Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
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?

Would You Pay $2000+ for Apple's AR/VR Headset?​

Nope. Happy enough writing code for $400 Oculus.
Although, if adaptation rate and software availability is high enough AND we have access to APIs, then I would go as high as $999.
 
rbwca said:
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.
Click to expand...
As I said in an earlier post in this thread, health/fitness/lifestyle will likely be the biggest component? So Fitness+ with paid add-ons.. your favorite NFL/IMSA/F1/futball star’s hand/eye coordination exercises as a $9.99 download to your Fitness+ subscription.

Entertainment as well? I suspect that every AppleTV+ original will have *experiences* created specifically for the headset. I suspect that Apple’s long-term relationship w/ Darth Mickey may allow for some interesting Headset-specific extras for Disney/Star Wars/Marvel movies/Series content as well? (For a premium price of course)

Apple Arcade? I’m sure Apple will try something in the gaming space, to be a key Headset attraction? Not sure what it would be?

And I’m sure that we’ll be told at the first Tim-Note after an iPhone w/ 360 camera capture ability, that iCloud+ is the best way to stream all of your and your friends and family’s immersive iPhone videos, especially with the Apple Headset.

Of course, because of all of this, I doubt that we’ll see the $2000-$3000 price that’s rumored? Apple will let everyone keep that expectation, then announce a $999 price, with 3 months of all the Apple subscription services that make it so amazing. Everyone will rush out, buy it because it’s an amazing deal.. and in three months, Apple starts getting a lot more services income…

Apple has bigger plans for this device than selling a handful at $2000-$3000/ea. They wouldn’t bother if they didn’t?

Again.. time will tell. Just my impression of things. Will be fun to watch regardless?
 
Last edited:
Moderate Nope. Would need some serious magic. Like auto-adjusting IPD and Near/Far sight correction.

$2k is above the price point of current "professional" grade VR. The User Interface would have be well beyond anything already on the market or coming to the market soon. $2k is like a Lisa of VR, in a market full of Windows 2 or Windows 3 PCs that are quickly driving towards Win95.

I'm keeping a cautious eye on the Lynx-R1 in April. For its price ($600) and specs, this seems about the right target for a general consumer XR.
 
Lol who would pay $2000+ for a cheap plastic/rubber band? Also remember Apple has proved that they care less and less about people's privacy, but they really care about people's hard earned money and their information, so this overpriced "Apple-secured" Apple-taxed headset will have questionable value. For those who have seen the anime Sword Art Online, remember how much information the NerveGear collects about every person? I won't be surprised if Apple and most other tech companies will go the same route, so I hope more people will start to use more common sense. In other words, be careful who you support and trust. Remember Apple is a corporation, a cold calculating corporation. Also, these times are getting rough with the inflation and everything, so I will keep my $2000+ thank you very much. I have friends who need money for food and groceries. Overpriced overhyped products from Apple and others doesn't have and never will have much value to me. Apple, you now have too many overpriced products.
 
Jensend said:
To make motion controllers intuitive to use, you need a 3D display that shows the virtual environment from a natural perspective*. To make stereoscopic displays comfortable, you need motion tracking to adjust the image to match your head perspective.
The technologies need each other to reach their full potential. The combination is much stronger than the sum of the parts.

Take a game like Job Simulator. Anybody can easily play the game in VR with no previous gaming experience, because it’s so intuitive. But if you only had the VR controllers and tried to play the game while watching it on a traditional TV, it would be extremely difficult to control.
I can juggle 4 objects in VR. I’d have a hard time just throwing one object up in the air and catching it if I were just watching my VR controller on the TV.
You may think Job Sim is a stupid game. Fair enough. But my point is that you shouldn’t judge the potential of motion controllers based on your experience with very limited motion controllers.


*the 3D part is less important than the natural perspective part, so even if you don’t have stereoscopic vision, VR still has something to offer you.

Yet here you are looking at a flat screen. Somehow that’s a fine use of time, but a more capable display technology isn’t?
Click to expand...
Fancy use case scenarios might sound amazing, but in the end, when we talk about an end consumer device for gaming, I doubt it will go anywhere. People in general are lazy. That's why anything like the Wii and Kinect didn't get any traction long term as people just want to sit down with their gamepads. Nobody really wants to be up and about playing games, they want to sit in their couches. That's the reality of video gaming.

There will be extreme niche use cases in some enterprises (eg. Microsoft Holo lens).

Apple has to come up with a new use case.
My guess, Fitness+. Fitness instruction over a 2D video sometimes is not that intuitive as you can only see one perspective. Putting this into VR/AR might be an interesting application, as long as Apple can keep the weight low and comfortable to be worn in a lengthy period. Maybe that's why they are aiming at that lower weight target for the device.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jwdsail
here’s how I see this playing out. The best we can hope for a first gen apple device that is not over $2,000 like a MacBook Pro is for it to be as good as the m1 chip was to the low end macs. Made a huge difference, was great. But we clearly know now that it is the absolute bottom of the barrel as far as apple silicon mac speed. There will be nothing slower than these CPU’s and people can’t wait for faster models. So the glasses can be a noticeable advancement to other current VR but newer models will be noticeably faster and sleeker. At worst it will be like the first iPad or iphone, quickly left behind by the second and third generation hardware.

The promise of the Reality OS will be fulfilled on the second or third model not the first one everyone buys. But you’ll get a taste of the future by spending $2,000.

It will be a much better device when it’s cheap and just streams the worlds instead of holding them on an internal drive. You will pay a monthly or yearly fee to access these worlds but the same headset can view worlds that are rendered with better tech as the server farm is upgraded. Your monthly fee covers all that. The first model will be much more costly and have smaller worlds that fit on its hard drive or limit how many people can inhabit the same world. Future ones worlds will be limited only by how big the server farm can handle.
 
$2000 is crazy expensive for the VR market right now. It's still in its infancy and the market doesn't care enough about display quality to go for the high end product.

Is Apple going to finance them? $55/mo for 36 months?

The price is so ridiculous, it makes me wonder if Apple intentionally leaked an outrageous price so that they could "Wow!" everyone with a launch price of $499.
 
For 2k? For sure. It’ll have the horsepower of a couple of m2 processors. Retina level vr. Will set the standard for immersion and comfort. Will likely use the same cushion tech they are using on the ap max and I love that.

I’m not a gamer but it’ll be worth it just to watch 360 12k videos on YouTube.
 
Wildkraut said:
No, not even for $300, because there will be no decent usage for it.
VR only makes sense on a super powered Computer with AAA ray tracing games consuming >450watt.
Click to expand...

No. Not even close.

I have a quest 2 and a ‘super powered computer’ (i9, 3080ti, 64gb ram, etc.) and the quest 2 does just fine compared to the VR games via steam etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Unregistered 4U
code-m said:
Didn’t people say that about iPhone, AW, AirPods and to some degree iPad.
Click to expand...
Cellphones were already an established huge market when Apple entered with the iPhone.
People were already wearing watches before any electronics existed.
Bluetooth headsets, tablet PCs, they all were already established markets. Apple simply made the better version of the product.

VR/AR headset is not even a market yet in the sense of consumers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back