Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
lmao dude what is your POINT? i just said that there were old people demoing AVP in store. is “old” a slur now?
My original point was that the AVP is not for the mass market, but for people who can afford it.

You then added “Much older-looking than my 70 year-old mom. Old af. Crusty. AARP/Old Country Buffet-types. I could go on.” Those are hateful stereotypes. I’m sure you could go on. But, please keep the hatred to yourself.
 
If you are into viewing your memories in spatial media format, you should give Spatial Video Studio a try as well!
 
  • Like
Reactions: vantelimus
These sentiments is not unlike the Pro Display XDR and iPad Pro that have yet to be thoroughly outclassed at several core hardware capabilities and brought unprecedented things to their device categories at a prosumer price that necessitates a much higher price than what mainstream and modest users of such device categories are willing to pay.

The Vision Pro is no different exacerbated with consumers used to unrealistic prices of medicore gaming headsets that have been sold at a loss for years by Meta towards billions of dollars lost very few companies could stomach they deliberately do for their that very reason.

Apple with these products do unprecedented and appreciated prosumer-oriented feats that warrants such prices understandably to them and a meaningful amount of enthusiasts of such device categories.
Meta helmets are far from mediocre and the sales prove it. The Meta Quest 3 is one of the best VR headsets currently available on the market. These are great VR headsets.
 
  • Like
Reactions: turbineseaplane
Meta helmets are far from mediocre and the sales prove it. The Meta Quest 3 is one of the best VR headsets currently available on the market. These are great VR headsets.
1.2 million Quest 3s sold ain’t that big a number. 4x as much as Vision Pro at 1/6th the price?

Quest 2 sold 10 million.

It’s a smallish market but there’s a good reason BestBuy has Quest 3s stacked to the rafters. They don’t sell that well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vantelimus
1.2 million Quest 3s sold ain’t that big a number. 4x as much as Vision Pro at 1/6th the price?

Quest 2 sold 10 million.

It’s a smallish market but there’s a good reason BestBuy has Quest 3s stacked to the rafters. They don’t sell that well.
The Quest 2 has made over 20 million sales. the quest 3 seems to be selling quite well and the cheaper model will increase sales even more. The quest 3 is great for playing video games. I only use it for playing and I'm very happy with it. It's a niche market that will grow enormously in the years to come.
 
  • Like
Reactions: turbineseaplane
Meta helmets are far from mediocre and the sales prove it. The Meta Quest 3 is one of the best VR headsets currently available on the market. These are great VR headsets.

The Quest 2 has made over 20 million sales. the quest 3 seems to be selling quite well and the cheaper model will increase sales even more. The quest 3 is great for playing video games. I only use it for playing and I'm very happy with it. It's a niche market that will grow enormously in the years to come.
…Meta’s VR division also has lost 14 billion in a single year alone and it’s not impressive to sell a product at unrealistic prices competing essentially with yourself as a budget standalone headset to lose that much primarily to seed a user base for the Metaverse—an idea that isn’t critically acclaimed well executed.

The Vision Pro is also consistently more favorably reviewed across several core XR capabilities and is technically/functionally superior in several XR headset capabilities unsurprisingly as a prosumer headset vs a budget pure gaming headset.

As typical with a prosumer Apple device compared to competition, the Meta headset is only better for gaming and price of admission for mainstream budget users.

Only a good thing, even the Vision Pro’s OS capabilities are something Meta has had to mimic capabilities from but cannot with full parity because the hardware limitations of their budget headsets.

Meta headsets don’t even have HDR and other the screen capabilities nor do their headsets have eye tracking or an APU as powerful as a Vision People (laptop-class instead of Meta’s head scratching mobile-class APU other headsets).

The Vision Pro doesn’t focus on games and still has a more powerful GPU.

The Quest is medicore at playing VR games with such restrictions. It’s medicore playing non-VR games as well as not being able to play VR games anywhere close to the level of non-VR AAA games available on non-VR games available at its price.

This alone makes it a hard selling point for AAA gamers:

Buying a medicore Oculus Rift headset means you pay more than current gen consoles to play worser games at worser quality; even non-VR games are worser being played by a Meta headset rather than playing via traditional means because of their HDR-less and worser quality screens compared to a 4K TV (what current-gen consoles are designed to be primarily connected to).

You also consume premium content way worser than non-VR hardware not having premium HDR such as Dolby Vision HDR.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Blackstick
dead platform
Lack of a killer app will do that. Here Apple has a device well suited for use as a simulator or virtual walk through or scientific modeling (especially modeling of molecules) or virtual prototyping, but it's being pushed as an over priced entertainment device. Very few would pay $3500 to be entertained when cheaper options with more games/entertainment material are available.

Apple has the $$$ to make a virtual tour of Buckingham Palace or the White House or the Eiffel Tower and so on. They can develop a app that downloads a CAD/CAM file to create a virtual prototype engineers can interact with without having to build a real model. If Apple wants the AVP to succeed, they need to use it to do things a computer can't. Entertainment? There are cheaper and better options out there.
 
…Meta’s VR division also has lost 14 billion in a single year alone and it’s not impressive to sell a product at unrealistic prices competing essentially with yourself as a budget standalone headset to lose that much primarily to seed a user base for the Metaverse—an idea that isn’t critically acclaimed well executed.

The Vision Pro is also consistently more favorably reviewed across several core XR capabilities and is technically/functionally superior in several XR headset capabilities unsurprisingly as a prosumer headset vs a budget pure gaming headset.

As typical with a prosumer Apple device compared to competition, the Meta headset is only better for gaming and price of admission for mainstream budget users.

Only a good thing, even the Vision Pro’s OS capabilities are something Meta has had to mimic capabilities from but cannot with full parity because the hardware limitations of their budget headsets.

Meta headsets don’t even have HDR and other the screen capabilities nor do their headsets have eye tracking or an APU as powerful as a Vision People (laptop-class instead of Meta’s head scratching mobile-class APU other headsets).

The Vision Pro doesn’t focus on games and still has a more powerful GPU.

The Quest is medicore at playing VR games with such restrictions. It’s medicore playing non-VR games as well as not being able to play VR games anywhere close to the level of non-VR AAA games available on non-VR games available at its price.

This alone makes it a hard selling point for AAA gamers:

Buying a medicore Oculus Rift headset means you pay more than current gen consoles to play worser games at worser quality; even non-VR games are worser being played by a Meta headset rather than playing via traditional means because of their HDR-less and worser quality screens compared to a 4K TV (what current-gen consoles are designed to be primarily connected to).

You also consume premium content way worser than non-VR hardware not having premium HDR such as Dolby Vision HDR.
for me the meta quest 3 is not mediocre, I also play on ps5, xbox series x etc... but I really like the quest 3. the eye tracking is more of a gadget than something useful. the games are quite good on the quest 3 even if obviously, no vr headset will have the power of a game console. the fact that there is no hdr is in no way disturbing, quite the contrary . quest 3 is still expensive for a lot of people. It is an excellent complement for playing video games. The helmet is not mediocre. to play it's really very good.There is no point comparing the AVP to the Meta Quest 3 because they are not at all made for the same use, do not have the same price and do not target the same market or the same needs.

Ps : Obviously, it depends on what use we have for it. but personally, this helmet suits me perfectly. it would be absurd to buy an avp when I would do almost nothing more than what I would do with the meta quest 3, that is to say, play... The most important thing is that there is choice for everyone and just for one category of people ☺️...
 
Last edited:
Lack of a killer app will do that. Here Apple has a device well suited for use as a simulator or virtual walk through or scientific modeling (especially modeling of molecules) or virtual prototyping, but it's being pushed as an over priced entertainment device. Very few would pay $3500 to be entertained when cheaper options with more games/entertainment material are available.

Exactly what you say isn’t happening actually is, according to this February article from the Harvard Business Review about Early-Adopter efforts:


You don’t see it because you aren’t the target audience. You won’t see it here unless Apple announces some big deal. You especially won’t see it on this forum, which is thick with people who participate for the sole purpose of traducing Apple’s products.


Apple has the $$$ to make a virtual tour of Buckingham Palace or the White House or the Eiffel Tower and so on. They can develop a app that downloads a CAD/CAM file to create a virtual prototype engineers can interact with without having to build a real model. If Apple wants the AVP to succeed, they need to use it to do things a computer can't. Entertainment? There are cheaper and better options out there.

First you say people don’t want to pay $3500 for an entertainment device when cheaper options are available and then you say apple should produce high-end entertainment content. Make up your mind.

Apple is subsidizing the creation of high-end 3D entertainment. Perhaps not what you suggest. But, then, this is not a mass market device. Apple knows the owners are early adopters. It doesn’t need to spend a lot on content to get early adopters to buy. It needs to continue to develop the core capabilities and developer libraries that make 3D CAD/CAM viewer apps like Jig (which was available on launch day) possible.
 
My original point was that the AVP is not for the mass market, but for people who can afford it.
We were never in disagreement on that so I’m not sure what relevance that has to my “old” remark. It was just an interesting sight to behold.
 
My AVP will be delivered this week. Not a gamer so I am hoping the expanded Mac display will boost the utility of the device for my work. My right hand is pretty mauled by arthritis from many, many years of long days and nights with the mouse and the keyboard. 2,000 films in the Movies library and the ability to watch YouTubeTV with the device add another serious value. Some exercise apps would be useful. Live concert, sports would add real value for me. Would seem education applications would be a natural for the device but I read almost nothing about what is coming. I will do a rapid evaluation for a week and, if not convinced, will simply return it within the 14 day period. An M5 chip successor at the end of next year, if real, makes me a bit nervous about the investment.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.