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.
What We Know About the Apple Vision Pro Hardware So Far
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
One can just use a face doily! 🍥🍥
big question: when will see the emoji for this new device??
so 4-5 years after release when the launch model no longer supports the latest OS upgrades or apps; the whole thing gets thrown in the bin and you gotta buy a newer model?
That's going to be a tough
That's going to be a tough
I was wondering about that too, might be a reason to buy some and keep them sealed up in the original box.
I agree...the underlying tech (hardware, the special see-through displays, and software) is astonishing and no doubt took a long time and a ton of money to develop.
IMO, it's just a start... to get a device into customer, and more importantly, developer hands.
The future looks bright!
this is exactly what I alluded to in another thread.
AirPods Pro / Max, Apple Watch, Spacial Audio, LiDAR…
so many things they have released over the past several years are all apart of this headset.
it’s REALLY cool. I HAVE to get it lmao.
Come on now, Apple stores have an acceptance program where they can recycle the components from these devices.
Anyone throwing an old Vision Pro "in the bin" is only being spiteful and petty and attempting to "own" people that otherwise wouldn't care.
Very interesting. Source? I don't perceive flicker in LCDs at 60Hz. Is there some special property of xR that makes this more of a problem? Also, compared to their other work on this, altering brightness to compensate for different frame times seems like a very small challenge. The function doubtless isn't linear, but I also doubt it's greatly complex.
On the contrary - from a physical perspective, it's trivially easy. The light seal is magnetically attached and the headband clips in and out. Replacing them is quick and painless. On the other hand, the software is a big question, and if it's like the ipad, personalized sharing is a nonstarter. I *hope* they have profiles, and it's not implausible, given the price, but I'm not optimistic.
Now, this is really interesting. Porn has driven many major tech innovations. Just the backsplash of that effect has significantly contributed to the "ick factor" of my business. So, Apple hates porn, but if they really block it out, that might be the one thing that can drive enough competition to give them trouble.
I was thinking about this, and in the end I don't think it's going to matter. Apple will block apps that are purely porn, but they won't block "player" apps that have legit "experiences" that aren't porn. Like, they allow VLC, a generic media player, even though it can also be used for porn media. I suspect that this will be enough to keep porn from being a wedge that drives people away.
Even the big porn sites are unlikely to be able to invest enough to develop tech that is sufficiently superior for porn purposes, compared to more generic tech, that it will give them a strong competitive edge. They're more likely to buy in to content-playing toolkits and player apps.
Note, I'm not saying that such superior tech isn't possible, I just think the investment necessary to build it is probably too great for the marginal benefit.
So many impressive parts. The camera system is also fantastic. Also with the Vision Pro having an M2 chip, M3 chip may launch only after the headset launches
yeah tbh… I don’t think this is a product you need to wait for Version 3 for. this is history right here. Version 1 is already INSANE.I’m with you; version 3 feels like a good point to jump in depending on how long they take to iterate new versions. If more than 18 months between releases I may not have the patience
I understand why someone would want to wait, but not this is such a different first gen product. I’m sure Apple will give five-star service to those who have one and if it’s faulty, they’ll replace it. if you want to sell it, I’m sure resale value will be super high.
all of Apple’s products so far have been incorporated into this and all of Apple’s products (except this) are matured…
Most LCDs and OLEDs show each image for the whole frame time, unless they use PWM (pulse width modulation) to dim the display. But PWM is usually measured in hundreds of Hz, so isn't directly perceived as flicker. There are some monitors that are made for gaming that can pulse the screen synchronously with the refresh rate, but they are fairly uncommon, and none allow pulsing and VRR at the same time.
VR screens have to pulse the screen, because if they didn't, whenever you rotate your head you'd see a huge amount of smearing and text would become unreadable until you held your head still again.
Even if using VRR and low persistence were possible, it probably wouldn't be a huge advantage because it would likely only work in a fairly limited range, like 90Hz-120Hz.
Last edited:
That guy is just making troll videos.
One of the people who used it and was shown the court side NBA experience said it was so good he would pay the NBA thousands of dollars a year to see games this way, and he has been court side at an NBA game.
This guy.
Apple Vision
Apple Vision is incredibly compelling, first as a product, and second as far as potential use cases. What it says about society, though, is a bit more pessimistic.stratechery.com
He also has some comments on R1 on how it makes real time operating system possible and what that means. He does agree with the TikTok troll about the man watching the videos which just sounds like none of them have kids and have ever rewatched a video of their child…a very common thing to do.
I've been dreaming about that for years.
About the price: Yes, it's painful, but whiners should still stop whining:
- $3500 is less than half the inflation-adjusted cost of the first Mac, which has 128KB RAM, a single 400KB floppy, and a black&white 512x342 screen.
- $3500 is even substantially less than the inflation-adjusted price of my first Apple II+ (48KB RAM, *no* storage at all, *no* screen- oh, and no lowercase letters!), at $999 - itself a *big* discount from the common $1500 price.
OTOH, the best big-screen TV on the market at $3500 should definitely support HDMI in. And you know it won't. Hopefully inbound video streaming will be good enough that we forgive this.
- $3500 is less than half the inflation-adjusted cost of the first Mac, which has 128KB RAM, a single 400KB floppy, and a black&white 512x342 screen.
- $3500 is even substantially less than the inflation-adjusted price of my first Apple II+ (48KB RAM, *no* storage at all, *no* screen- oh, and no lowercase letters!), at $999 - itself a *big* discount from the common $1500 price.
OTOH, the best big-screen TV on the market at $3500 should definitely support HDMI in. And you know it won't. Hopefully inbound video streaming will be good enough that we forgive this.
Well, to be honest Apple Vision Pro does not work with Mac software, only with iOS apps as well as its own app store‘s apps, obviously. So you wouldn’t have a mac, but more like an iOS device that can virtualize the Mac screen. Moreover, you can only have one virtual Mac screen at a time. That’s because having more screens would require a wifi bandwidth that simply isn’t feasible.
You probably know this already, but just in case…
The device comes with two cables: one you can plug in the power socket for all-day usage, and the other one attached to a battery.
I think that’s M2 and R1 computing power limitation. I’m no expert but logic tells me that 120hz would require 25% more power.
False. In fact I think the demo showed multiple separate Mac screens at the same time, but regardless of that, your bandwidth argument is incorrect. It's conceptually (though not in implementation) like foveated rendering: you don't bother to update as often the windows that don't have the user's eye focus. You could probably get a reasonable result just discarding frames, but I bet they do something slicker.Well, to be honest Apple Vision Pro does not work with Mac software, only with iOS apps as well as its own app store‘s apps, obviously. So you wouldn’t have a mac, but more like an iOS device that can virtualize the Mac screen. Moreover, you can only have one virtual Mac screen at a time. That’s because having more screens would require a wifi bandwidth that simply isn’t feasible.
You probably know this already, but just in case…
Logic might, but not math.
You mean 33%.I don't know this for sure but I suspect the issue is display power, not GPU power. 120Hz requires more juice than 90Hz. ...although, come to think of it, latency issues might be even more of a limitation here. Irreducible latency in the camera pipeline might be putting a hard limit at 90Hz. That could even explain the "special" 96Hz movie mode - with movies you're presumably darkening the environment and not observing it much, so latency problems getting to 96Hz may be ignorable. You don't get motion sick if you can't see the environment not moving properly.
I don’t really buy the cannibalization argument. The fact that it only runs for 2 hours on a iPad-esque interface should tell you all you need to know. If it runs the full macOS I doubt it’d last more than an hour, even less if it runs something intensive. It would also mean that it would have to run macOS within the tracking/gesture interface, which is even more power intensive. Besides, Apple probably wants developers to adopt new AR experiences into their apps and not just slap existing apps onto a familiar interface and call it a day.
1. Spatial Audio from Airpods
2. Lidar from iPhone
3. U1 Proximity Awareness from multiple products
4. Continuity from iPhone
5. Facial Recognition from iPhone
6. Motion and Geo sensor from Watch
I doubt running the full MacOS would double power use over "native" mode, but even if so, so what? The point is to use this instead of a Mac. Right now, you have zero ability to do that. If instead I can use it for only an hour on battery, but indefinitely tethered, that is a HUGE improvement. For that matter, I could bring a big battery pack instead of the Mac itself and then I could use it for longer untethered. That's a LOT of extra flexibility.
It would, among other things, solve the problem of trying to get work done in economy class. Especially since more and more airlines are providing power at the seats now.
The argument about native apps is irrelevant; that will happen regardless, assuming enough of these are sold, because people will want the improved experience. How do you get enough of them sold first though? This would help (though I don't think it'll need help; it may take a few years but it's going to be huge).
I think this thing would *fly* off the shelves at $4499 for 32GB RAM, 1TB SSD, full Mac experience included (presumably in a VM). Even 16GB RAM at that price. Even at $5k I'd be hard pressed to say no to that, and I'm cheap.
Now that I think of it... I can easily imagine Apple selling an "upgrade" to the base unit for $500 or even $1k just to allow it to boot MacOS in a VM. It would do huge business. (You'd still want more RAM though, at least.)
Eyes use muscles to focus, the danger is to focus to long on the same distance so that these muscles strain in the same position. The same effect when keeping your arm in the same position for to long, aka the gorilla arm. Best way to avoid this is to take pauses and focus on other distances, it can even be trained to some extend.