I’ll make my point simple for you: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.
It will be hard for Apple to sell the Vision Pro. At any price.
I’ll make my point simple for you: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.
Doomed? If it doesn’t work out they’ll discontinue it and go another route. It’s highly unlikely doom them. What a strange take.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.
And I’ll make mine simple for you - no it won’t. But it’s also not the goal. The goal is long term. They’re not after a high selling device. They’re after a head start in a segment which will dominate over the next X years like smart phones have over the past decade or so.I’ll make my point simple for you:
It will be hard for Apple to sell the Vision Pro. At any price.
One VR focused channel compared it to that and said most people are comparing it to the cheap versions when the feature set is closer to the $7000 devices. The VR channel actually was very impressed with the Vision Pro - no doubt in part because more people supporting VR is good for VR. But they also said it appears apple is really trying something new and different.I’d say the Vision Pro is on par with the Varjo XR-3, which is $7000 + $2000/yr software subscription.
![]()
Varjo XR-4 Series
The world’s highest resolution mixed reality headsets for ultra-high fidelity enterprise VR, XR and Spatial Computing.varjo.com
So why, in your estimation, have VR headsets (which I love and own several) not caught on in the last 7-8 years, despite many high-end products with the exact same software features for years?And I’ll make mine simple for you - no it won’t. But it’s also not the goal. The goal is long term. They’re not after a high selling device. They’re after a head start in a segment which will dominate over the next X years like smart phones have over the past decade or so.
I'm not big on any of the extremist/sensationalist stuff in either direction. Decent working VR goggles aren't going to doom civilization and overpriced ones that sell poorly aren't going to doom Apple either.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.
Apple isn’t selling a VR head set so it might be completely different people would be interested.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.
Mainly because, a: they’re low end (in comparison) single minded devices and b: apple device is AR focused - this is much more AR than VR.So why, in your estimation, have VR headsets (which I love and own several) not caught on in the last 7-8 years, despite many high-end products with the exact same software features for years?
Correct. It’s an AR and VR headset. That seamless transition between the two is great.Apple isn’t selling a VR head set so it might be completely different people would be interested.
Not sure what you’re getting at, but home computers were historically a distinct market segment from PCs.Hmmm. PC. What does that mean again?
Yes. Completely distinct. As distinct as an st is to the mega st - for example. Soooo, not that distinct. Home computer v PC is like an air v a pro. It’s a label. The distinctions are semantics. The real distinctions are from a mainframe to an Apple Watch. Ymmv obviously and each person has an opinion (amongst other things).Not sure what you’re getting at, but home computers were historically a distinct market segment from PCs.
As far as I'm aware, no VR maker has pitched their device in such a way that made me feel like it could replace my computer/monitor setup. Apple's presentation made me feel like that's a real possibility. Whether it actually works that way, we have to wait to see until it's released and actual users get to use it for actual work. But if it really can replace my computer/monitor, I'd certainly want one.So why, in your estimation, have VR headsets (which I love and own several) not caught on in the last 7-8 years, despite many high-end products with the exact same software features for years?
VR will “dominate?” I don’t think so. Not until they can make it as easy as putting on a pair of sunglasses.
As far as I'm aware, no VR maker has pitched their device in such a way that made me feel like it could replace my computer/monitor setup. Apple's presentation made me feel like that's a real possibility. Whether it actually works that way, we have to wait to see until it's released and actual users get to use it for actual work. But if it really can replace my computer/monitor, I'd certainly want one.
And agree that getting it to come down in size to something closer to regular glasses will speed adoption.
The OP used a clunky first-edition IBM PC as an example of a home computer. IBM PC were decidedly not home computers. These were business computers. They were called “personal” computer, because unlike the previously prevalent minicomputers and mainframes, they were not time-sharing (multi-user) computers, but instead only used by one person at a time. Home use only became common a couple years later with cheaper IBM-compatible clones, which also became slightly more compact.Yes. Completely distinct. As distinct as an st is the a mega st - for example. Soooo, not that distinct. Home computer and PC os like an air v a pro. It’s a label. The distinctions are semantics. The real distinctions are from a mainframe to an Apple Watch. Ymmv obviously and each person has an opinion (amongst other things).
Again semantics. I think you know what the OP was getting at.The OP used a clunky first-edition IBM PC as an example of a home computer. IBM PC were decidedly not home computers. These were business computers. They were called “personal” computer, because unlike the previously prevalent minicomputers and mainframes, they were not time-sharing computers, but instead only used by one person at a time. Home use only began a couple years later with cheaper IBM-compatible clones, which also became relatively more compact.
Airpods aren't about audio quality. They're about seamless device switching, lack of pairing pain, etc. All I need to start using my airpods with a new device is to sign in to my apple ID. My best other BT headphones, high end sony ones that I love, can pair to two devices and must be manually unpaired to be able to pair to a third. They're much "better" headphones, but much worse to use day to day. I use crackly, dirty, almost dead airpods over 95% of the time because they "just work," even if they sound like crap.I'm not grumpy at all, I'm just being honest. Not only do AirPods continue to look ridiculous, there are far better options out there in their price range when it comes to audio quality and in app EQ modifications and customizations.
As I see it, Apple built this function into the Virtual OS, whereas this Virtual Desktop is a third-party app you buy separately. When I viewed Meta's promotional material for the Quest, there was no mention of this Virtual Desktop. Yes, this is Apple being better at PR than Meta, but it's also a difference in product focus, that I suspect would end up in better virtual desktop experience on Apple's platform.![]()
Virtual Desktop Classic on Steam
Virtual Desktop is an application developed for the Oculus Rift / Rift S, HTC Vive, Valve Index and WMR headsets that lets you use your computer in VR. This app is NOT for the Oculus Quest or Pico headsets. You can browse the web, watch movies, Netflix or even play games on a giant virtual screen.store.steampowered.com
I’ve been using Virtual Desktop in VR headsets since 2016.
Anyway, I’m sure the optics on the Vision Pro are fantastic. (They’d better be, at that price.)
But there’s nothing new here, other than a seamless transition between AR and VR, which is cool.
Semantics is what matters. My understanding of the argument is that the form factor counts in what people are willing to use at home. Clunky headsets are fine when that’s what’s necessary for work, but not so much at home for recreational use.Again semantics. I think you know what the OP was getting at.
I’m certain that Apple’s integration will be great.As I see it, Apple built this function into the Virtual OS, whereas this Virtual Desktop is a third-party app you buy separately. When I viewed Meta's promotional material for the Quest, there was no mention of this Virtual Desktop. Yes, this is Apple being better at PR than Meta, but it's also a difference in product focus, that I suspect would end up in better virtual desktop experience on Apple's platform.
Proving everyone’s point again. What was once a computer filled room is now on a watch. What is now a face filled computer will eventually on a contact lens.Semantics is what matters. My understanding of the argument is that the form factor counts in what people are willing to use at home. Clunky headsets are fine when that’s what’s necessary for work, but not so much at home for recreational use.
Well, progress isn’t linear, so I don’t believe in extrapolating the future from the past. Let’s wait and see when those contact lenses will come along. I’d certainly welcome them!Proving everyone’s point again. What was once a computer filled room is now on a watch. What is now a face filled computer will eventually on a contact lens.
With tech it’s almost a proven thing so far. But yes! Let’s see. The future is promising and there can be no denying that this product (from initial impressions and disregarding apples ability to both ‘make amazing’ and ‘utterly gimp’ a product at the same time) - looks very very promising.Well, progress isn’t linear, so I don’t believe in extrapolating the future from the past. Let’s wait and see when those contact lenses will come along. I’d certainly welcome them!
MR is doing its job and serving its purpose.MR, that keeps leaking Apple secrets, got a press pass?![]()
Narrow use cases?If these other options work for you, great! But to suggest that what many of us are expressing as something novel in the Vision Pro is imagined and not real is to discount our own positions as consumers in the market place.
Apple is bringing best-of-class technology married to a mature eco-system. It elevates the idea of the AR/VR tech. When I look at it and realize that I can seamlessly use apps and an OS that I'm extremely familiar with, along with a trust in Apple's ability to deliver unique tech and experiences, I'm sold. None of these other devices have given me anything close to that vision. All the examples you've given were targeted at narrow use-cases or enterprise adaptation to very narrow uses. That's not this. This is relevant to the average Apple consumer in the way that the laptop was newly relevant to those using a desktop. The way that the iPhone was relevant to those using laptops. The way the iPad carved a new niche to those already invested in the ecosystem.
I see this replacing my laptop. I already know how/why I'll use it. And it fits perfectly into the investment I have in the ecosystem, leveraging and expanding it. It will make me more productive in the work I do. Period. All the other examples you've given were largely focused on gaming or gimmicks. This is focused on general purpose computing with an already mature OS and ecosystem.
Apple easily sells 1 million of these in the first year. And it grows exponentially from there.