Samsung's VR Headset Looks a Lot Like Apple Vision Pro

[steve09090]

Which platform are you talking about?

They are very committed to android as well as android automotive OS

Google has started and stopped various projects over the years but entire platforms I don’t think they’ve been particularly flaky about.

Not as committed as you might think. They scrapped Android Auto for phone screens. It was an app that allowed the screen of the phone to be used as an Android Auto interface while driving, intended for vehicles that did not have a compatible screen built in.

• How about Chromecast?
• Google Stadia
• Googe Domains
• Google Chrome Apps
• Jamboard was an entire system

How about Google Chrome OS? That's as flaky as you can get.

 

[Velli]

Emulating the West is part of modern Asian culture. Starting with the Japanese in the 19th century (whose new emperor ditched centuries-old isolationism in favour of a wide embrace of Western culture - even considering replacing the local language with English at some point), the trend progressively spread to other countries and it's no surprise, nowadays, to see the likes of Samsung shamelessly copying Apple's AirPods Pro or Vision Pro.
That being said, Asian countries and corporations have, each at its own pace, evolved from blindly copying the West to a more selective approach, from reverse engineering to advanced R&D, from cheap low quality to cutting-edge luxury. A good example of this is how the "Made in Japan" brand evolved from the 1960s to the 1990s.

Fully agree. The interesting part is at which point public acceptance kicks in. Japan today is known for quality, in a way Korea is not yet. But I’m not convinced Korea will ever reach that state, and in the meantime they are being overtaken by China. They will be caught between two chairs: Not quality enough to compete with Japan, not cheap and advanced enough to compete with China.

 

[svish]

Maybe Samsung will announce it at the next unpacked event for Fold/Flip. Don't think it is going to be much cheaper than Vision Pro. At most $1000 less. Besides waiting for AR glasses to launch. Not happy wearing huge VR headsets.

 

[williamkey123]

Good. If they give it a non-insane price, I'll buy one too. I bought an AVP but the only thing it was good for was watching movies (so I returned it). If they can make that experience as good as the AVP but sell it for less than $1000, I'll buy one in a second. Hopefully this puts some pressure on Apple to not make such a pointless, pretentious device and actually compete.

 

[thekeyring]

You couldn't make this stuff up.

 

[Sandstorm]

Looks like any other VR headset. Also looks better than AVP (without the stupid front screen) and will probably cost at least 1/2 less.

 

[steve09090]

Looks like any other VR headset. Also looks better than AVP (without the stupid front screen) and will probably cost at least 1/2 less.

Have you seen it?

 

[Marshall73]

Standard operating practice for Samsung so this should be no surprise. They have done it with products from LG, Sony and others in the past, from fridges and washing machines to televisions.

 

[Amazing Iceman]

If $1500- even without Apples FAT margin- resolution is almost certainly going to take the big hit... which is what it will also take for a Vpro NOTpro to hit those kinds of prices so many keep pitching as necessary.

If Samsung or a NOTpro launches at $1500 or lower, get ready for the massive backlash summarized in just one word:

BLURRY!
​

Other than some financing trickery and the approx. $1000 cellular subsidy model, I see no path to:

1. Maintain Apple's fat margin​
2. Keep 4K per eye (which is most key in addressing the blur)​

Samsung's "copy" could potentially address #1 some... but I believe the path to $1000-$1500 brings on the blur... probably 1080p per eye at best... which is what the ones already down in the "desirable price points" offer now. What's wrong with those? Blurry! Apple (or Samsung) blurry won't be superior blurry... just a much more tangible gripe to sling at the next version(s).

For the very same reasoning we rationalize anything "retina" to justify paying up for it, this is basically the same thing... EXCEPT we are so locked on price, we are wishing away a kind of "retina" only to then- probably- not want what we're seeking because they sacrificed quality of image. Will blurry cheaper be > crisp pricier?

If that’s what you expect, then get a Meta Quest. No need to wait for Apple.
You all talk about “Apple’s fat margin” because you only consider the cost of the hardware. Now, how do the engineers and everyone else involved in design, testing, manufacturing, marketing and selling of the AVP get paid?
Where does that money come from?
If you want a cheaper quality AVP, you all are barking at the wrong tree. Well, maybe Apple releases a lower level Vision device for those looking for a toy, but it will not bring the same experience.

“Oh that Porsch is too expensive! Lower the price like a Kia, put a smaller engine, manual window openers, it should cost less than $30,000 so we can all afford it, they should forget about their fat margin and focus on releasing it to the masses.”

 

[surferfb]

Good. If they give it a non-insane price, I'll buy one too. I bought an AVP but the only thing it was good for was watching movies (so I returned it). If they can make that experience as good as the AVP but sell it for less than $1000, I'll buy one in a second. Hopefully this puts some pressure on Apple to not make such a pointless, pretentious device and actually compete.

These $1000-$1500 price estimates are pipe dreams if you want a similar experience - component costs of AVP were estimated to be over $1500. The (internal) screens/lenses were over $500 on their own.

The reason AVP is so expensive really is because it’s state of the art and expensive to make.

Apple Vision Pro’s components cost $1,542—but that’s not the full story

The OLED displays account for more than a third of the component costs.

arstechnica.com

 

[CharlieBoyWoof]

Imitation is the best form of flattery - no matter how much you hate the person/company you’re flattering.

Samsung hasn’t had an original idea since 2006.

Funny spelling of "apple"

 

[uiop.]

Funny spelling of "apple"

Samsung's in-house silicon game over the past 20 years has been incredible.

 

[turbineseaplane]

These $1000-$1500 price estimates are pipe dreams if you want a similar experience - component costs of AVP were estimated to be over $1500. The (internal) screens/lenses were over $500 on their own.

The reason AVP is so expensive really is because it’s state of the art and expensive to make.

Apple Vision Pro’s components cost $1,542—but that’s not the full story

The OLED displays account for more than a third of the component costs.

arstechnica.com

1. Those are estimates
2. The source data is going to be 2 years old this Summer
3. Other makers are likely to accept way less margin on the final MSRP as well

Component costs on a lot of this will have come down wildly in the last 18+ months, especially OLED related things, which were estimated at 35% of AVP costs

 

[Rychiar]

Oh my God, headset looks like headset 🤣

no other headset ever looked like this before AVP🤷‍♂️

 

[MacBirdy]

Samsung, a company without shame and without ideas of their own.

 

[Velli]

1. Those are estimates
2. The source data is going to be 2 years old this Summer
3. Other makers are likely to accept way less margin on the final MSRP as well

About 3: So far no one has been able to use that alleged advantage to actually ship a product of the same quality but at lower cost. It is always a worse product at half price. Never the same quality at 30% less, or better quality at the same price. Any example you can think of to counter that, will be lower quality but higher specs, and that doesn’t count.

As a general rule, Apple’s high margins come from selling very high volumes of very few SKU’s, where most competitors sell smaller volume of each of more SKU’s. That gives Apple an incredible advantage in benefits of scale.

Also, I remember seeing Samsung’s first 7” tablet at IFA in 2010, with a price tag on the show floor of 799.-. When they realised the iPad would blow it out of the water, they slashed the price even before it came to market, and then even more (and it was still blown to bits by iPad). If not for the competition from Apple, 799.- was the price Samsung wanted to charge, not the 599.- or less it was actually sold (and mostly not sold) at in the end. Apple’s price forced Samsung’s price DOWN. It’s fair to say Apple is greedy, but if you think Samsung is any better, you need a wake-up call.

 

[surferfb]

1. Those are estimates
2. The source data is going to be 2 years old this Summer
3. Other makers are likely to accept way less margin on the final MSRP as well

Component costs on a lot of this will have come down wildly in the last 18+ months, especially OLED related things, which were estimated at 35% of AVP costs

Totally understand, which is why I expect the next "Apple Vision" product to cost less even if it is just an update to an M4 or M5 chip with no other changes. But I also don't think Samsung is going to magically figure out how to produce a product at the AVP level of quality and be able to sell it for $1500.

Would love to be wrong, to be clear - as you know I'm a big fan of this technology and want to get it in the hands of as many people as possible, but I just don't think the AVP-quality experience is doable today at $1500. Starting at $1999? maybe. But $1499 just seems like a bridge too far. In 2 or 3 years? Probably. But not today.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Samsung, a company without shame and without ideas of their own.

Umm..

 

[Mooey]

They'll copy everything Apple except the price. And that's why this will be popular. No one is going to buy $3000+ goggles. Now $1000 goggles on the other hand...

 

[turbineseaplane]

They'll copy everything Apple except the price. And that's why this will be popular. No one is going to buy $3000+ goggles. Now $1000 goggles on the other hand...

And while many will knock this -- the smart business move is absolutely to do whatever it takes to get the price right.

Hopefully the sacrifices to do it won't be "that bad", but ultimately a not as good product that hits an attractive and tolerable price point is a better business product than a way too expensive but better specced deviced

The best features and components don't mean a hill of beans if it results in something too expensive to be purchased by any critical mass of folks

 

[Odan]

Of course it looks like the Apple vision... no one is surprised. One thing I will find more interesting is if it works with Steam VR unlike the Apple Vision...

 

[4nNtt]

Samsung releasing a photocopy of the Vision Pro is not what I expected

 

[MVMNT]

Apple sued for less in the past.

 

[surferfb]

They'll copy everything Apple except the price. And that's why this will be popular. No one is going to buy $3000+ goggles. Now $1000 goggles on the other hand...

Again, I remain incredibly skeptical that a product can be sold at $999 that will come anywhere close to matching the experience of AVP. Can Samsung release a $999 headset? Absolutely. Will it be anywhere close to the quality of product as AVP? I suspect not. But I've been wrong before and I'll be wrong again, so we'll see what happens.

My guess is that even when the technology is "mature" we're looking at MacBook Pro level pricing for AVP, MacBook Air level pricing for a lesser-equipped "Apple Vision" and maybe iPad pricing for a "Apple Vision Air" (Meta Ray Bans-like device). Will definitely be interesting to see where all of this shakes out.

 

[Johnny907]

Looks more like every meta headset I’ve seen, just with a black faceplate instead of white.
Seriously people, get over this Samsung hating nonsense.
I’m a Ford guy but I don’t go out of my way to hate on Chevy or Ram for gods sake. Be happy with your Apple gear and let Samsung users be happy with theirs.