Kuo: Apple's Vision Pro Successors Off the Table as Focus Shifts to Smart Glasses

[Brother Cavil]

It was basically a project for them. It was never going to take on mass appeal at over $3K.

I don't entirely agree. $3500+ is definitely prohibitive for a large percentage of the population, but there are still plenty of people who can easily afford to spend that much. It was definitely an early adopter product, but I fully believe they expected to see it become aspirational in the way that the iPhone did. Plenty of people couldn't afford the iPhone or couldn't get one because they used a different carrier. But they WANTED it. The media oooo-ed and ahhhh-ed over it. I think Apple was hoping for a similar trajectory for Vision Pro.

I think they made two very critical errors. First and foremost, they didn't deliver a particularly interesting user experience. The public has been primed by sci-fi TV and movies for decades to expect these wild, immersive 3D interfaces as soon as they don the VR goggles. That didn't happen with Vision Pro. For an immersive product, it was very 2D.

The other big error was expecting developers to step up and deliver the visionary apps and experiences that would make the product appealing. Apple needed a visionary launch app, something to really show the potential of the device, something to get developers excited about developing for the platform, something that captivated the consumer's interest in the way Safari in one's pocket did when the iPhone launched.

Even then I'm not convinced that people want to wear goggles. Ultimately I think VR goggles and VR experiences will always look best in the movies.

 

[BGrifter]

This is the only way the glasses will flop too. People will start making it socially unacceptable. See Google early 2010s. Another problem will be how to get people who don’t wear glasses to wear them and not making it another dust collector. Another challenge. People with glasses who need them are not able to take them off in inappropriate situations. And don’t forget all the anti AI and surveillance trend. Apple needs to find a good selling point and usecase otherwise I see this not doing well. Better than VP but not as well as Apple hopes.

Yeah, early efforts in the category did a lot of PR damage. A mix of shoddy devices and extremely creepy early adopters poisoned the well.

Apple might have the credibility with customers to turn public opinion around. But “creep does something creepy with Apple Glasses” is an easy news story to write.

I’m not convinced Apple needs the headaches.

 

[Rychiar]

Kind of a, "no-duh" moment. Supply chain guys always distill the truth, no matter how hard it is to accept.

Failure of the M2 model, failure of the M5 model. Fundamentally, mainstream users don't want to be wearing scuba goggles and a hip battery pack. Most people aren't loners and don't want something covering their eyes preventing social interaction. The most important issue is, there's no killer app for Vision Pro. And no, having a big display is not a killer app.

what does failure mean... at that price point selling a couple hundred thousand is a success... I mean are Mac studios a failure?...

 

[huge_apple_fangirl]

If Ternus is moving away from Vision Pro that's a great sign for Apple. AVP is Tim Cook's Newton. He is not a product person and he shouldn't have tried to be. Ternus is a product person.

 

[eggfooyung_copyover]

Incoming Apple CEO John Ternus signed off on a major revision of Apple's Vision Pro and smart glasses plans, consolidating Apple's work in the category.

According to Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo, Ternus nixed plans for a second Vision Pro and a lighter Vision Air. Kuo says there are only two smart glasses products in development, including the AI smart glasses that Apple is creating to rival the Meta Ray-Bans and a display-equipped set of AR smart glasses.

"I think removing the Vision Pro line was the right call, as Apple shifts resources toward smart glasses with greater mass-market potential," writes Kuo. Kuo says that the Vision products roadmap that he shared in June 2025 is no longer a useful reference because of the major changes that Apple has made to its plans over the last year. Kuo's product timeline originally featured seven products, but now it features just two that are still relevant.

Kuo believes the AI smart glasses will ship in 2027, while the display-equipped augmented reality glasses with "optical waveguides" won't come out until 2029 at the earliest. Optical waveguides pair a micro-display with waveguides that guide the image to the user's eyes. Lenses remain transparent, so the virtual content looks like it's overlaid on the real world view.

Bloomberg's Mark Gurman weighed in on Kuo's report and said the Vision Air was discontinued in October 2025, the display glasses meant to pair with a Mac were sunset in January 2025, and AI smart glasses will launch at the end of 2027.

While Kuo does not believe Apple is working on any version of a Vision Pro, Gurman claims Apple has a Vision Pro 2 "in testing" but the category is "on ice." Earlier this week, Gurman also said Apple is working on a cheaper, lighter Vision Pro, but the device is unlikely to launch before late 2028 or 2029.

John Ternus is set to take over as Apple's CEO on September 1, 2026. Current Apple CEO Tim Cook will remain on as Executive Chairman.

Article Link: Kuo: Apple's Vision Pro Successors Off the Table as Focus Shifts to Smart Glasses

This is damn impressive. Optical Waveguides. After I read the post, I fell into the Wiki black hole of looking up the Waveguide.

Imagine watching movie in a theater with the glasses. Sensors on the glasses notify you of your excess hydration levels due to the extra large 40oz fountain drink purchased at the snack bar. A notification shows up with a countdown timer, map of the theater showing the nearest restroom, and a reason to leave this scene of the movie. Walking through the dark movie theater, IR lights paired with AR illuminate the path on your glasses. During the bathroom visit, the glasses is explaining to you what is going on in the scene utilizing the movie theater's AD Close Caption for the Blind in real time. As you head back to your seat, the glasses slowly fade out and back to normal view.

 

[AppleTO]

I would be curious to know how long visionOS would be developed for if the hardware was discontinued. On the other hand, they would probably just adapt the OS for the glasses.

 

[cdsapplefan]

Cook never said or implied that "we will sell millions of Vision Pro’s" [sic]. Apple did sell well in excess of 100,000 units at $3,500 each; you do the math. But most important is the tech demo that AVP presents. AVP hardware is superb.

Yes your correct. I think he even said that it was gonna be for a “niche” group of customers too.

 

[Brother Cavil]

what does failure mean... at that price point selling a couple hundred thousand is a success... I mean are Mac studios a failure?...

Bogus comparison. Mac Studios are a type of Mac. If you're going to compare Vision Pro, you need to compare it to the PLATFORM, not a specific model. Vision Pro was a new computing platform and selling only a few hundred thousand is definitely a flop. But low sales are only part of the story. The real problem was the profound lack of consumer interest once those few hundred thousand fans had bought their Vision Pros. The public, en masse, showed no interest in the platform.

It flopped. Plain and simple. Unlike the iPhone, it did not become an aspirational product that everyone wanted. When you consider the likely billions that were spend on R&D, selling a few hundred thousand probably didn't even recoup the investment. A lot of the tech will surely find its way into other products, so it's not a total loss by any means, but it was a flop.

 

[ThisIsMike]

I am going to be in the minority here but I think this is a mistake. These two devices are complimentary, and in the longer term, I think there IS going to be a larger market for the Vision. They will eventually be less expensive and more comfortable, and there are things they will ultimately do better than AR glasses.

I hope this is more along the lines of, let’s put a pin in it for now, and come back to it when the time is right and we can make something more compelling for the average consumer.

 

[xander49x]

If any of this is remotely true, Ternus is the wrong person for the CEO job. He will destroy Apple; he did not want the Vision Pro on the market

 

[xander49x]

It was an odd move to do a headset vs glasses when, even at the launch of the vision pro, glasses were what people actually wanted and were leaning towards.

I always got a laugh at the promos of the person in the vision pro doing work at their standing desk.

I know lots of people who use the Vision Pro for work, I do, and it's a game-changer

 

[Jensend]

I’m very surprised how many people think this stuff either isn’t possible or is super far off… Meta already has glasses with single display on the market right now. Google Aura has dual displays in the 1200p range with 60 degree FOV and runs the full version of Android XR by offloading the processing to an external puck and that comes out next year with development kits coming this year.

With the technology we already have Apple could theoretically produce XR glasses with dual display that runs the full version of Vision OS and has the computing and battery external. The only real downsides at this time are resolution, brightness and field of view all of which are developing quickly.

It’s absolutely possible for Apple to bring a Vision Pro like experience to glasses form (with external computing) by 2029 or even earlier if they really wanted.

I mean, display "glasses" already exist. Apple has the ability to make that product. But what do you mean by "displays within (thick) glasses form factor" ? Most display glasses, including Google Aura, use birdbath optics, and can't pass as normal glasses. You mentioned waveguide displays. How will that work when someone needs to update their prescription? If it has dual displays, how will it deal with different IPDs?

Will the "Vision Pro like experience" include high performance eye tracking and 6-DOF spatial tracking and hand tracking?

If they are wired to a puck, what advantage do they have over a VR-headset form factor? Sure, much smaller and more comfortable, but if you have the ability to do that, you can just make a much smaller and more comfortable VR headset.

I guess my standards of what counts as a "Vision Pro like experience" and what counts as "(thick) glasses form factor" may be different than yours.