I don’t think MacRumors gets a cut on those sales.
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.
Vision Pro 2 Rumored to Gain Brighter and More Efficient Displays
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Sorry, I meant iPhones are 1/3 the price. Most people do not update laptops yearly, under normal circumstances. I would put the Vision Pro in the category of a gaming console or oculus quest.
Even though most of the hardware won't get any (design) updates, it will be relatively straightforward (I would think) to put new Apple Silicon chips in the Vision Pro each year. I expect spec bumps for a number of years, just like the iPad Pro's. Apple cannot expect to sell M2 chips that are 20% of the performance of the M6 in 2026... that makes no sense to me.
There won't be a Vision Pro 2 because this one will tank.
This report focuses on AVP 2, but the timeline for a lower cost version is unclear.
Those complaining that the first generation is "gimped" should simply not be early adopters. The first generation of most products from most vendors is not quite nailed (again, the M1 silicon being a pretty notable exception). It takes time and iteration to achieve a high level of refinement. You can't come out of the gate with everything perfect. In the case of the AVP, Apple seems to have iterated internally and waited a pretty long time to ship, so it seems it is actually very refined for a first-gen product. According to every account, the displays are better than anything else out there by a wide margin. But yeah, in 3 years they'll be able to make it better. And they'll have a better understanding of which features are important and which need improvement as more people get to use it and provide feedback.
I think also the some folks are overlooking how enormously complex AVP is. Iterating this thing is not going to be a trivial exercise. There will be room for improvement in 20 different areas. Everything will not magically be perfect on the first go-round. Early adopters accept that in exchange for being able to use the cool new thing before everyone else.
I think also the some folks are overlooking how enormously complex AVP is. Iterating this thing is not going to be a trivial exercise. There will be room for improvement in 20 different areas. Everything will not magically be perfect on the first go-round. Early adopters accept that in exchange for being able to use the cool new thing before everyone else.
Yeah, I bought mine on day 1 and am still surprised how nice and zippy it is. Great purchase.
Many don't remember that the original Mac (with 128K of memory, a single floppy disk drive, and monochrome 7" display), released in 1984, cost $2,495. Today, that would be $7,400.
AVP is well-priced. Apple will sell a lot of them. Even though it's a 1st gen device, and that most people here still don't know what AR is about and its potential.
They'll buy it just for the immersive "multiple giant computer displays in your living room" aspect. Which is fine.
Developers will purchase it to develop interesting AR applications that will be useful in business/commerical and consumer spaces.
AVP is well-priced. Apple will sell a lot of them. Even though it's a 1st gen device, and that most people here still don't know what AR is about and its potential.
They'll buy it just for the immersive "multiple giant computer displays in your living room" aspect. Which is fine.
Developers will purchase it to develop interesting AR applications that will be useful in business/commerical and consumer spaces.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
There are these tiny little consumer "ball" cameras one can put on top of their head or mount to a stick that can do it for only a few hundred dollars retail. Here's a very cheap example below $150 retail. Obviously, mounting this kind of thing on top of our heads is probably NOT a desirable option but cameras spread around our heads should do the trick. Whether that adds significant cost and/or storage demands is up in the air, but if a $150 camera can do it, I suspect Apple could find a way to deliver the same capture range... maybe in a V Pro Pro?
And yes, I'm sure that $150 camera does not live up to the quality of the cameras Apple are probably using in Vpro. So I don't mean that for $150 more Apple could have delivered 360 degree video capture. On the other hand, I doubt it would add substantial cost to achieve that kind of capture if Apple had gone after it.
As is, Vpro "spatial" is going to be limited to "out front" capture whether shot with Vpro or iPhone. But as OP offered, it would be nice to capture the view all around, so that one could then playback and look all around and see whatever was out front, full left, full right and even behind. That already exists for many years now with cheap retail cameras. Look up any VR 360 degree videos on youtube, play, click & hold & pull left, right, up, down or look fully behind. Here's just one of MANY examples...
Play it. Click on it & hold & pull the view around to any direction. Conceptually, with Vpro, there's no pulling around- we just look over there or up there or back there and see like we are "there" now. But the abundance of such videos on youtube shows that the tech to capture it has existed for a long time... and if many "they"s can do it, Apple can too.
Last edited:
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Got you. But the "feel the fool" comment seems like it wold equally apply to the MBpro buyer who buys this years and then "falls behind" next... even if it's only a psychological thing of coveting "latest & greatest."
And hang in there for a while: it won't be that long until we see the $2K iPhone... and then the $3K iPhone.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
A "lower cost version" is likely either this version when a "2" is launched or a significantly feature-cut creation. What is the desired price of the lower cost version? And what equivalent feature cuts do we expect to get it to that price while Apple maintains its margin?
What I see among many comments is a desire for one that is somewhere between sub $1K and maybe $2K. There are already VR headsets there and they get there probably with less profit margin (Apple would likely never accept that), 1080p instead of 4K "views", weaker chipsets, less cameras and arguably poorer build quality.
Those who call for the lower cost version should identify what they want cut to achieve it. That pretty much doesn't happen. Instead, it seems to be an expectation of maintaining everything that this one can do but just cutting the price substantially. The only way that happens is for Apple to cut their margin substantially... which seems probably the most unlikely of all possibilities.
Last edited:
Imagine how much brighter, faster, and more efficient the third generation will be. The only way to win this game would be to wait until it's discontinued and buy the last model released.
The article also says in 3 years, not 1, which is kinda what you'd expect with most releases before our current reality of "something new every year with very minor changes".
Imagine you could spend $3,499 on one model or spend $5,500 on a slightly better model both in a new product category. Who would choose the higher priced one? Who knows? This is Apple's frustration which is why they iterate each generation of product so that supply prices come down as production scales rise. It's actually a very natural process, but consumers are impatient and expect everything to be the latest and cheapest when they have money to spend.
Most people/families didn't own an early Mac. There were some, but the majority of homes had no computer at all until the mid 90s.
I don't think this will tank, but I don't think it will be popular outside of the crowd that buys a Mac Studio or Mac Pro. The majority of Apple users have an iPhone, a sub $2k MacBook, an Apple Watch, and aren't looking to drop $3k+ on something like this, regardless of what it can do.
I know that every model is better than the last one, but in the beginning the progress from model to model is the biggest. The original iPad became unusable after a few years. Basic apps no longer worked and the old versions of those apps, that might still work, were not available in the app store. Or think about the first iPhone that did not even have an app store. It came with a few apps an that was it.
MV-HEVC format is open, so anyone could create a rig for it and there is stitching software for putting together lots of cameras. It would be expensive. I wouldn’t be surprised if Apple has some prototypes for professional video production.
Those cameras and videos you link aren’t 3D, they merely produce a spherical 2D video. It probably wouldn’t be difficult to write an app that projects those videos in the 3D space of the AVP, and Apple could conceivably have added cameras in the right locations to capture such videos, but that’s not actual spatial VR.
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
Maybe incremental mixed with big leaps. Variable focal length lenses, 8K per eye, and wider FoV would all be notable upgrades.Honestly, for such an expensive device, I would hope / expect the generational improvements to be extremely incremental, like the Apple Watch. I mean for instance I have a 5th Gen Apple Watch and see no reason other than the ailing battery to upgrade to anything newer.
I posted this before, but all I want is the thing to be a bit smaller in the forehead, otherwise this will be exactly the same product for a decade at least until Apple can make real pass-though as compelling as the digital version, at which point the digital version will be good enough that we're all wearing Doc Browns glasses.
What is the basis for your prognostication? Without a reason, the statement is irrelevant and meaningless.
Those people you mentioned above haven't the foggiest idea what AR is about, the problems it can solve, etc. They're just looking for something that will produce a few super-sized virtual immersive computer displays in their living room environment. And it will be somewhat popular.
But that's not Apple's focus or the market Apple is targeting, where it will do very well.
My guess is that many of the specs stay the same, with some material (plastic?) and minor design changes. Possibly an omission of the front display (until a later gen it returns when costs drop further), and minor updates like Bluetooth/wifi standard or whatever. I think that could knock up to 1K off the price, given economy of scale over two or so years.