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?![]()
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?![]()
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.Do you get the feeling or any sense from Apple that this is going to be a yearly upgrade product or something like the Apple Watch the next version significantly eclipse the launch version? I desperately want this and I have several use cases for this but it’s a one-time purchase for me as that amount of money is life changing for me, if I was to take the plunge, do you think that this is something that I will regret within 12 months because Apple will do the yearly cycle or is this a product that you think won’t get updates for several years and then it will be a big sea change?
Your wish -I really want an AI that can transcribe videos into text, i hate those reviews that could be read in <1mn
I think No Mans Sky on PS5 works with PSVR2 (definitely does with number 1).I wish I could get this just for gaming (for my console(s)). All of the current VR headsets just try too hard. I don't need a "game-on-rails" with the ability to use motion controls etc. Just give me an immersive headset that takes over my peripheral vision and a conventional controller!
👋 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.People said the same thing about AirPods, and now no one even bats an eye at someone wearing them. First-gen will be a little bucky, but in a few years, this tech will be simply amazing. Apple, once again, isn't the first to the game but seems to have gotten it right.
You want Whisper.I really want an AI that can transcribe videos into text, i hate those reviews that could be read in <1mn
Thanks, Dan. That was a good summary. I was pretty excited about Vision Pro watching the Keynote, but I assumed it was just me geeking out over it. It's nice to see confirmation that everyone who's had a chance to use it has been pretty much blown away by it. Apple took their time getting this right, and I suspect it's going to evolve into the next major computing platform.
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 is your own Personal Assistant for transcribing videos and voice memos into text. Leveraging almost-instant Artificial Intelligence technologies, Transcribe provides quality, readable transcriptions with just a tap of a button. Do you have to listen to your voice memos over and over...apps.apple.com
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'd really like to see a real world comparison between this and the Microsoft Hololens. I know Microsoft is only marketing the Hololens to business and industry right now but if AR goes mainstream they could easily pivot their existing product to compete.
I find it interesting that Apple was pushing AR but then went full VR instead. The Hololens has a transparent display that can be made opaque on demand so when you look at the real world you're actually seeing the real world with an AR overlay. With the Vision you're seeing simulated AR. The real world is coming from the cameras and what you're seeing is only what's on the screen. Even more interesting is that Apple decided to put a display on the front to make it appear as if the screen were translucent when in fact it is not. I know that Hololens has advanced eye tracking, hand gestures and many of the same features including the exact same $3,500 price. The cheaper game systems like Oculus keep getting mentioned but real AR hardware in the same price range does not.
MacRumors crew, any chance of getting your hands on a current gen Hololens to compare the AR experience?
I really like Tim's polo. Anyone have a link to 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'd really like to see a real world comparison between this and the Microsoft Hololens. I know Microsoft is only marketing the Hololens to business and industry right now but if AR goes mainstream they could easily pivot their existing product to compete.
I find it interesting that Apple was pushing AR but then went full VR instead. The Hololens has a transparent display that can be made opaque on demand so when you look at the real world you're actually seeing the real world with an AR overlay. With the Vision you're seeing simulated AR. The real world is coming from the cameras and what you're seeing is only what's on the screen. Even more interesting is that Apple decided to put a display on the front to make it appear as if the screen were translucent when in fact it is not. I know that Hololens has advanced eye tracking, hand gestures and many of the same features including the exact same $3,500 price. The cheaper game systems like Oculus keep getting mentioned but real AR hardware in the same price range does not.
MacRumors crew, any chance of getting your hands on a current gen Hololens to compare the AR experience?
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.@mattopotamus Hard disagree that you can’t compare Apple’s headset to competitors.
FOV, refresh rate, resolution, “screen door effect,” and anything to do with optics (which I’m sure are great on the Vision Pro) are all open to direct comparison. Especially on higher-end headsets.
Battery vs. no battery. (And now, external battery.)
Weight. Fit.
User input. (The Quest Pro has both controllers AND hand tracking where you do the same “pinch to select” movement.)
Eye tracking (also on the PSVR2 and Quest Pro)
I agree that the seamless blend of AR and VR on the Vision Pro is exciting. But that’s all that’s “new” here.
The software features they debuted (movies, photos, web browsing, etc.) have been around for the last 7+ years since the beginning on other headsets.
Hmmm. PC. What does that mean again?The IBM PC isn’t what is called a home computer. Home computers are computers like the Apple ii, the Commodore C64 and Amiga, and the Atari ST.
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.Also, that $3500 price tag (when you have affordable, completely capable $300 headsets like the Quest 2 that still can’t sell over 9 million units) is a major barrier of entry.
My point in that post is to illustrate the extremely low adoption of VR with only 9 million total units sold across all manufacturers.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.
What software? 😂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 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.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.