Vision Pro Creator Mike Rockwell Has Considered Leaving Apple

[MrWayne]

Why would Rockwell jump from one fire into another more raging one? At least at Apple users aren't leaving in droves because of Siri, they're just asking to fix it.

It’s like giving someone in hell a glass of ice water.

 

[dbwie]

Yes, the Vision Pro is expensive. It’s $300 per month for 12 months on the Apple Card. That breaks down to roughly $10 per day for a year. Any way you cut it, it’s a lot of money! I do get $10 of worth per day out of my M5 Vision Pro, however. Part of it was my determination to really use it daily, to justify the purchase, and I do. Others who could not justify it have returned it, or have sold secondhand. I figured out, after much trial and error and communicating with other AVP owners on Reddit, how to make it most comfortable, which was an early barrier to my adoption. It is the giant screen TV that I could never have in my small apartment. As for the lack of apps, remember what Jobs said about the first iPhone that had only Apple apps… “use Web apps” Much of the streaming video I like to watch, YouTube TV, Tennis Channel, Gotham Sports, Curiosity Stream, etc, all work through Safari on AVP, very well. I’m saddened that the app environment has not developed, but not surprising given the small market for the AVP. AVP adds a giant display to my Mac Mini in Mac Virtual Environment. Apple could have marketed the AVP differently. AR maps the digital world onto the real world. VR is about immersing in a virtual world. It is the only Apple device I have where I want to turn off all notifications. It is a great “disconnect” from the real world. I use it for meditation, and taking a break from my career, in which I am intensely social and hyperconnected to the point of exhaustion. I don’t want to Facetime on my Vision Pro, so I don’t care about the persona. I don’t check social media on AVP. It’s nice to dial back immersion so I can walk around the apartment with it, but when sitting I stay fully immersed. Even though it is expensive, the good news is that the battery is external, so when that eventually dies, I can get another one and keep using AVP. They hyped too much about “eyesight” out of fears that being disconnected from ones environment was a drawback, or that others not seeing your eyes would be weird. That is the benefit! They had YouTubers and tech journalists, all hyperconnected people, reviewing it from that perspective, so the reviews did not catch the benefits that I perceive. I predict that lots of this technology from AVP will trickle into other future Apple products, such as the AR glasses. People already use AVP without the light seal, so I don’t think they need to ditch this concept entirely, but it will be a while before we see another one. If they can make one that is smaller, lighter, and under $2,000, then that is a day when we might see the next Vision Pro. Until then, I plan to keep enjoying the one I have.

 

[Analog Kid]

Vision Pro was launched too soon and I'm guessing that's Tim's fault as the rumours were he wanted it out ASAP.

Maybe they drop the price, take the financial hit but get far more people and app developers into the device. And then roll out a new, lighter (hopefully) version. I don't see glasses performing as effective as the headset.

The technology is cool - Apple should try to partner with the major sports or musicians. Imagine throwing on the headset and bam - watching a live game courtside or front row seats for your favourite band. Make it a subscription if need be (yeah I know another one!)

But rumours are Ternus isn't a fan of AVP so it may be shelved.

It was not released too soon. I would not have wanted to wait to get what I have now. Sure there will always be a better version coming, but they put something into the market that does its job really, really well and in a way that I don't think will be easily replaced by "glasses" even if that sounds like a good idea. Glasses can only present something in your field of view and will have to always compete with ambient light-- they can't immerse you. The cost of the technology is a barrier to entry, sure, but I would argue a poorer implementation would have lowered the barrier to exit. It could be lighter, and it could run longer, but those things will come. I don't pay any attention to the comments people make about how it looks-- they're clearly not focused on what's important.

I'm a little worried if Ternus has expressed a view that AVP should go away. It's worth remembering that a corporate environment is a political environment and people's expressed views are not objective but can be shaped by looking for political advantage or managing political fallout. I just hope AVP doesn't get terminated early because it was politically expedient.

 

[TheAngryKiwi]

I think anyone who's been intimately involved with, and/or responsible for, two of the larger "dud" areas in Apple of late (Vision Pro & Siri are right at the top of that list) definitely should consider a change.

Rockwell has been leading the Siri “rebuild”, your beef there is with John Giannandrea. Give reading a go next time.

 

[nt5672]

Vision Pro was launched too soon and I'm guessing that's Tim's fault as the rumours were he wanted it out ASAP.

Maybe they drop the price, take the financial hit but get far more people and app developers into the device. And then roll out a new, lighter (hopefully) version. I don't see glasses performing as effective as the headset.

The technology is cool - Apple should try to partner with the major sports or musicians. Imagine throwing on the headset and bam - watching a live game courtside or front row seats for your favourite band. Make it a subscription if need be (yeah I know another one!)

But rumours are Ternus isn't a fan of AVP so it may be shelved.

Whoever it was that kept the AVP battery in the headset was really stupid. For a first gen product a cord and a belt battery would have been much better than neck strain.

 

[egdiroh]

I don’t understand why AVP is a failure. Have you ever tried a Quest 3?

I did say the technology works well.

I think it failed to live up to the hype. The hype had it being the "next iPhone" but with the expectations of like the next years iPhone, not the slow ramp up that the early iPhones saw.

I think that if it was a success or failure will ultimately rest with the internal decision makers at apple. At some point that have to do some money in and money out calculations. I think a lot of the research and software has already made it into, or will make it into other products. So it might not be that bad on the balance sheets. But that is going to be based on internal decisions of where to assign shared costs, and some of that will be determined by the agendas they are trying to achieve. If they want it to be a success, as much will get shifted elsewhere as can be, or pushed off against the future. If they want it to be a failure or to amplify the success of other things the billing me all be pushed to it.

 

[MNLondon]

I think this Vision Pro gadget is completely overpriced and far too heavy, just like the AirPods Max. What has happened to Apple's iconic design ethic? More to the point, I would suggest they get someone who can design a much lighter and practical product, which is £1000 less expensive, so more people can actually enjoy it. Ultimately, there will be something we attach to the side of our heads, which accesses the brain directly, and the Mind's eye. Maybe we need more time for that tho, and someone with greater 'vision' at Apple......

 

[MDL-Steven]

I still love watching TV shows on Movie on my AVP as long as I have the luxury (i.e. time) for it.

I still can't really make it a day-to-day driver for productive, profit-making work ...

 

[Takeo]

Everyone attached to Vision Pro needs to go. Tim Cook is one down. Rockwell is next.

 

[bLackjackj]

If John Turnus is smart, he wont kill the line, but will put out a lower cost affordable version of it.

Apple already is working on a lower cost version.

 

[svish]

Looks like more staff will continue to leave Apple and hopefully Apples plan for improved Siri and Apple Intelligence will not be delayed.

 

[eifelbube]

No doubt in my mind the next version will be much more refined. Likely in the form of glasses, and possibly using a person's iPhone …

I did the demo, the tech is breathtaking … I do not see how a next version needs to and could be much more refined. Delivering this tech via ski goggles at $3.5k with limited content are the stumbling blocks. Reducing the goggles to the size of spectacles requires a light seal to maintain the crucial immersion effect. Any shield attachment or extension will make them look like welders glasses. The form factor of spatial computing wearables makes them unlikely to reach the level of social acceptance necessary to graduate from niche to mass product, not even at $999.

 

[H_D]

I don’t get the whole AVP is expensive shtick. The Studio XDR or an iPad Pro with Magic Keyboard and Pencil etc is just at the same price, a well-spec’s MBP is at twice of what you pay for it. And the tech is amazing. I don’t get the hate.

 

[eifelbube]

Also... I would love to explore the 20,000 year old cave paintings in Lascaux from walking around in my living room.

Agreed. And plenty of content like that would help. If you do not have the money to travel around the world to sites spectacular in scenery and culture and would like to experience them as virtual as possible, then a one-time $3,500 investment might be well worth it.

 

[ds2000]

Eh.

You may not like it but vision pro is a halo product to show the way forward in terms of how to build a relevant UI, figuring out app design patterns etc. for what is coming.

Forget the form factor. It’s not ready for mass production yet because we do not yet have the technology.

Something a little larger than a set of glasses though is where it’s headed. Maybe not this year, maybe not next but within 3-5 years that’s what we’re going to get.


Like AI LLMs, augmented reality is going to go from being a bit of a joke to a game changing technology very, very rapidly once it hits a critical tipping point.

Agree, the vision pro is an incredible product, its ahead of its time and also too expensive. I loved it when I had it but did sell it a few months before the update landed. If they shrink it down to glasses size with real passthrough, as you say 3-5 years, it'll be top of the class.

 

[citysnaps]

I did the demo, the tech is breathtaking … I do not see how a next version needs to and could be much more refined. Delivering this tech via ski goggles at $3.5k with limited content it are the stumbling blocks. Reducing the goggles to the size of spectacles requires a light seal to maintain the crucial immersion effect. Any shield attachment or extension will make them look like welders glasses. The form factor of spatial computing wearables makes them unlikely to reach the level of social acceptance necessary to graduate from niche to mass product, not even at $999.

And many people could not imagine many of the products Apple has released over the past 50 years. Yet Apple came through with them propelling the company to being on of the most successful consumer tech companies in the world.

 

[maflynn]

And many people could not imagine many of the products Apple has released over the past 50 years. Yet Apple came through with them propelling the company to being on of the most successful consumer tech companies in the world.

Yes and no.
Nearly every product that apple "created" had already existed, whether we're talking about the Macintosh, iPod, or even the iPhone.

I'm in no way diminishing the innovation but they rarely roll out a product that has never been seen.

I mean even the Vision Pro wasn't revolutionary, other companies had already had VR/AR headsets.

 

[JKLassitter]

Apple should be working on a Vision Neo that has 8K clarity and with only absolutely necessary features and styling, and retailing for $1999.

 

[kcwookie]

Ok here is the problem with the vision pro, pure and simple....IT COST TOO DAMN MUCH. 3499 IS AN INSANE AMOUNT OF MONEY FOR A PRODUCT THAT HAS NO CLEAR DEFINED USE. Its an amazing technical product, no doubt about it, but their is no way your average consumer is going to drop that kind of money for a novelty luxuary item that isnt a laptop that can get actual work done.

Apple did something amazing with the vision pro but killed it before it ever launched with that price point, because in order for VR and AR to succeed it has to afforable and apple is missing the mark completely here with its price point. Yes i get it has breakthough high end tech and that costs alot, but i truly believe if apple put out a "Air" version of the Vision pro at a much lower price, it would work.

Heres the core problem. Meta (yes say what you will about their privacy issues) has got them beat on the hardware front on every catagory when it comes to VR/AR Headsets and smart glasses. I own 2 pairs of Smart Glasses which are just cameras, speakers and an Ai, and the Meta Quest 3 which is a really cool VR/AR headset for 500 dollars (But i think the price went up recently).

its a wonderful gaming system, and i use it all the time, but its app support isnt the greatest. If you buy it as a gaming platform, i think you will be happy but in no way shape or form is it a genuine productivy tool.

IF APPLE MATCHED WHAT META IS DOING IN THE VR SPACE it would dominate the market overnight. You give me a apple version of the Meta quest 3 with the apple ecosystem, the ability to send messages, video chat, music, appletv all built in like most other apple products, for under 1000 dollars, you have yourself a massive adoption rate and support for the platform.

The vision pro does all of that, but way over priced. You dont need that idiotic front facing screen with the eyes. You dont need aluminum in the unit that adds weight and makes the device unconfortable to use for long periods of time and increases the cost of the device and this idea that it will replace computers...is a far fetched dream.

You market it as an entertainment device. As steve jobs said, "Headphones for the eyes" and you have a system that flies off the shelves at 1000-1500 dollars MAX.

3500 Dollars is the cost of a used car, or months worth of rent and bills. No sane person who isnt wealthy is going to buy something like that.

Im an early adopter and im far from wealthy and yes if i had the money id buy an apple vision pro today if i could. But i live in the real world with real bills to pay and as much as i love AR/VR tech it doesnt keep a roof over my head. It does me no good owning an apple vision pro if im out in the street using it.

If John Turnus is smart, he wont kill the line, but will put out a lower cost affordable version of it. I truly hope he does. I do think the tech is amazing and will EVENTUALLY make its way into every day use...but thats never going to happen at 3500 dollars.

 

[maflynn]

and retailing for $1999.

It won't sell like their 3500 model. 2,000 is priced beyond what most consumers will be willing to pay and truth be told, it seems both the industry and consumers have moved on from VR headsets.

 

[kcwookie]

I write this as I begin my day. I use my AVP nearly daily as a laptop replacement. I prefer it to a laptop, especially when I’m away from home. I have a M5 Mac Mini with a 43” display and my AVP gets more use.

I know the device has haters but they don’t have one with sweat stains from extended use. I don’t really care about another expensive entertainment device. I want my AVP because of all the benefits it give me working on public transportation or in my cube. It lives up to my expectations and it was worth the money. I’m looking for a reason to upgrade, but there is not enough there for the M5 version.

Glasses are not going to have a TB of storage or the benefit of all the cameras this one has. It is expensive because it is not a consumer product. For what it does for me it is cheap. For one this, the privacy it provides me when I work is outstanding.

 

[kcwookie]

Apple should be working on a Vision Neo that has 8K clarity and with only absolutely necessary features and styling, and retailing for $1999.

Like what? What would you give up?

 

[abowlby]

I guess he wants to stick around to ensure the Siri overhaul is a failure, too.

Google's doing it and its software so it will be clean and work as advertised.

 

[Yourbigpalal83]

First off...Ditch the Isite front screen thing completely. Its a waste of resources and power. If people cant tell your in a VR Headset when your wearing it on your face, that is their problem. It drains processing power and battery power. 2, lower the resolution on the Air/Neo models. 4K (2k for each eye) is fine. 120hz is ideal, but 90hz is doable. If you can keep 4K for each eye, wonderful, but this has to be 1500 or below. 3500 dollars is too much pure and simple. 3: Ditch the aluminum. Unless they are using it for heat despiation...its just an extra cost thats heavy. Plastic in this case is fine. Apple still uses Plastic in their airpods...and those are still a high end quality product. Plastic in and of itself works great when its not needed for functional devices. Aluminum or Titanium is wonderful when it serves a genuine function but you have to ask yourself if its worth the aditional cost.

In the AVP case, if it reduces weight and still serves the same function, all the better. My Meta quest 3 is plastic, but it doesn't feel cheep in any way.

Also, i hate to say it but lose some of the functionality. Its nice if it can wirelessly connect to a laptop but leave that for the pro models. The cheeper version should be mostly for intergrating with AppleTV, Music, Photos and Videos and apps and shareplay for shared media consumption. Facetime too.

The idea is, this is a personal media device. You buy this, you go into your VR/AR world to watch a movie, view 3d Photos and videos, have shared interactive experences with other people. You all want to watch the latest NBA Game virtually together and feel like your court side with your friends, great! You all want to go to a virtual movie theater and watch a movie, wonderful. Share a few photos of your recent trip with friends and family...wonderful.

But most people arent going to connect this to a computer and make 3d models for video games and movies with. Most people arent going to edit the latest Avatar movie with this. Thats what the pro model is for, thats why the pro models cost more.

The point is to get a version out for mass adoption for VR/AR interactive content and consumption. Your never going to do that when your entry level is 3500 dollars.

Most people dont need a 1600 dollar entry level macbook pro for every day use. Thats why they have the air and now the NEO. The neo is selling out because its the right value at the right price.

Same idea here. It can be done. Meta's doing it, problem is they dont have the app ecosystem or apple exclusive apps like music, apple tv and messenger apple does.

 

[Brother Cavil]

The point is to get a version out for mass adoption for VR/AR interactive content and consumption. Your never going to do that when your entry level is 3500 dollars.

But will there be mass adoption? Meta's headsets are considerably cheaper and they don't sell well. Every person I know who has a Vision Pro or Quest says they don't use it much, if at all. I don't think the problem is price. The problem is that 98% of the public isn't interested in this computing form factor and I don't see anything changing that anytime soon.

Most people dont need a 1600 dollar entry level macbook pro for every day use. Thats why they have the air and now the NEO. The neo is selling out because its the right value at the right price.

Same idea here. It can be done. Meta's doing it, problem is they dont have the app ecosystem or apple exclusive apps like music, apple tv and messenger apple does.

Meta's sales numbers aren't great. They've sold over 20 million Quests since it first launched years ago. Meanwhile, Apple sells that many iPhones in a month. The estimated number of active daily Quest users is less than 7 million. That's hardly a thriving product. It's a niche at best.

There's a small and very vocal group of VR boosters out there who are convinced that AR/VR is the "next big thing" but so far there's zero indication that is true. Consumers aren't interested in headsets, cheap or expensive, light or heavy, doesn't matter. They don't want to wear them. I don't see anything changing this.