More power to you, but I’d rather buy a fully tricked out iPad Pro or MacBook Pro for those kinds of prices. I’d likely get more use out of them than I would VR goggles.I'd love to say "No, that's absurd!" but in all honesty; yeah, probably. Somewhere around $2500 would be my limit. And it would have to be really, really cool.
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: Would You Pay $2000+ for Apple's AR/VR Headset?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
At $100,000 for an Apple Car? Tell ‘em ‘e’s dreamin’.
At those prices, I’d probably buy from an established luxury performance brand, like a nice Ferrari (not that I’m in the market for that expensive of a car or for a fresh-off-the-lot new car, either*). But a lot of good performance and/or luxurious cars can be had for less than that.
* If you’ve got enough money to spend that the immediate depreciation hit doesn’t bother you, by all means buy new (your new car is what allows others to buy a decent used car in about 3 to 5 years, after all). I honestly can’t see Apple charging $100,000 for their car, because cars that cost that much are ones that you’re typically buying for the nameplate as much as anything else (or maybe for supercar performance). Apple doesn’t have the same cache as Ferrari or Lamborghini, or Bentley and Rolls Royce, for that matter.
What's the use case? I can see the need in certain kinds of business for equipment maintainers to see how to fix machines, but I don't see a general need.
That’s an easy no. I can’t see paying more than $499 for something like this. I can’t imagine using it anywhere near as much as my MacBook or iPad, so it can’t have a price like those. Maybe when they are slim like regular glasses and I can have them on all day, but not if it looks anything like these renders.
$2000 is pretty expensive for something like this, but for me it really depends on the device’s capabilities. If all it can do is improve on the same old b******t that Oculus Quest and Vive are already doing, then no way. The main stream market has already spoken on that technology, and almost no one is interested in it.
If, however, an Apple headset brings something new and useful to the scene, I might be compelled to spend $2000 on it. Who knows what that could be… Maybe if the headset gave me virtual work spaces, and could tie in to my Mac and other devices? Maybe if It could do pass-through MR to present helpful augmentation for real-world activities? Maybe if it could use Apple’s SLAM technology along with real-time object capture to scan environments and objects that I want to share with other people via iMessage? Maybe if it had a nice UI on top of SceneKit to allow people to build experiences that they could share with each other? I would part with $2000 for that.
If, however, an Apple headset brings something new and useful to the scene, I might be compelled to spend $2000 on it. Who knows what that could be… Maybe if the headset gave me virtual work spaces, and could tie in to my Mac and other devices? Maybe if It could do pass-through MR to present helpful augmentation for real-world activities? Maybe if it could use Apple’s SLAM technology along with real-time object capture to scan environments and objects that I want to share with other people via iMessage? Maybe if it had a nice UI on top of SceneKit to allow people to build experiences that they could share with each other? I would part with $2000 for that.
Name just one thing Apple dominate the global market with. Just one!
No way. Too much $$$ and I don't see the appeal other than games. Also, as a glasses wearer, would I even be able to use this anyway?
No way. I've bought every Apple product imaginable since the 1984 Macintosh (still have it!) but I have less than zero intrest in VR googles that isolate me from the real world to have me enter a virtual one. Maybe, *maybe* I could see AR glasses that you wear that super imposes a high resolution heads up display over the real world (like Google Glasses but much more high tech) but not this, never.
Nooooo
Apple hasn't come out with a new product category since the 2018 launch of the HomePod, and there hasn't been a new wearable since the 2015 debut of the Apple Watch. That's set to change in the not too distant future, as Apple's AR/VR headset is nearing completion and will likely see a launch in 2023.
Subscribe to the MacRumors YouTube channel for more videos.
Rumors about the first head worn Apple-branded AR/VR product have been trickling out for years now, so we thought it would be useful to provide a quick overview of what's coming, including the most recent realityOS information.
Hardware Features
Software Features
- Overall Design - Apple's headset won't look too different from the Oculus Quest virtual reality headset, featuring a curved visor that slides over the eyes and a comfortable mesh base that rests against the face. The visor will completely cover the eyes, blocking out peripheral vision to prevent light leaks.
- Headband - The headset will be held in place by a swappable, adjustable headband that could be made from a material similar to an Apple Watch Sport band.
- Weight - Apple wants the final version of the headset to weigh between 100 to 200 grams. That would be far lighter and more comfortable than something like the Oculus Quest 2, which weighs 503 grams. Prototypes weigh around 300 grams, so Apple may not be able to get the headset's weight quite as low as its target.
- Spatial Audio - One of the headbands that Apple is testing features spatial audio technology for a surround sound experience.
- Display - Apple's AR/VR headset is expected to adopt two high-resolution 4K micro OLED displays supplied by Sony for a high-quality viewing experience that offers up to 3,000 pixels per inch.
- Cameras - The headset will be equipped with more than a dozen optical cameras for tracking hand movements, eye tracking mapping the environment, projecting visual experiences, and more.
- Control Methods - Apple may support multiple input methods, including hand gestures, eye tracking and iris recognition, and a finger-worn control device. It will also detect skin and could monitor expression.
- Chips - Two Mac-level Apple silicon chips are expected to be used in the AR/VR headset to provide the computing power that Apple wants. The headset is expected to be a standalone device that is not reliant on the iPhone or Mac for processing power.
Pricing
- realityOS - Apple is designing a new operating system for the headset, and it's expected to be called "realityOS." Just this week, references to realityOS were found in Apple's source code.
- App Store - Along with a new OS, the AR/VR headset will have a dedicated App Store. Apple will focus on gaming, streaming video content, and video conferencing.
- Media Content - Apple could be planning to work with media parters to create content that could be watched in VR.
- VR FaceTime - Apple is rumored to be working on a VR FaceTime-like experience with Animojis and other 3D features.
Bloomberg's Mark Gurman has speculated that the headset will sell for over $2,000, and The Information believes it could cost somewhere around $3,000.
Release Date
Apple has pushed back the planned release timeline of the AR/VR headset several times as it continues to work out development issues. There were multiple rumors suggesting that we'd see the headset debut at the 2022 WWDC event, but Bloomberg's Mark Gurman recently said that Apple may further delay the headset until 2023.
At this point, it's looking like we'll have to wait for 2023 to see the headset launch, though there is still a small possibility that it will see a 2022 announcement to give developers time to prepare apps for the device. Apple is said to be targeting the 2023 Worldwide Developer's Conference for a launch.
As for the development issues, Apple is having trouble with heat dissipation due to the high-powered processor, and there are still problems with the camera and the software to work out.
Read More
For all of the rumors on Apple's AR/VR headset, we have a dedicated rumor roundup that aggregates all of the information that we know so far.
Article Link: Video: Would You Pay $2000+ for Apple's AR/VR Headset?
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
And yet, when Apple Watch launched there was the Edition version at $17K- exact same technology guts but packaged in a little gold. Apple had no Rolex, etc. cache in watches- they didn't even have Timex cache as a watchmaker at the time- but that didn't stop them from trying.
I look at how Apple prices everything else relative to mainstream competition. A $100K car MSRP wouldn't really surprise me. That would be choosing to put the 40% margin on top of a car competing with brands like Audi, Mercedes, BMW, Lexus, Tesla, etc. I very much imagine they are in that zone... if not higher.
And given how many parts Apple could perhaps choose to "improve," something well north of $100K for the "pro" or "magical" car version wouldn't surprise me either.
If they can dare to price a monitor stand at $999 and a piece of cloth at $20, a whole car by Apple seems like it would have a shocking retail price- IMO.
Sure, but it’s just an incentive, they do make it as easy as possible to buy more. But, there’s no requirement! If you don’t buy AirTags, that’s ok. No HomePod? Perfectly fine. No, Apple VR? Not a problem.
I get the feeling this is gonna be one of those classic Macrumors threads we'll look back upon a few years from now and either have a laugh about it or be like "Yup, they were right on the money".
But I will put my thoughts in just in case. I think the price point of $2K certainly seems high on a product that's extremely niche in this time period and I'm not sure the infrastructure is there yet to accommodate this device but Apple could lay the groundwork like they've done before and build off of that and we'll see where it goes. I personally would not spend that kind of money right now on an unproven product but 5 years or so down the line I'm sure everyone will have one if all goes according to plan.
I'm imagining how cool it would be to play a game like Pokemon or others while wearing these if it was done right. That would be a pretty fun time!
But I will put my thoughts in just in case. I think the price point of $2K certainly seems high on a product that's extremely niche in this time period and I'm not sure the infrastructure is there yet to accommodate this device but Apple could lay the groundwork like they've done before and build off of that and we'll see where it goes. I personally would not spend that kind of money right now on an unproven product but 5 years or so down the line I'm sure everyone will have one if all goes according to plan.
I'm imagining how cool it would be to play a game like Pokemon or others while wearing these if it was done right. That would be a pretty fun time!
But I was about to buy AirTags. If I wanted to buy more redundant things I'd buy a smart speaker as well
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Hard to say. Basically, this COULD replace anything our eyes can see with anything else. Here's a few possibilities...
- Visually, it could deliver Star Trek holodeck-type experiences. Add matching "spatial" audio to fool our ears too.
- If the deals were made, this could give every wearer courtside or front row-center seats to any event without having to actually go there (and fight over the same seats in person). People will pay upwards of several thousand dollars to be courtside (or near courtside) for ONE game/concert.
- Some think this could replace desktop/laptop monitors with virtual monitors of any size & shape. I'm thinking about spending $2K for an ultra-wide monitor to link to 2 desktop machines. If this could deliver the SAME or better experience, I could be more attracted to this (as this could also bring my "big monitor" on the flight, cruise, train, etc. too)
- If there is any place in the world one considers their perfect place, this could simulate being there whenever you would like to be there.
- Virtual vacations (staycations without visually seeing only the stay location)? Fly around anywhere like Superman? Swim the seas like Aquaman? Go see the virtual Beatles in live concert in 1963? Go witness ANY historical event? Walk with dinosaurs? Explore the universe? Ease on down the yellow brick road with Dorothy & company? If anything can trick eyes and ears into virtually being there, this could deliver all kinds of experiences.
- Shopping: walk around vacation properties in many places without having to actually go there and see them in person before you buy/lease. Instead of watching a video that shows you what the person with the camera wants you to see in a rigid frame, you can freely look around at whatever you want to see.
- Gaming: genre like racing could take on entirely new dimensions.
- any kinds of heads up benefits without having to look at a phone/tablet screen- the information appears on top of what you are seeing
- improved vision (and sound?) in less ideal situations (enhanced vision in the dark?)
- shopping: see the new sofa- and the 5 others you like- in your own living room before you decide to buy, see yourself in the virtual mirror in the new suit before you buy, etc.
- be your own expert tour guide when visiting new places. Don't miss seeing that special thing because you didn't know it was just right over there.
- language translate app functions in real time without having to aim a phone- everything can translate to your language when you look at anything
Once its possible to do a very good job fooling vision and hearing senses with something like this, the range of possible experiences are likely beyond anyone's imagination right now. Lunch on the moon? Take a stroll on the rings of Saturn. Dive down to Titanic and see if first (virtual) hand. Visit all of the desirable vacation destinations you'll never be able to fit in actually visiting in a lifetime. Etc.
Will this deliver all of that? Who knows? Does even Apple know right now? It's been one big pile of rumors so far with only a few minor hints that Apple is working on SOMETHING along these lines. End result could be ski googles that play Oculus-type games and that's all.
I could look at the subject of this thread: $2K for a pair of tech goggles and easily think "NO". But if I could get an NBA Season Pass of virtual-but-pretty-realistic courtside seats for up to several times $2K (often the price for "season tickets" for less prime seats), I could be much more interested. Last game I saw in person, I got a pretty good seat in row 8 for $500. If I wanted to see many more games in virtual row 1- center court, $2K plus some kind of virtual feed service fee would not seem too high (relatively).
$2K goggles with embedded chips? No. Unique experiences probably not able to be had- and paid for- any other way? Maybe.
Last edited: