I was surprised by this as well! I guess Apple really wants to promote Vision Pro as much as possibleMR, that keeps leaking Apple secrets, got a press pass?
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.
Video: Trying the Apple Vision Pro Headset
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't think it will be yearly, at least not a strict yearly cycle like the iPhone. That's really their only product that adheres to a strict annual update schedule. My hunch is that Vision Pro will get updated on a schedule more like the Mac than the iPhone.
It might also just be too early to tell. The hardware is very sophisticated. It will probably take some time, and sales volume, to bring costs down and develop a non-Pro version of the product. I'd be very surprised if this first model sees an update a year after release.
Your wish -
Transcribe - Speech to Text
Transcribe audio and video to text with Transcribe – your AI-powered transcription assistant. Get instant, high-quality transcripts, right from your phone. Whether you need to transcribe voice notes, meetings, interviews, lectures, or videos, our advanced AI provides you with fast, accurate, mult…
apps.apple.com
👋 I’m excited for the Apples Vision Pro-far from an expert,but when $’sView attachment 2214703 permits it’s definitely a device on my radar, as I am sure it is for many-re: the$-what do users expect with all that remarkable hardware industrial designed into a device that’ll alter “perspectives” completely. Here’s the tongue in cheek photo. it’s RARE that a productS “use case” will be defined by the user & not the product itself-if that makes sense?
MacRumors videographer Dan Barbera is in Cupertino this week to attend WWDC on behalf of the site, and today, he was given an opportunity to try the Apple Vision Pro in person.
Subscribe to the MacRumors YouTube channel for more videos.
Dan is one of the first people who has been able to test the headset, as Apple is only providing these demos to select people who were able to attend the keynote event.
While Apple did not allow filming of the headset and the usage experience, Dan did a video to recount his thoughts on what it was like and to answer questions from MacRumors readers and viewers.
Make sure to watch the video to get Dan's full overview of what it was like using Apple's new wearable for the first time.
Article Link: Video: Trying the Apple Vision Pro Headset
The thing with this headset is that there isn't really a "public" use case, at least not yet. With airpods, you listen to music or a podcast while walking around. With the headset, you are expected to be mostly stationary, inside, in a room. From what we've seen there weren't any "outside" demos, it might work fine outside but that isn't a given.
To me the headset is like AirPods Max. You can wear them in public, but it is a bit more of a social faux pas because with the large objects over your ears, people assume you can't hear them, even though you can. The same will apply to the headset, even though Apple did try to mitigate this with the eye display.
People will use this around other people, but it will primarily be in office environments or at home around family.
thanks but it can't transcribe from links, plus it costs 13 euros per month for 5h/Month ...no thanksYour wish -
Transcribe - Speech to Text
Transcribe audio and video to text with Transcribe – your AI-powered transcription assistant. Get instant, high-quality transcripts, right from your phone. Whether you need to transcribe voice notes, meetings, interviews, lectures, or videos, our advanced AI provides you with fast, accurate, mult…
👋I’m excited for the Apples Vision Pro-far from an expert,but when $’s permits it’s definitely a device on my radar, as I am sure it is for many-re: the$-what do users expect with all that remarkable hardware industrial designed into a device that’ll alter “perspectives” completely. Here’s the tongue in cheek photo. it’s RARE that a productS “use case” will be defined by the user & not the product itself-if that makes sense?
Hololens seems like a true AR product, whereas Vision Pro is a VR product with fake/simulated AR. This is probably my biggest concern with the Vision Pro experience. How will it feel to see a "reality" through cameras and screens? Will it feel completely natural, or will the mind rebel on some level?
I listened to the most recent Pivot podcast earlier today. Scott Galloway has been pretty pessimistic about Vision Pro and VR in general. He talked a bit about how we resist wearing anything that obscures our peripheral vision and how that's basically hardwired into us. I've tried a few VR products. Despite finding the experiences pretty cool, I never got comfortable wearing that kind of gear. It always felt "wrong" on some basic level and that made it hard for me to fully enjoy the experience. If Vision Pro's AR mode feels as natural as Apple suggested during the keynote, that will remove a massive obstacle to adoption. If it still feels like you're watching video, however, I'm not sure most people will embrace it.
Several YouTube reviewers have done both. The guy from CNET mentions HoloLens by name and his comparison was basically … not even close and apple was several generations ahead or something. I have used HoloLens so was impressed by that.
I don’t know if this product will succeed but basically these reads like all the parts of the iPhone existed already so who cares blah blah. No it’s the software and OS which is the important thing and here many reviewers are consistent. Nothing else compares. That’s what makes the device the device.
Well, all other things being equal - not really. You can buy smart phones now for 80, yet droves of people buy high end android or iOS devices for over 1000.
My point in that post is to illustrate the extremely low adoption of VR with only 9 million total units sold across all manufacturers.
Certainly there’s a place for high-end headsets. Like the Valve Index, Quest Pro, Pimax, etc…
But my point is that if you can’t already sell them for $300 or $3000 - no matter how good - $3500 is going to be a hard sell.
A few people have brought up the Hololens, and I think it would be a worthy comparison for AR features as:
1. Microsoft has spent millions (maybe more?) developing the Hololens over the past 10yrs and it's been field tested
2. Even with the enormous effort put into development, their multi-billion-dollar defense contract is in jeopardy because it still makes soldiers dizzy and gives them headaches
I can only see these issues being worse with the Apple Vision Pro after extended use, as you're not even getting a real-world view of the outside world with the headset on, you're seeing it through stereo cameras. It's interesting that Dan at MR sees this as a useful productivity device whereas Marques from MKBHD didn't see productivity as a major selling point. Dan noticed pixelation in some text, and I wonder what the font size was? Because for all the Vision Pro can do, it can't break the laws of physics... most articles on VR state that the pixelation will be noticeable until you reach 8k+ per eye. Unless, of course, you blow everything up to make it huge. How many people with normal eyesight enjoy viewing 1080p text content on a huge TV you're sitting one foot away from?
For all the people who think this can replace a 4K monitor or even an ultrawide display, I'm not really buying it. I'm sure there is some calculation out there for how high a resolution you need to simulate a 4K monitor at X distance, but it's going to be much higher than 4K per eye.
The same can be said for entertainment... sure, you can have a "100 foot screen", but I'm guessing that picture is no where near as crisp as you'd get on a 4K TV. So for the people out there saying this can replace a theater setup, I don't buy that either. Sure, it's impressive the first time you see it, but the longer you use the device, the more you'll notice the shortcomings. All VR is pretty impressive the first time you try it.
With all that said, it's still an impressive device. But as impressive the device is, any other company could have made something similar. The reality is only Apple, Microsoft, Google, and Amazon have that kind of money lying around and the hardware experience to bring these kinds of specs to a production device. Apple decided to take the risk, so we'll see if it pans out. Make no mistake though: Gen2/3/etc of this kind of device will be anyone's game, and there are players out there who have more experience than Apple when it comes to AR and VR. The people out there saying Apple is changing the game with this, or even finally bringing an AR/VR device that is marketable to the table, are misguided IMHO.
I'm also going to predict this thing will be in short supply... those high res displays are rare and I have to think their yield will be relatively low. But time will tell. Personally, I think these types of devices are still 5+ years away from niche appeal, and probably closer to 10 years away from mass appeal. But at least the hype from the Vision Pro will get more people thinking about VR!
1. Microsoft has spent millions (maybe more?) developing the Hololens over the past 10yrs and it's been field tested
2. Even with the enormous effort put into development, their multi-billion-dollar defense contract is in jeopardy because it still makes soldiers dizzy and gives them headaches
I can only see these issues being worse with the Apple Vision Pro after extended use, as you're not even getting a real-world view of the outside world with the headset on, you're seeing it through stereo cameras. It's interesting that Dan at MR sees this as a useful productivity device whereas Marques from MKBHD didn't see productivity as a major selling point. Dan noticed pixelation in some text, and I wonder what the font size was? Because for all the Vision Pro can do, it can't break the laws of physics... most articles on VR state that the pixelation will be noticeable until you reach 8k+ per eye. Unless, of course, you blow everything up to make it huge. How many people with normal eyesight enjoy viewing 1080p text content on a huge TV you're sitting one foot away from?
For all the people who think this can replace a 4K monitor or even an ultrawide display, I'm not really buying it. I'm sure there is some calculation out there for how high a resolution you need to simulate a 4K monitor at X distance, but it's going to be much higher than 4K per eye.
The same can be said for entertainment... sure, you can have a "100 foot screen", but I'm guessing that picture is no where near as crisp as you'd get on a 4K TV. So for the people out there saying this can replace a theater setup, I don't buy that either. Sure, it's impressive the first time you see it, but the longer you use the device, the more you'll notice the shortcomings. All VR is pretty impressive the first time you try it.
With all that said, it's still an impressive device. But as impressive the device is, any other company could have made something similar. The reality is only Apple, Microsoft, Google, and Amazon have that kind of money lying around and the hardware experience to bring these kinds of specs to a production device. Apple decided to take the risk, so we'll see if it pans out. Make no mistake though: Gen2/3/etc of this kind of device will be anyone's game, and there are players out there who have more experience than Apple when it comes to AR and VR. The people out there saying Apple is changing the game with this, or even finally bringing an AR/VR device that is marketable to the table, are misguided IMHO.
I'm also going to predict this thing will be in short supply... those high res displays are rare and I have to think their yield will be relatively low. But time will tell. Personally, I think these types of devices are still 5+ years away from niche appeal, and probably closer to 10 years away from mass appeal. But at least the hype from the Vision Pro will get more people thinking about VR!
Sonoma is the new Vista. Widgets right on your Desktop. I still remember the idiot "Windows 95/Mac 84" stuff. Now it's MacOS 2023/Windows 2006.
Anyway, this headset could doom Apple. The price is too high and the functionality is meant to isolate you from real people. Either civilization is doomed or Apple is. Steve Jobs is rolling in his grave. This is not what he left Tim Cook.
Anyway, this headset could doom Apple. The price is too high and the functionality is meant to isolate you from real people. Either civilization is doomed or Apple is. Steve Jobs is rolling in his grave. This is not what he left Tim Cook.
What software? 😂
You mean the ability to watch movies, browse photos and the web on a big screen in VR/AR?
Those features have been around for 7+ years, bud.
I’m sure Apple will do those things better than ever. But there’s gotta be a LOT more unique software than that.
Well this is an age old apple argument. ‘It’s cheaper elsewhere’ - it hasn’t proved much of a problem for them to be honest. We will see I’m sure.