There is no evidence that people generally want to wear computer hardware on their faces.
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.
Kuo: Apple Vision Pro Unlikely to Receive Major Upgrades Until 2027
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There is no evidence that people generally want to wear computer hardware on their faces.
It’s a package!
Isn’t it? By what metric? Seems a very decent start to me.
Doesn’t rebut anything I said. And you don’t know anything more or less about Apple’s plans for the device than any of the rest of us.
The cost has to come down significantly for this to be more practical than just attending a course.
Also, take for example cooking: This needs to be hands on. Simulating cooking won't teach you about the physics and chemistry of time, temperature, tools and technique. Lots of other things need to be hands on.
A driving simulator: You can't feel the inertia of driving in a simulator, and so you cannot develop practical real world reflexes or learn the dynamics of reacting in a real situation (where lateral forces will impact how you oversteer or understeer). At best you can learn the basics of operating the controls of a vehicle, but that's about it.
The list goes on... and this is just assuming adult learning. Setting aside the known impacts on developing brains of extended exposure to non tactile interfaces.
Obviously not but there has never been a product quite like the VP. I don’t count previous low-res headsets.
The cost will come down and the simulated experience doesn’t need to completely replace the hands-on experience to still be incredibly useful as a preparation for the real thing.
Think of a flying simulator. Could be incredible as preparation and a huge cost saver even at current prices considering how much flight lessons cost.
Have you even tried the VP yourself?
FAA licenses require a certain number of booked hours of actual flight time.
Also, simulators don't need graphics realism as the point of a simulator is to get accustomed to the huge number of controls, gauges in the instrument cluster and tower chatter... the biggest thing simulators need, AVP can't provide: tactile controls and instruments to develop proficiency in IFR flight rules.
Last edited:
Eventually when these costs come down, sure... but we're not going to be there for a while. The problem is that Apple may drop the entire project before it reaches that point because the product has to see around 22% year over year growth for there to be continued R&D spend to improve tech and further reduce the cost.
If adoption at the start doesn't take off quickly, you'll never get to this idealized state... and materials costs in the immediate future are expected to go up, especially lithium.
The lack of evidence of something does not prove anything, that is a logical fallacy. It is true that the current product is clearly not for everyone, because it costs $3500.
It’s obvious that Apple eventually wants to make a product that everyone will want, but I have no doubt it will need to look completely different from what exists today. With newer technology, it is very possible that people will want to wear it.
I don’t really know anything about aviation. It was just an example that crossed my mind when you mentioned driving simulators. But I know flight simulators are still a thing. Even on regular old PCs without tactile controls other than a keyboard. And I know how a VP can make you feel like you are actually in a different location because I’ve used one extensively and not just read about it. So whether it can help someone get accustomed to sitting in a cockpit or not there are and will be countless of other similar use cases.
Apple has enough cash to keep the VP around for a long time. They are committed to this as a platform and are not discontinuing it.
Flight sims like you are describing are for entertainment purposes only. Real flight simulators, like those at Embry Riddle Aeronautical University or University of North Dakota's Center for Aerospace Sciences (the top two aerospace programs) cost millions of dollars.
All the products and services that have came out under Tim Cook were already in development when Jobs was alive. Yes Cook is a good supply chain guy who has given Apple its success post Jobs but he isn’t a tech guy and it looks like the playbook that was given to him is on its last pages.
It’s not about the flight sims. I concede that was not a great example. We can move on. The points I’ve made about VP still stand. Even though it won’t replace million dollar flight sims.
There have been many products like the Vision and none of them have achieved wide spread adoption.
I’d say that there’s a fairly large body of evidence that people generally don’t like to wear things that go over their faces unless there’s a very specific and critical use. So no, it isn’t a logical fallacy. It remains highly dubious that anyone outside of tech fan circles will want to wear such a device for any period of time.
Exactly. Like the difference between F1 2023 on a PlayStation and the dedicated simulators that the teams use to train drivers. And even those advanced simulators are not really the same as driving the actual car.
The areas for growth and innovation are obvious. Rage addicts praying they cancel it less than thirty days in are going to be disappointed.
Didn’t dispute it. What I said is that you don’t know anything more about it than anyone else here. You’re speculating just like everyone is.
That sort of drastic personal evaluation based on simple differences of opinion around Apple products is over the top and totally uncalled for.
People wear glasses every day. People became accustomed to wearing technology on their bodies. The ability to view information privately and conveniently and the potential workplace benefits will be more enticing on a mass basis as the tech improves. It won’t always look like this.
We’re all conjecturing. Some is based on logic and evidence and some is based on emotion. It’s clear there’s a path to growth and revolution here and it’s clear Apple has the resources to see it through. Assuming it will die out days in is an emotional response many have.
I’m talking circumspectly. Rage addicts are real. Some people pull their fun from endlessly complaining about anything and everything. Go on a Star Trek sub. Every episode is awful and worse than the last and every show is terrible and bring back the old writers and shows that they also hated. And they watch week after week because complaining about how terrible it is the highlight of their week.
Look at the 24th anniversary post and read the old comments from other products. iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, iPod? All DOA and misguided and don’t they we want iTunes and more MacOS?
Its not a question of what you need to do. It's what it enables you to do or experience something that you can't do now or ever. Learn how to repair a Jet Engine. Visit museums all over the world. Climb Mt. Everest. The possibilities are only limited by ones' imagination.
I don’t think this is true. There are two major products that came out exclusively under Tim Cook: AirPods and Apple Watch, the latter because Cook is a watch enthusiast. Vision Pro can be counted as a third.
I suspect Apple TV+ is also Cook exclusively because streaming wasn’t really a thing during Jobs’s day.
One interesting thing Kuo mentioned is that Vision Pro returns are less than 1%, less than that of the iPhone 15 Pro, which sits at 1.2%. Another interesting observation was that 20-30% of Vision Pro returns are due to people who were unable to figure out how to set it up. If he’s correct, then anecdotes probably drive the claim that people were returning them in droves.