Yes, the fact that there's huge numbers of us Apple customers / users who aren't at all interested in Apple's latest product is very telling.
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.
Meta Hopes Apple Vision Pro Will 'Reinvigorate' Headset Space
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yes, the fact that there's huge numbers of us Apple customers / users who aren't at all interested in Apple's latest product is very telling.
Largely true. You know you’re successful when the mainstream uses the term iPad when referring to all tablets. The word “tablet” barely registers with them. This is exactly like people asking for a Kleenex when they just want a tissue—the brand Kleenex became thoroughly ingrained in the public conciousness.
I have no dislike anything related to Meta. I refuse to feed that beast. Meta is the real world Virtucon, and all Zuckerberg needs to round things out is a Mini-Me and a hairless cat. Right now Vision Pro has no appeal to me other than to my geek side being interested in the hardware, how it operates, what it's capable of, and how hard can it be pushed.
I'm on my second Apple watch now. My first being the 4, and my current being an original Ultra. I use this thing every single day for both things a regular watch can do, and for things only it can do. I use Apple Pay on my watch just about every day, I also use it to reference the weather, etc without having to grab my phone. IMHO, it's one of the most useful items of kit I have.
To me the benchmark of how useful technology is its ability to impact the non tech inclined masses. I think the Apple watch crossed the threshold on this one a long time ago. My luddite spouse won't leave the house without it, and I see people wearing them everywhere. So a large portion of the population has found a space for them.
I'm not saying your opinion doesn't have merit. To some, it's a bit much and I get that. But for a large group of people, it's more than an elaborate toy.
I'm on my second Apple watch now. My first being the 4, and my current being an original Ultra. I use this thing every single day for both things a regular watch can do, and for things only it can do. I use Apple Pay on my watch just about every day, I also use it to reference the weather, etc without having to grab my phone. IMHO, it's one of the most useful items of kit I have.
To me the benchmark of how useful technology is its ability to impact the non tech inclined masses. I think the Apple watch crossed the threshold on this one a long time ago. My luddite spouse won't leave the house without it, and I see people wearing them everywhere. So a large portion of the population has found a space for them.
I'm not saying your opinion doesn't have merit. To some, it's a bit much and I get that. But for a large group of people, it's more than an elaborate toy.
I think they do not see meta as competition the same way it's unlikely Jaguar thinks of fiat as competition.
VisionOS is the product. The Vision Pro is just a tool to access VisionOS.
VisionOS is spatial computing. It's built for general purpose computing. Productive work (and entertainment) that is enhanced in 3D space, just like our actual lives are lived in 3D Space. It is computing not limited by a small rectangle screen. There is no "killer app." It's not meant for a singular use. It's meant to be used generally, for general computing tasks.
Meta sees "The MetaVerse" as the killer app. So much so that they renamed their entire company after it. And yet, still, to this day, has Meta even built one of these Meta Spaces? Is anyone using the Meta Quest to access a MetaVerse that is at the heart of Facebooks vision for a Metaverse? I personally have no interest in the MetaVerse.
Contrast this with me, using Apple Freeform on VisionOS, on day one, to stand and outline my book/philosophical project, using life sized post-it style notes on my wall. Able to see the 300+ post it notes that I took off of my wall and put into Freeform. This work doesn't work on my laptop screen. I need to stand and interact with it like I used to do on my actual wall. I then pivot to work in life-sized Keynote, which I use to make "movies" of the entire project, presenting it in visual style. In Keynote, I construct the 300+ icons that are part of the project. Then, I'll sit, open environments to help get me into a flow state so that I can finish writing the book that's core to the project.
Meta and Apple are not doing the same thing. Meta is building a headset. Apple is building an OS for Spatial computing.
VisionOS is spatial computing. It's built for general purpose computing. Productive work (and entertainment) that is enhanced in 3D space, just like our actual lives are lived in 3D Space. It is computing not limited by a small rectangle screen. There is no "killer app." It's not meant for a singular use. It's meant to be used generally, for general computing tasks.
Meta sees "The MetaVerse" as the killer app. So much so that they renamed their entire company after it. And yet, still, to this day, has Meta even built one of these Meta Spaces? Is anyone using the Meta Quest to access a MetaVerse that is at the heart of Facebooks vision for a Metaverse? I personally have no interest in the MetaVerse.
Contrast this with me, using Apple Freeform on VisionOS, on day one, to stand and outline my book/philosophical project, using life sized post-it style notes on my wall. Able to see the 300+ post it notes that I took off of my wall and put into Freeform. This work doesn't work on my laptop screen. I need to stand and interact with it like I used to do on my actual wall. I then pivot to work in life-sized Keynote, which I use to make "movies" of the entire project, presenting it in visual style. In Keynote, I construct the 300+ icons that are part of the project. Then, I'll sit, open environments to help get me into a flow state so that I can finish writing the book that's core to the project.
Meta and Apple are not doing the same thing. Meta is building a headset. Apple is building an OS for Spatial computing.
I had motion sickness once from my quest 2 when i first got it and haven’t had it since and it’s been over a year. No matter what i play nothing bothers me now. People who are prone to such ills i suppose will always have issues. The same people usually can’t go see 3d movies in the theater either. Sucks to be them
Right!?
The only reason I'm "not interested", is that I can't afford to buy the current gen Vision Pro.
Otherwise I'd be eyeballs deep into that gizmo.
Now they have an Apple product to copy because Apple gets it right on the first try 98% of the time.
This is interesting.
OK Nobody likes Facebook but their Quest headsets are OK. Of course the Vision Pro quality is far in excess of the Quest 3 but functionally they are broadly the same beast with passthrough, browsers, games, etc (I said broadly!)
But, people are saying that the Vision Pro is some new Jesus moment, and yet there is a huge hill to climb.
Its a new product segment for Apple.. sure - but VR has been around for years so its not a brand new concept by any means.
There is a reason that the Quest 2 was very successful - and thats price vs features and it was a fine headset... the Quest 3 builds on that and remains reasonably priced and accessible for those who are interested.
Back to the Jesus moment for Apple.... when they introduced the phone... everyone had a phone. When they introduced the watch... a lot of people didnt wear watches so couldnt see the point however over a few years they have enticed the non watch wearers to wear a watch again...... but wearing a watch isnt a big leap.
The vision pro however is a totally different thing and a lot of people simply arent interested or find it understandably impractical to have that thing on their head. It's a very non-social device. You cant really wear it and use it with others in the room.....
Im not saying that VR/AR etc is never going to take off in the way that 3D TVs failed to gain traction... but the current hardware with the current price points and usage limitations with social interaction and battery life etc etc just mean to me its not going anywhere just yet.
One day, when the technology is shrunk into a standard pair of glasses and there are genuine use cases for it, then maybe... but that day is a long way off.
Back to the article.... Meta would be very remiss not to take full advantage of the rise in public awareness of VR headsets that the Vision Pro launch will provide... and given careful marketing they could entice people who could never afford the Vision Pro to take a chance on the Quest 3 give that it can do a lot of the things that the Vision Pro can for a fraction of the money. If a potential VP buyer loves the prospect of watching a large screen movie... MQ3 can do that. If a potential VP buyer wants that browser experience.... the MQ3 can do that etc etc......
OK Nobody likes Facebook but their Quest headsets are OK. Of course the Vision Pro quality is far in excess of the Quest 3 but functionally they are broadly the same beast with passthrough, browsers, games, etc (I said broadly!)
But, people are saying that the Vision Pro is some new Jesus moment, and yet there is a huge hill to climb.
Its a new product segment for Apple.. sure - but VR has been around for years so its not a brand new concept by any means.
There is a reason that the Quest 2 was very successful - and thats price vs features and it was a fine headset... the Quest 3 builds on that and remains reasonably priced and accessible for those who are interested.
Back to the Jesus moment for Apple.... when they introduced the phone... everyone had a phone. When they introduced the watch... a lot of people didnt wear watches so couldnt see the point however over a few years they have enticed the non watch wearers to wear a watch again...... but wearing a watch isnt a big leap.
The vision pro however is a totally different thing and a lot of people simply arent interested or find it understandably impractical to have that thing on their head. It's a very non-social device. You cant really wear it and use it with others in the room.....
Im not saying that VR/AR etc is never going to take off in the way that 3D TVs failed to gain traction... but the current hardware with the current price points and usage limitations with social interaction and battery life etc etc just mean to me its not going anywhere just yet.
One day, when the technology is shrunk into a standard pair of glasses and there are genuine use cases for it, then maybe... but that day is a long way off.
Back to the article.... Meta would be very remiss not to take full advantage of the rise in public awareness of VR headsets that the Vision Pro launch will provide... and given careful marketing they could entice people who could never afford the Vision Pro to take a chance on the Quest 3 give that it can do a lot of the things that the Vision Pro can for a fraction of the money. If a potential VP buyer loves the prospect of watching a large screen movie... MQ3 can do that. If a potential VP buyer wants that browser experience.... the MQ3 can do that etc etc......
I'm as big of an Apple fanboy as they come but I do find it hilarious how folks in this forum seem to deny the fact that Apple ultimately entered this space because Meta proved there is indeed, a market for these types of VR/AR products.
Weight is the biggest problem for me. I’ve had half a dozen VR HMDs and they just keep getting heavier. At least Apple didn’t put the battery on your face…but the glass and aluminum certainly can’t help.
Meta is "optimistic" that the launch of Apple Vision Pro will help reinvigorate the headset market and drive more users towards its Quest devices, according to Wall Street Journal report.
Meta Quest 3
Formerly known as Facebook, Meta in 2021 changed its name in part to communicate its vision of a future "metaverse" in which people don its headsets and interact with each other in a completely virtual reality.
Three years on and after pouring $50 billion into investment, Meta's Quest devices barely count as 1% of the social media company's revenue, and the metaverse remains a largely nebulous concept that has so far failed to capture the imagination of customers.
But with the February 2 launch of the Apple Vision Pro just days away, executives at Meta are viewing Apple's entry into the market as a potential validation of CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s AR/VR gamble that could draw more consumers into the headset space, according to sources who spoke to WSJ.
Meta employees "see the Quest and its software ecosystem emerging as a primary alternative to Apple in the space, filling the role played by Google's Android in smartphones," claims the report.
Meta is hoping that software makers will be inspired to develop apps that increasingly draw users into the space, enabling more people to experience the new virtual environments, with the company's sub-$500 Quest devices offering a more affordable alternative to Apple's high-end $3,499 headset.
Executives at Meta have also reportedly been influenced by Apple's concept of spatial computing, which emphasizes mixed reality by overlaying virtual images onto real-world surroundings. Apple unveiled the Vision Pro in June 2023, and in the meantime Meta has been "increasingly focusing on mixed reality," claims WSJ's sources.
Notably, Apple has shunned Meta's digital reality vision at every opportunity. For example, Apple VP of global marketing Greg Joswiak has said that "metaverse" is a word he will never use. Similarly, Tim Cook was quoted in 2022 as saying he's "not sure the average person can tell you what the metaverse is."
Article Link: Meta Hopes Apple Vision Pro Will 'Reinvigorate' Headset Space
I'm pretty sure this was not meant to be a literal statement of "Everyone" but a variation of "lots of people".
Its kind of funny because Microsoft created something similar earlier in the first two markets, failed to a varying extent, and now Apple is trying the same thing. Apple usually does a better job at this, but they also typically come at it from more customer facing side, which I'm not sure the Vision Pro is at the moment.
Just a heads up that the AVP weighs 20% more than a Quest 3 which doesn't have a detached battery. I'm curious to see the jump in visual quality the AVP provides but, as someone that has to actively remember that I own a Quest 3 (and 2 and 1 and Go and a Rift and a Vive and a Rift Dev Kit 2 and Dev kit 1 over the past 10 years) and have to kind of force myself to pick it up to play games...I don't know how someone coming into the space cold is going to be like "oh cool, to use my computer I've got to strap a pound and a half to my head and I can only use it for 2 hours without being tethered to the wall". I'll probably return it in 2 weeks after I end up using it for a total of 6-10 hours and then just keep using my laptop, ipad, and iphone.
There isn't a big market for these types of VR/AR products. It's a very small niche market. Apple hopes to make it a big market.
I imagine that Apple's Vision is to Meta's Quest what the iPhone was to the Blackberry, similar concept but completely different and vastly superior implementation. Whenever Apple comes out with a new product line, people start telling them they need to drastically reduce their prices to compete. Apple has never worked that way. I am typing this on a MacBook Pro that cost nearly $2,500, even though I could have purchased a "similarly specced" HP laptop for less than half that price. my iPhone 15 Pro Max cost ten times the cost of a cheapo Android phone. I received a "digital photo display" for Christmas. Cost my sone about $60 to buy it for me. Turns out, it was a 10" Android tablet re-packaged with limited functionality. A similarly-sized least expensive iPad costs 5 times that. The iPad's been out more than 10 years. Apple has zero interest in competing with anything at the low end. Since at least the original Mac (not sure about the Apple II), Apple's strategy for every product is, "can we sell these with sufficiently high margins to make them what we want them to be?" Apple has repeatedly said this approach is "in its DNA."
Having said all of that, I do believe Apple will shortly (within a couple years or sooner) come out with a less expensive version of the vision, in the $1,500 range. It's hard to imagine Apple will come out with a headset in the $400-$500 range. Unfortunately for me, no matter what price Apple lands at for its Vision line, I won't be buying one. I am blind in one eye due to a childhood accident, so I have no depth perception, and would be missing a significant part of the benefit and usefulness. Sad, but true.
yawn... niech item for a niech market... you ain't gonna be riding mass transit with one on your face...
They could make Oculus $50 & I still would never buy hardware from Facebook.
Ever.
Ever.
Sigh, that’s just history repeating itself. Is there some understanding in the tech world that, once Apple makes it’s belated entry into the market, the most the competition can hope for is “We wanna be the number 1 number 2!”
Technically Meta is the leader since Apple has not shipped a single unit yet, but thats just units sold. To lead means to be at the forefront of development, not just sales, and I think it's pretty clear the Vision leapfrogs over the Quest 3 in terms of technological advantages. Totally dispute your tech claim of meta maturity. Market maturity maybe. You keep making price the end all and be all in your posts, but thats missing the point. The point is the Vision costs more because it's worth more. Got to pay to play.
Somebody will. They will look like an absolute tool, but they'll do it.
Proof of any of this? Apple has been working on this for over a decade. It's the obvious evolution of all this tech we carry around. You might have a point that Apple chose this moment in time to enter the market partially because of meta, but they were going to enter it, meta or not.