Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.


Apple's Vision Pro headset has left many early adopters expressing dissatisfaction over its weight, limited use cases, and sparse software ecosystem, according to a new article from The Wall Street Journal.

vision-pro-video-recording.jpg

In the year following the device's launch, user feedback suggests that it has failed to meet expectations for comfort, software support, and social acceptance. In interviews conducted by The Wall Street Journal, early buyers of the Vision Pro reported that the device now sits largely unused due to a range of practical issues. Dustin Fox, a real estate agent in Centreville, Virginia, said:



He explained that he was initially drawn to the device's novelty and potential productivity benefits, but found the physical experience of wearing the headset unsustainable for extended sessions. The Vision Pro weighs approximately 600 to 650 grams (1.3 to 1.4 pounds), depending on the light seal and headband configuration. This is considerably heavier than typical head-mounted consumer electronics, and the front-heavy distribution has become a recurring complaint.

Tovia Goldstein, a 24-year-old based in New York City, said that his experience watching content on the headset was also limited by discomfort and an insufficient number of apps to make it worthwhile.



When he retrieves the device to investigate any new apps that have been added to the visionOS App Store, he noted the lengthy startup time as a deterrent, citing the need to connect the external battery and wait several minutes before the device is ready to use.

The Vision Pro debuted with high visibility, including a flagship store event in New York City attended by Apple CEO Tim Cook. In the weeks following the launch, users were spotted wearing the headset in public spaces such as malls, restaurants, and sports events, but several buyers said that public enthusiasm quickly diminished.



Fox said that he considered selling his Vision Pro, but resale values had fallen significantly below the original price.

Another early adopter, Anshel Sag, a technology analyst based in San Diego, used the Vision Pro for inflight entertainment but eventually abandoned it due to social discomfort and practicality issues.



The Vision Pro's travel case, sold separately for $199, is also large; it measures in at roughly 12 inches by 9 inches by 6.5 inches.

Anthony Racaniello, a media studio operator from Philadelphia, attempted to use the headset in the workplace and during air travel but experienced both social alienation and practical challenges. During one nearly six-hour flight, he said a flight attendant ignored him during beverage service.



He later sold his Vision Pro for $1,900 — a 46% loss from the original purchase price — and said he did not miss it.



Yam Olisker, a 20-year-old YouTuber from Israel, flew to New York to purchase the Vision Pro at launch and obtained Tim Cook's signature on both his iPhone and the Vision Pro box.



That being said, he does not regret the purchase and enjoys watching movies with his Vision Pro, especially 3D films like Metallica, which he said makes it feel "like you're at the concert." Nevertheless, the weight remains an issue, and he has to lie in bed to mitigate its effect when watching movies.

Although Apple's work on a substantially enhanced Vision Pro model has apparently stalled, there are strong indications that the company will release "an incremental update to the product with limited changes to its physical design," such as a chip upgrade, according to The Information. Corroborating this, Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo and Bloomberg's Mark Gurman have said that a more iterative second-generation Vision Pro is in active development, adding the M5 chip and little else.

This updated model is expected to reuse most of its components from the first-generation Vision Pro to offset the surplus inventory in Apple's supply chain. Gurman said the refreshed device could launch between fall 2025 and spring 2026.

Article Link: WSJ: Some Apple Vision Pro Buyers 'Feel Total Regret'
My Vision Pro works in exactly the context I had envisaged, as regards its potential as a replacement for a desktop or laptop computer. It has a tiny footprint that allows flexible and convenient use. I also use a foldable bluetooth keyboard with integrated mouse pad, because the natural interface for typing on the Vision Pro is not suitable for volume text - and all too often it is not convenient to rely on dictation. For example when one is not entirely alone. The keyboard fits neatly into the Vision Pro case.

The only negative comment I would make is that, in my view, the Vision Pro would have been better as a portable Mac OS device rather than being based on iOS. The decision to base it on iOS seems vaguely bizarre. Perhaps there was some anxiety that the Vision Pro would piratise/parasitise MacOS device sales. That said, given the hardware convergence, presumably the option remains for the Vision Pro to boot up in MacOS instead, in which case hopefully some 3rd party "Parallels" equivalent will step in.

Otherwise this article falls rather short of the mark. There are always going to be people with buyer's regret, particularly in the case of this sort of expensive personal gear. What a shame to have dedicated an article to glorifying the whiners and whingers - although probably the author had an axe to grind?
 
I like mine and can wear it for hours at a time. I like movies in it, but don't use it for that much because a lot of the streaming available to it, is stuck at 1x playback, and at 1x I want to be doing other things and it's not built for that. I use it for productivity at work and there the limitations are the startup and shutdown costs as well as the limited batter life.

If I were apple I would prioritize the following:
- tiling apps for multi-tasking
- getting phone mirroring like the Mac has working
- Speed up getting it from in someone's bag to in-use (especially for glasses wearers)
- Speed up getting it from in use to in someone's bag (especially for glasses wearers)
- increase battery life.
 
That being said, he does not regret the purchase and enjoys watching movies with his Vision Pro, especially 3D films like Metallica, which he said makes it feel "like you're at the concert."
I went to the apple store and watched the Metallica concert sample footage. It wasn't just like being at the show, it was like being on stage with the band.

If there was a full length U2 concert from the Sphere available I would buy an AVP today. I hope a lot more content becomes available soon.

One limitation though is the 180° angle of view. It really needs to be 360° to be true VR. Baby steps, I know. I should be happy with what is available now and be patient as the technology matures.

If I could get a used 1TB model for $1,500 or less I might be tempted to buy.
 
I went to the apple store and watched the Metallica concert sample footage. It wasn't just like being at the show, it was like being on stage with the band.

If there was a full length U2 concert from the Sphere available I would buy an AVP today. I hope a lot more content becomes available soon.

One limitation though is the 180° angle of view. It really needs to be 360° to be true VR. Baby steps, I know. I should be happy with what is available now and be patient as the technology matures.

Your local Apple stores still have it on display? Both of mine took it down months ago.
 
I don't understand the "regret".

1. You knew before buying it that it was a $3,500+ headset that runs iPad apps.
2. You knew before buying it that it was heavy, awkward, isolating, nausea-inducing, and tethered to the wall.
3. You knew before buying it that it would not and could not ever be a mass-market product, which means little-to-no developer adoption, little-to-no content, and little-to-no renewed interest from Apple in terms of software updates.

There is no excuse for regret here. There was no "maybe" it would be a good product. It is a terrible product, that never should have shipped. It only shipped because Tim Cook said "ship it" after being shown a demo of visionOS which is meant for a totally different product and form factor.

The glasses, with real passthrough and AR-software is what Apple was building. They created the headset to demo it, because the hardware for the glasses is nearly impossible to this point. The fake video passthrough with all of its nausea-inducing latency and expensive camera suite was for simulating AR. It was never meant to be a product. But the very ill-advised leadership at Apple decided to package it and ship. All of this was documented in the press by anonymous Apple engineers in the run up to launch, you can go read about it for yourself.
 
oh really because up until now I have yet to see a single negative post about it. good job WSJ 👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏 riveting journalism
Why do you believe “negative posts” are related to buyer’s remorse?

It is possible that a product can get great reviews and consumers have buyer’s remorse…because nothing in that genre is worth a $3500 starting price.

Yes, I’ve used one in my home environment. Awesome experience. Nowhere near $3500 awesome.
 
  • Like
Reactions: turbineseaplane
The AVP forum here on MacRumors is mostly a graveyard. When the ground zero for people who feel a pressing, obsessive urge to celebrate Apple at every turn can't find reasons to talk about the product, the smell of death should be apparent.

I do assume Apple will rescue the concepts eventually and leverage them into a different, far better conceived and interesting product or products. Just not in anything like the current form factor which will be taken out back and quietly knifed.
 
I think AVP is 2 device generation away from being more acceptable, for both form factor and pricing.
Two generations might be five-six years away, so the OG is a stop gap device meant for early adopters with deep pockets.

For obvious reasons, apple couldn't market it that way though, lol. I learned my lesson with the first iphone.

I am curious how many people bought an AVP and left it in the factory seal hoping for a big pay day selling it as a collectible in 10 or 20 years. It will be interesting to see if the "investment" pays off? I guess there's still time to do this since the first generation is still available to buy...
 
Last edited:
The two people I know that bought it sold it after several months; one of them a coder at the spaceship.



The concept is garbage, and therefore the device is too, by extension
Yep, 100%. I’ve bought a couple of models of Meta’s headsets over the years and have always felt huge regret for spending my money —however little compared to Apple’s headset— and having it just sit there and stare at me. The concept is very intriguing, but it’s just not practical. So happy I was able to stop myself from buying it when the hype was high.
 
I don't understand the "regret".

1. You knew before buying it that it was a $3,500+ headset that runs iPad apps.
2. You knew before buying it that it was heavy, awkward, isolating, nausea-inducing, and tethered to the wall.
3. You knew before buying it that it would not and could not ever be a mass-market product, which means little-to-no developer adoption, little-to-no content, and little-to-no renewed interest from Apple in terms of software updates.

There is no excuse for regret here. There was no "maybe" it would be a good product. It is a terrible product, that never should have shipped. It only shipped because Tim Cook said "ship it" after being shown a demo of visionOS which is meant for a totally different product and form factor.

The glasses, with real passthrough and AR-software is what Apple was building. They created the headset to demo it, because the hardware for the glasses is nearly impossible to this point. The fake video passthrough with all of its nausea-inducing latency and expensive camera suite was for simulating AR. It was never meant to be a product. But the very ill-advised leadership at Apple decided to package it and ship. All of this was documented in the press by anonymous Apple engineers in the run up to launch, you can go read about it for yourself.
Pretty easy, really. Because until you sit down and use it for an hour it sets in: “realistically, when am I going to get honest, real-world use out of this?”

That why the two people I know 1) returned it, and 2) never use it.

Most electronics users are pragmatic. “If it works, it works”…as opposed to the people here who are more cult-like and are serial apologists…like yourself.
 
No, people fall for Apple’s marketing and think they’ll get used to it with time or that the software ecosystem will improve substantially.

Apple marketed it as “family dad recording his child’s birthday party with it”, not as an early-adopter tech nerd product.
What don't people understand about "People buy what they like when they like"? If you don't want a product, you don't buy it, right? If a product of any type makes people happy, they buy it. If a nerd wants to buy this or any other item, they are looking down if people like you say it's stupid, etc., if they buy it?
 
Apple should never have tried to fit all that into a headset. It should have been an iPod-type device in the pocket, with a thin fibre optic cable to the headset. Much more comfortable and it would mean you could upgrade the iPod part and retain the headset, upgrading every couple years. But no... Apple is a pain in the neck.
 
A solution looking for a problem.
This was my thought from the day it was announced.

The travesty is Tim Cook dedicating resources to his signature boondoggle while Apple software, Siri, and AI have been left painfully behind.
Exactly. Introducing a new product line to the ecosystem is a long term commitment, and now Apple is stuck supporting it for years.

Doing it, no less, at a time when the industry is shedding jobs by the thousands, making the lives of those who remain misery with unsustainable workloads and mandatory RTO chipping away at work-life balance.
 
Hopefully Apple can get the price down and reduce its weight. Even then in the current form, there will not be many customers. Don't think it is something people will be wearing on their head for long periods. AR glasses will be the future and Apple should try to launch them as soon as possible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mganu
The glasses, with real passthrough and AR-software is what Apple was building. They created the headset to demo it, because the hardware for the glasses is nearly impossible to this point.

Dumb question: HUDs have been in fighter planes, commercial aircraft, and passenger vehicles for years now. Why is it "impossible" to bring this to a practical set of glasses?


EDIT Dumber question - why don't we hear more about products like this?


 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Fara82Light
Imagine having to use OLED display with PWM daily. Yeah, right. We all do.

And now imagine having to use 2x OLED display with PWM for each eye. And you get Apple Vision Pro.

Multiply it by old saying from our school days, “To protect your eyes do not sit close to your TV!”. And imagine having two TVs+powerful wireless transmitter+CPUs all close to your brains and eyes. You get AVP again.

I mean I love progress but if people reporting nausea and eye strain just after 15-30 minutes, is it really progress?

Back when I was kid I thought “ooohh boi can’t wait for 2025 to get rid of this ugly dim LCD monitor and get something nice”. And now I feel like “TOO MUCH!!! Stop it”.

I think there is certain degree to which computing may enter our lives.
20 years ago Internet was an escape from the real world. And now we escape to real world away from the Internet
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.