their traditional forms. To carry along all 3 on the go is a heavy load with a LOT of duplication of tech. If some can make virtualized versions of those work, $2499* can seem to be a relatively LOW price instead of high one.
  • Use the financing gimmick to alter the cost perception. If $3499, offer 36 months, 0% financing to shift the perception from $3499 to "free*". If $2499*, shift the perception to "free*" too... exactly as it is done with iPhone now. Just like iPhone, buyer still pays full price for the device, but the perception is altered from $2499-$3499 today to as little as "free*" today... and then monthly payments to actually pay for it over time.
Is there more than these ideas? Of course, there are PLENTY more that could be done with the ability to show eyes anything as if it is what we are actually seeing. The above list is just quite accessible things that Apple could easily do, mostly by opting to spend some of the cash laying around doing nothing and rolling out a tweaked model with a few new capabilities that are certainly doable.

I hope Apple keeps evolving this product. I like "any size" screen targets vs. limited sizes that come with fold/roll concepts. An any size screen wherever one goes without weight & size scaling up to facilitate it seems preferable to ever-heavier & bulkier fold/roll devices to me.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Disagree
Reactions: MacCheetah3, Dawn of Individual Merit and zach-coleman
HobeSoundDarryl said:
As anyone who reads many of my threads know, I'm neither Apple "is always right in all things" fan nor ("they are always wrong") hater/troll... but simply a consumer who posts what I actually think vs. doing free PR/Sales work/defending or seemingly existing to only stir the pot. Here's my take on Vpro...

All of the tech companies are trying to solve a tangible problem: how to deliver bigger screens "on the go." Some are experimenting with physical options like folds/rolls and others are trying to virtualize that part of things since "the rest" of a physical device doesn't need to scale larger to match a scaled screen size.

Vpro and similar are consistently one smallish size and always the same weight... while delivering any size screen when on the go. That's the very big, very useful solution for all those "what problem does it solve?" people.

I do not foresee phones with even 8" screens (but maybe the bricks will grow to that). Laptops become just too heavy if built much larger than they are now (can you picture yourself with a MB 24"? MB 30"? Bigger?)

I do the bulk of my computing work on a 40" ultra-wide screen. But when I hit the road, that thing can't go with me... so I downscale to 16" or smaller screens... and immediately feel the tremendous constraints of that. Productivity plummets when the work canvas goes small.

Folds/Rolls/Virtual all attempt to solve THAT problem: let us have any size canvas to do our computing without making someone like me try to fit that ultra-wide physical screen into my travel bag (somehow). Vpro's great advantage vs. fold/roll options is that it delivers ANY size (screen(s)) without scaling up weight or physical size with screen size. For that alone, I think VR is best answer for those- like me- who desire bigger screens on the go.

ASD with stand option has readily sold at upwards of $2K/pop. That's a screen likely to be parked in one spot for its useful life. No one is probably trying to carry it with them to use as a mobile screen everywhere. It's certainly not getting used on the plane ride, etc. Vpro lets that screen- along with any other size screen or screens- go with its owner. It is upwards of a theater-size screen that can fit in the travel bag. No other concept does that.

  • "But I already have a big TV..." and it probably never moves from the 1 spot you have it.
  • "I would rather buy a MB" then you probably don't feel the great constraint of working within a 13"-16" screen size... and my guess is that anyone considering a Vpro already own a MB. If not then yes, they probably need a Mac first.
  • "I don't see any use case" Reread the above: an ANY SIZE SCREEN WITH YOU WHEREVER YOU GO has many very tangible uses... superior to a tiny-size phone or tablet screen or even a 16" laptop screen.
What are some "easy" things Apple do to make it more appealing?
  • Make it cellular so that the approx. $1000 subsidy could be applied, instantly altering the perceived price from $3499 to 2499*... just like iPhone pricing is psychologically altered from $1000+ to free*.
  • Offer a virtual iPhone "latest" app to take advantage of the cellular so that one can then opt to buy Vpro instead of multiple iPhones over the life of device. It's easy for even 2 iPhones to hit $2499. Some may be able to make a virtual "the precious" stand in for an actual one. There's already a working iPhone simulator app. Put an iPhone-VR in a cellular-capable Vpro.
  • Allocate an AppleTV+ type budget and dedicated human talent towards the content and app side of things for Vpro. I don't think this can be a "build it and they will come" thing. I see this more like game consoles where the dazzling "games" need to be rolling out every month available exclusively for Vpro. "Simple" ideas mostly leaning on spending money: NFL-ST-VR, NCAA-F-VR, NCAA-B-VR, MLB-VR, NHL-VR, NBA-VR, Broadway Shows-VR, Live Concerts-VR, Cirque-VR, Olympics-VR, etc. Vpro "content" is king. Apple may have to drive much more of it directly or via subsidy money to third parties to better establish it.
  • Develop a Personas PRO offering that fully models each person so they have more than just a chunk of their "front" (view) to wash out the "ghosts"/phantom nature of it. I envision a 3D scanner "booth" in Apple stores like the old photo booths. Step in, follow instructions to create your pro model, then it transfers to your Vpro or to iCloud to then transfer on to Vpro. Persona PRO then takes over as your persona in all persona things and you no longer look like a phantom. Make Personas look much more like the actual person.
  • For the alt-laptop use, do what people are already doing: build an Vpro accessory Mac that is basically the bottom half of a MB... maybe with a bigger battery which can then power BOTH Mac AND the Vpro but also directly feed the computing view up the same cable too. If Mac is rendering the view, Vpro could deliver the multi-screen or super size screen(s) experience some want when using it in this way.
  • Make Vpro cable of being a Mac "on our heads" instead of only an iPad. It plug bluetooth keyboard and pad/mouse and one has an any-size screen Mac anywhere they happen to be. To paraphrase a line from Jobs: an iPhone, an iPad and a Mac. The market readily spends much more than $3K to buy those 3 products in their traditional forms. If some can make virtualized versions of those work, $2499* can seem to be a relatively LOW price instead of high one.
  • Use finance gimmick to alter the cost perception. If $3499, offer 36 months, 0% financing to shift the perception from $3499 to "free*". If $2499*, shift the perception to "free*" too... exactly as it is done with iPhone now.
Is there more than these ideas? Of course, there are PLENTY more that could be done with the ability to show eyes anything as if it is what we are actually seeing. The above list is just quite accessible things that Apple could easily do, mostly be opting to spend some of the cash laying around doing nothing and rolling out a tweaked model with a few new capabilities.

I hope Apple keeps evolving this product. I like "any size" screen targets vs. limited sizes that come with fold/roll ideas. And any size screen wherever one goes without weight & size scaling up to facilitate it seems preferable to ever-heavier & bulkier fold/roll devices to me.
Click to expand...
Your thesis is incorrect. This was to usher in "Spatial Computing", not simply provide a large screen on the go. If that were the case Apple probably could have solved it at a much lower price, and with much better sales, due to presenting a concrete, albeit uninspired, use case.

I do like some of your ideas though: cellular subsidies, and some compelling content. Kind of strange and disappointing that such obvious ideas aren't coming out of Apple.
 
spaxxedout said:
Even though the Vision Pro is by far the most powerful HMD, it’s still cpu / gpu constrained in many areas, and I’m happy to hear about M5. FWIW, Vision Pro was heavily delayed due to the pandemic, and its M2 always felt like a last minute addition.

A big advantage with the M5 is the high likelihood of default 120hz, with downlocking to 100hz for PAL content. This will help tremendously with motion blur and viewing 60fps content.

Another tidbit is that the new iPhone Pro’s have a new anti glare coating on all the rear cameras, and the standard models have that coating on one of the cameras. I feel like this might be Apple testing a new lens coating for Vision Pro, as the screen glare in the cinema environment is above and beyond the most significant hardware issue with the Vision Pro.

People like to complain about the external battery, but that’s actually a superior design. It’s very easy to plug it in while in use (unlike quest). Also, having an easily replaceable battery goes a long way for the overall longevity of the product.

As for weight, that’s all pretty subjective. However, I promise that it’s not as heavy as it looks.
Click to expand...
I actually very much agree about the battery being an advantage. At first I wasn’t sure, but in all my actual use, I find it very easy to keep things topped up, keeps some weight off the headset, and is replaceable if the cells die out. A gen 1 AVP could last someone 5-7 years or more of actual use.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MacCheetah3 and spaxxedout
The-Real-Deal82 said:
So they've released the first version and charged consumers £3500-£4000, barely released any content for it, and theres now rumours a second version is coming out with updated hardware already?? Sorry what? Talk about hanging their customers out to dry.
Click to expand...
What does this even mean?
Of course there’s going to be a second generation, eventually.
People bought $6000 MacBook Pros with the M2 series, and nine months after introducing that Apple came out with the M3 MBPs.

But even still, this article says it won’t be out until late 2025 at the earliest, which could easily turn into early 2026, and then summer 2026. We’ve seen this happen over and over.
Two years between product updates, of course there is going to be improvements.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lilkwarrior
TheColtr said:
I own a Vision Pro. I won’t buy another one for $3500. If Apple offered a significant discount if I traded in my current Vision Pro I’d consider it, otherwise I’m waiting for something much cheaper and closer to glasses.
Click to expand...
This. Same here. I love my AVP but would I spend $3500 again? Not a chance. Especially just for an M5 and AI.
 
Someyoungguy said:
Your thesis is incorrect. This was to usher in "Spatial Computing", not simply provide a large screen on the go.
Click to expand...

And yet, the seemingly ONE focus in all Vpro marketing is on large screen on the go. What is the signature feature of the upgrade Vpro OS? An even bigger screen on the go.

That shared though, I agree with you that Apple wants "spatial computing." If so, they need to show a lot of it that is NOT simply bigger screen TV or monitor usage. If I create something and call it holodeck, I better have some hologram programs working so that people can experience my spin... and want it for themselves. Else, what's in a name?

Someyoungguy said:
I do like some of your ideas though: cellular subsidies, and some compelling content. Kind of strange and disappointing that such obvious ideas aren't coming out of Apple.
Click to expand...

Yes. Much like how Sony & Microsoft invest heavily in the content side with each new console roll out, this seems like it needs Apple to further open the gigantic wallet and spend some money either creating much more of their own content especially for it and/or offering seed (AKA bribe) money to third parties to create incredible stuff for it.

Instead, they seem to be going at like they are going at "we're serious about gaming:" a "we built it, now you (developers) make it amazing." My very best opinion of it is that it can't be a "build it and they will come" model. My gut is that Apple needs to put as much into it now as what they have put into it over the last 5+ years to get it to market. Else, I'm not sure third parties see enough ROI in it to make it a success for Apple.

The common perception is that stuff like Playstations are "loss leaders" and Sony makes the money on the "apps." In this case, I suspect Apple is seeking maximum profit on each unit sold AND on the "apps" too. Therein lies even the fan frustration at value proposition. Either make it much more affordable or make the existing pricing seem like a bargain by jacking up the "what can it do?" benefits.
 
SexExpert said:
What do you suggest Apple do instead? Send out consent forms to all the early adopters and ask if they'd mind terribly giving Apple permission to release version 2? If you bought a v1 and are surprised a v2 is on the horizon I would question your intelligence.
Click to expand...
This is why I didn’t buy version 1. It wasn’t the initial cost that bothered me so much, it was getting on the upgrade treadmill for a $3,500 product.
 
Who cares about this ? Apple has a product that no one’s want and avoid giving us what we need … Pass …
 
I tried an AVP in store recently. No queue which was good. It was impressive, but it made me nauseous and by the end of the demo I couldn't wait to take it off, plus it was starting to irritate my skin.
I forgot to ask how difficult it would be to put files from a usb stick on it, say if travelling, but sadly I couldn't wait to get out in the fresh air.
I did think that the field of view was a bit narrow for an immersive device before I started wanting to hurl too.
 
  • Like
  • Disagree
Reactions: AndiG and dominiongamma
The technology is obviously impressive, but I’m less and less convinced that - regardless of the cool apps or games that are built - people will ever want to sit down and put on a headset. AR glasses seem more mass market.
 
Problems are (1) price, (2) visionOS is designed to be too limiting for professional use (like iPadOS). HW is pretty good, so while it would be cool to get from 16Gb memory to 32GB or 64GB, and increase speed; it is _not_ the limiting factor for the device.

Not seeing myself upgrading next year...
 
The Quest Pro didn't even last 2 years before being discontinued and it doesn't even have the biggest complaints of the vision pro

1- The price is lower
2- It's lighter
3- More apps at launch

People still did not buy and got it discontinued.
Companies are still figuring things out. It's normal for a new market, like at the beginning of smartphones pre 2005. If you have the resources to try before market matures then go ahead, if not just wait.
 
as long as they have a cheaper model out. it was stupid to launch with just the Pro model.

not everyone buys an iPhone Pro/Pro Max. give people an option for something cheaper.
 
Sounds like Apple is selling promises again.

"Okay, the first Vision Pro didn't make spatial computing mainstream, but this next one, this one's gonna do it!"

Sure, I guess. I'll believe it when I see it.
 
AlexESP said:
I’m not convinced by the VP as it is, but thankfully Apple still doesn’t present prototypes and preserve their dignity. Trying to fool people is an important line not to cross.
Click to expand...
Take a look yourself. This product developed by Meta is so cool. Feel the enthusiasm of the people developing it and you understand what the AVP is completely missing.

 
I am excited about this product and more importantly, its future. One of the weirdest things about its positioning currently is that at its price, it’s only M2, and will be all the way through M4, and with Apple intelligence coming, it’s going to be missing one of the biggest things Apple is currently pushing. And, it doesn’t have a Pro chip either. Seems like M2 Pro could have been a bit more future proof to make it until M5. It’s just quirkiness of this new category, but interesting to say the least.
 
TheColtr said:
I own a Vision Pro. I won’t buy another one for $3500. If Apple offered a significant discount if I traded in my current Vision Pro I’d consider it, otherwise I’m waiting for something much cheaper and closer to glasses.
Click to expand...
Same here.

The one reason I would upgrade my Vision Pro is if they come out with a higher resolution display. I use mine for the laptop remote display feature (really the only useful thing about Vision Pro), and a higher resolution display would be amazing, as I like huge monitor displays for my coding with lots of windows and what not.

Vision Pro should really be sold as a monitor for a MacBook. Would be a lot cheaper as well if it ONLY had the monitor.

If not then the next best option would be to have a developers environment available in Vision Pro, instead of just the iPad-like consumption environment. I'd like to see access to file systems, terminals, Xcode/Visual Studio Code, etc..

Let us run Mac OS X Apps directly on Vision Pro!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back