Having the best headset is mute and pointless if it does not have a plethora of applications to justify such a title and Apple does not have a plethora of applications to make it come even close to being the best headset on the market.
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.
Tim Cook Admits Truth About Vision Pro Following Lackluster Sales
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And there are likely to be multiple special case scenarios. The point is that the AVP is a tech base, not "how many hula hoops can we sell."
Oh please. This is such a bs line. They thought the hype for their brand was bigger than it was and people would go gaga for a heavy computer monitor. People want VR. They want it to be lightweight and they want to play games. Apple could have done this but they chose to go for style over substance. One of these days they'll figure out folks can't afford their overpriced monitors and VR systems and will make some changes. They could have made this thing for $800, have it be super lightweight and blow Meta out of the water with some really cool controllers, but no. They had to overproduce the heck out of this thing.
For Apple? Pretty much, especially considering they were nowhere near their target numbers. But I wasn't even referring to initial sales. I'm talking about long-term potential and Apple picked a category that just doesn't work in that sense. You could give them out for free and people would still eventually stop using them and go back to their laptops, phones, consoles...
I've tried them but I'm relying more on the word of people I know who work at Apple HQ, who have more insight and have expressed a lot of the same. Calling my comments a copy/paste approach just because it's not the same as what you think is extremely silly. Instead of getting defensive, try understanding that not everything Apple makes is a brilliant idea.
Sales or revenues tell only half of the story. The interesting figures would be the margins on the device and how much they've spent for development.
You can make sales in the billions and still go bankrupt.
ok.... $3500 on 500,000 units is how much?... ok, after $1.5 Billion this is pretty much a break even endeavor, not like the apple car... we are at the point where it is now a proof of concept project that is now not going anywhere at this time... nothing to see here... move along...
they need to sort the battery pack out before i think about buying one. that is so obviously a stop-gap solution you just know you'll end up having to buy a next-gen version sooner or later.
it's like their very first apple watch which was almost useless without your phone
it's like their very first apple watch which was almost useless without your phone
Apple does best when they release products that fly through the door or produce sales that are significant enough to justify their existence.Their Apple Card has been a failure more or less. Thankfully, they didn’t release a car, but they still sank too much money into that. We know what happened when they released really expensive Apple Watches. Now, I could be wrong and the third or fourth generation AVP could hit all the marks (a defined purpose or multiple defined purposes, price, usability, comfortable to use, etc.) to finally be a successful product. Right now, it looks like a product that’s getting closer to Apple’s chopping board, maybe after the second generation is released, maybe earlier.
Edit- I just discovered the MR article posted today that Apple may end production of the AVP by the end of this year. That would be even earlier than I expected. I wonder if there will be a buyback program for AVP owners by Apple?
Last edited:
Sony DID release VR Gaming headset - it has all the same issues as Apple Vision - no content beyond a few AAA titles which are even more expensive than regular AAA games and they are rarely updated -
plus it is also limited to older HD display tech and has lag screen tearing issues. AND it does not have any apps or function as a computer the way Apple Vision does.
Wow, your headlines are really getting bad lately. You seem more desperate for clicks than Apple is to sell headsets!
“MacRumors Admits Truth That Clickbait Headlines Get Forum Posts.”
“MacRumors Admits Truth That Clickbait Headlines Get Forum Posts.”
I was alive when the Newton was released, although admittedly I was a young kid.
Even so I don’t remember that product being something you literally strapped to your face to use.
The thing the original iPhone did have was appeal. People wanted it. People talked about it. It was huge in the zeitgeist.
No one’s talking about AVP. Obviously not many people want one.
Plenty of people "want" and are talking about VP but the current price is a bigger hurdle than it was with the iPhone. Also, cell phones/smartphones weren't nearly as new of a concept for people in 2007 (most had already owned at least one) compared to AR/VR headsets today.
However, my point here was that the original iPhone also wasn’t a "full featured" and "complete" product, nor did either of them necessarily need to be at launch.
Plus, the original iPhone was subsidized by carriers, which made it much easier to get
Original iPhone was a hit, must have once you tried it, item, and that's WITH being stuck on what was seen as an inferior carrier at the time (Cingular)
It was the only product I ever basically camped out for ... was a line of hundreds of us in Boise
The original iPhone had only one carrier – AT&T. Jobs shopped Verizon and they said no. AT&T was the sole carrier for 5 years. (AT&T bought Cingular.) They did pay Apple some money for each phone sold. Even with the price reduction of a later version it wasn't a huge seller. That didn't last.
Not quite five years. Verizon and then Sprint were added in 2011.
Other countries used different carriers e.g., O2 in the UK.
That could happen way sooner, if Tim and colleagues sat down and watched BRAINSTORM, by Douglas Trumbull, written by Bruce Joel Rubin, about the evolution of a very hefty product down to a Walkman-like headset, both doing exactly the same thing, allowing the wearer to directly experience sensory "recordings" by others. The point being, it became "I need that!" marketable and lower cost through new chips and great design-- all part of Apple's brainstem.
I've worn the damn thing (thank you, Raines!) and BRAINSTORM was the first thing I thought of. Don't abandon it-- abate it. Boil it down to its essentials, then stuff it with App Store offerings. I'm looking forward to eye-nav Monopoly.
Blink to buy Boardwalk.
Excuse me, I see I have to do a finger thing to select the exit. Can't I just cross my eyes? Come on, Apple....
It's actually not. We have had headsets at that refresh since 2016. The human brain can perceive the lag time until about 360hz which is why people need to get their "VR legs".
For instance, while the refresh rate between 90hz and 144hz is night and day (less so between 120 and 144hz, if you can support it). We need the ability to run a headset at 240hz in a small, comfortable form factor and a MUCH bigger FOV before this segment can really take off.
Failed device from before it even started. Tried the demo at the Apple store the other day and wasn't impressed. It's a device that will bring us one step closer to AI, mind control, mark of the beast. Satanic.