Your Mac and Apple Vision Pro: What You Can Do (and What You Can't)

[doelcm82]

It's not just that, and it may seem trivial for some, but my wife's first remark on seeing this was about her hair and makeup. You are going to take these off with mussed up hair and red circles around your eyes, I've used VR goggles long enough to know this fact. These aren't going to be breakthrough until they are the size of glasses, which is why IMO Apple should have released a smaller, more glasses-like AR/virtual screen unit. I'm not even sure why they are pushing for the VR side of it.

I remember rumors about Apple Glasses (iGlasses) back when the iWatch was still a rumor. I remember thinking that I didn't wear glasses (since I had Lasik) and I didn't wear a wristwatch (since my phone was always with me), so these were two products I would pass on.

I changed my mind about the Apple Watch. And I do wear glasses again.

Those early iGlasses rumors had regular-looking glasses superimposing text and graphics on the real world. Some rumors had these images beamed directly into your eyeballs with lasers or something.

My guess is that the technology to make this happen isn't close to ready, and their efforts in that direction resulted in an un-Apple experience for the users. They would be limited to basically an Apple Watch's functionality.

The experience of having apps, displays, and UI elements appearing solid in front of you in your real world is amazing and intuitive. I haven't used Vision Pro yet, but being able to grab a browser window on the Quest 3 with my hand and position it somewhere else in the room just feels right. I think you're going to have a hard time convincing Vision Pro users to give up the experience (once they've had it). Apple will find ways to make it lighter and more comfortable and more affordable, but I don't think they'll be able to fit all the cameras for eye tracking and hand tracking in a device the size of eyeglasses. I don't think they'll be able to display app screens and UI elements that look solid and steady and at the correct distance by superimposing them on your actual vision. Maybe they'll figure this out. I just don't see the path.

If they are to succeed it will be by convincing people that it really is useful, so that when the next thing rolls around we'll be able to say,

Look at Apple Vision. When it first came out people were saying it would flop because no one would want to use it.

To which the naysayers (for the new device) would respond,

But this is different. Apple Vision had obvious and self-evident uses, and this new thing is ugly and totally unnecessary.

 

[G5isAlive]

Pretty casual brush off. But the point is absolutely valid. This is one of several significant hurdles to adoption. Of course gamers won’t care. But Apple isn’t after gamers. They’re after your mom. Look at the promo videos. They’re not targeting this at kids and gamers.

Not sure why you replied to me with this. I never said Apple was targeting kids and gamers. Clearly not. My mom? Alas she is no longer with us. I think they are targeting me. Regardless of my gender. They are targeting people that can afford to not use the AVP to replace their computer, or replace their iPad, or their phone, but complement them. The right tool for the right job. It's like the threads, should I buy an iPad or a MacBook. I own both. Similarly I don't think they are targeting people that would ONLY use this or need to use this for 8 hours a day. It's for occasional use, when it makes sense.

Sure its a valid point to say my brother wont use one because he is in court most of the day, or my sister if I had one wont use it because she likes her blown out hairdo, or my wife wont use it because she always falls asleep during movies. All valid points of who wont use it. But so what? It doesnt mean no one will use. it, and thats my point.

To the list of those that wont use it we can add you. for whatever your reason is.

btw, nothing about their promos says to me they are targeting moms exclusively, or even really at all. Please point me to what you mean. I see them targeting intelligent individuals with the means to buy this.

 

[arkitect]

Lol, I totally agree. Look, the VP is an initial product meant to get consumers excited and devs working on killer apps, I don't think anyone with half a brain expects it to be the next iPhone in 2024. I personally AM excited about it, rather I'm excited about what Apple can turn it into in 3-5 years and am looking forward to buying an iteration sometime in the future.

Edit: One thing to add, we are talking about a $3 trillion company with shareholders (myself included), so when they release something like this they really should have a clear vision on how they see it evolving. I think that's where I have issues, I'm not seeing a clear vision from Apple, if anything this feels like Google throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks. Is it a VR journey, is it meant to eventually supplant our iPhones and be worn all day, etc etc. I get that a lot of these questions can't really be answered well, and apps and paradigms get invented which completely change the way a device is used, but it would be nice as a shareholder to get a sense of *what* this is evolving towards or if this is the finished product.

👍
That sums my own thoughts very well.

For me it is similar to the launch of the Apple Watch.

No one — least of all Apple knew at heart what it was at its little silicon heart… No one.

They tried fashion accessory.

Well, turns out there are only so many solid gold pieces of disposable tech you can sell, even if you are Apple with a little booth in Harrods…

Then developers started moving towards fitness.

Tim Cook fell to his knees shouting Hallelujah! and finally a use was found.

The Apple Vision Pro is right now a solution looking for a problem to solve.

Will we the users and developers turn up again and save Apple's bacon?

I'm waiting to see.

 

[G5isAlive]

I bought the iPhone day one. Loved it. Understood its limitations; but more importantly, clearly understood its benefits. I understood it would improve over time. But that didn't diminish all the benefits that v1 iPhone gave me over my Palm Treo.

yeah okay well me too. over my blackberry work gave me. iPhone 1 for the win! But I understand those that say it wasn't for them until iPhone 4. To them I always say there wouldn't have been a 4 if not for people like me (and you) who saw the promise in iPhone 1. The same is going to be true for AVP 4.

 

[kiensoy]

Wait, if you can only mirror the built in Mac screen, then what is even the point like wouldn’t you see the same thing without wearing a clunky thing on your head, just not as „big“? Or am I misunderstanding it.

Guess it also depends on what field you are working in but not once in my life did I think „damn, I wish my screen for work was bigger!“ and I used to do a lot of Excel and wrote my thesis on a 12 inch MacBook back in the day 😅 For me (personally) this „wish“ only applies when I consume entertainment media

Not only will you be looking at the same screen but it will be lower res. The Vision Pro has a 4K screen per eye but in reality you will have extra stuff in the periphery while in mixed reality meaning the Mac’s mirrored window will be something like 2K or less. My MacBook Pro is 3.5K. “But it will be bigger!”

 

[doelcm82]

And that's fine. If you were the lone judge of "killer app", it's all decided for everyone.

For me though, THIS (mobile super-sized Mac screen) is a "killer app." I'm hoping Vpro will do that one thing really well.

For someone else, something else it can do will be their killer app.

My judgement and someone else's judgement of "kliller app" is just as valid as you seeing no killer app. And that's fine for all of us. It appears this product is not for you. That doesn't mean it's not for anyone. There's probably someone out there who may see it as the most important product for THEM, even above the "my precious" one.

All these threads fill with these camps where one group seems to desperately want to convince everyone else that Vpro is not for anyone... and another group chimes in with how they see things differently. But there's no room for different opinions: Vpro is not for anyone or Vpro is for everyone... it's a complete dud that no one will buy or it's the next iPhone. There seems to be little room for anything in between the two extremes... which is very likely where MOST people would put themselves... especially those who recognize that all extremist opinions either way are still built atop speculation on vapor for a product that no one has good to try yet (who can freely talk about the experience).

Vpro haters: HATE IT! It's awful
Vpro lover: LOVE IT! It's the greatest
And the rest of us: stand by, see for yourself and pass judgement on the actual product, whatever it is... and whatever it can actually do.

For me the killer app will be continuity, which may not be all that at first. I'll be able to copy from the virtual Mac screen and paste into an app on Vision Pro. I'll be able to drag a Safari window out of my Virtual Mac screen and have it exist as a separate window, or re-open the site seamlessly in a Vision Pro Safari window, so that it seems as if I dragged the browser window.

 

[spinedoc77]

And that's fine. If you were the lone judge of "killer app", it's all decided for everyone.

For me though, THIS (mobile super-sized Mac screen) is a "killer app." I'm hoping Vpro will do that one thing really well.

For someone else, something else it can do will be their killer app.

My judgement and someone else's judgement of "kliller app" is just as valid as you seeing no killer app. And that's fine for all of us. It appears this product is not for you. That doesn't mean it's not for anyone. There's probably someone out there who may see it as the most important product for THEM, even above the "my precious" one.

All these threads fill with these camps where one group seems to desperately want to convince everyone else that Vpro is not for anyone... and another group chimes in with how they see things differently. But there's no room for different opinions: Vpro is not for anyone or Vpro is for everyone... it's a complete dud that no one will buy or it's the next iPhone. There seems to be little room for anything in between the two extremes... which is very likely where MOST people would put themselves... especially those who recognize that all extremist opinions either way are still built atop speculation on vapor for a product that no one has got to try yet (who can freely talk about the experience).

Vpro haters: HATE IT! It's awful
Vpro lover: LOVE IT! It's the greatest
And the rest of us: stand by, see for yourself in a few weeks, and pass judgement on the actual product, whatever it is... and whatever it can actually do.

Personally, I'm just as ready to turn pessimist if it DOESN'T do this one thing well as I am to remain leaning to the optimistic side based on what I know about the vapor right now.

Yeah absolutely, I can only opine on "MY" personal opinion of a killer app. Let's not forget I'm Macrumor's official spokesperson for foldable screens, in that paradigm you have a tablet sized screen that folds to fit into your pants pocket, and that functionality regularly gets flamed by almost everyone else on MR. I totally get having a 130" screen (or whatever the spec is) on a headset pretty much anywhere you are, I really do. It also would be a killer app for me if it was comfortable and convenient, which the VP doesn't look like it will be for me, but again just personal preference. I guess for me it's that I don't see what Apple is seeing, I don't get where they are going with this product outside of what other VR/AR headsets accomplish. What else I could get, besides specs and the most refined product, that I wouldn't get from any other VR/AR headset. If anything the VP has me considering other headsets for the functionality that I personally find important.

You keep putting many of use in to either the Vpro haters or Vpro lovers category, you need to take a step back and realize that it's more likely that most of us are somewhere in the middle.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Yeah infinite monitors, no. But I think people expected infinite Mac app windows, which might be possible now or soon with native Vision apps. And I’m assuming it’s possible because if you’re not looking directly at a window, then it doesn’t need to be rendered completely or at all. So maybe it will be possible with Mac apps too eventually.

But as far as multiple virtual Mac displays, only one display is possible now if it’s only using Airplay since Airplay only mirrors. But it might be possible now or soon to get as many virtual displays as the Mac would normally support (non-virtually), not using Airplay. Not sure if Sidecar is a different protocol, but as you said, it exists for iPad so there may be something similar for VP, now or soon. A cable would be ideal for the best latency free connection, and to maximize the number of displays. Apple might have to make the cable that connects VP to Mac though. Hopefully that would also power the VP. Would need to plug a MacBook into power for long sessions.

This makes me envision a Mac app, that runs on the horsepower of the Mac when used with Vpro. In this app, it renders the view that looks just like the Vpro "spatial view" in which many Mac screens running on many Mac cores are dynamically updating. There's some communications between this app and Vpro to share with Mac, where user is looking, what hand gestures are in play, etc to basically simulate the Vpro view on that Mac screen... and simulate interacting with Vpro on that screen.

All of this seems plausible to then render on a single Mac screen to me. Is there a Vpro UI simulator for Mac now and does it present a Vpro-like view on a Mac screen already so that developers can get their apps working well for Vpro?

If so, then, that one Mac screen which- on the Macs flat screen- takes on the 3D depth of the Vpro view, is air-played to Vpro. I wonder if that basically creates the illusion of multiple Mac screens being updated at the same time while still throwing only one Vpro view from the Mac to Vpro.

I suppose the tech challenge is not in what was just described but mixing the organic Vpro apps into that Mac-generated Vpro view too. Otherwise, the above seems plausible to me, leaning on the horses of the Mac to then render a simple 4K "video" of the Vpro view to Vpro.

There's probably a big flaw in this idea that I'm missing. Else, this seems like a way to get multiple Mac screens within the Vpro view without having to overcome pinched Airplay bandwidth.

 

[arkitect]

You keep putting many of use in to either the Vpro haters or Vpro lovers category, you need to take a step back and realize that it's more likely that most of us are somewhere in the middle.

Well said! 👍

I am far too old to live in such a black and white world.

 

[musukosan]

Apple’s most loved and profitable product [iPhone] continues to get larger and more expensive as it matures. iPad Pro and Apple Watch also get larger and more expensive as they mature. It feels strange that we’re expecting [counting on] the game changer platform to get smaller and less expensive [for it to succeed].

I think because the keyword in the name “Pro”. This sort of implies there will be a non-pro version, and presumably cheaper.

 

[spinedoc77]

I remember rumors about Apple Glasses (iGlasses) back when the iWatch was still a rumor. I remember thinking that I didn't wear glasses (since I had Lasik) and I didn't wear a wristwatch (since my phone was always with me), so these were two products I would pass on.

I changed my mind about the Apple Watch. And I do wear glasses again.

Those early iGlasses rumors had regular-looking glasses superimposing text and graphics on the real world. Some rumors had these images beamed directly into your eyeballs with lasers or something.

My guess is that the technology to make this happen isn't close to ready, and their efforts in that direction resulted in an un-Apple experience for the users. They would be limited to basically an Apple Watch's functionality.

The experience of having apps, displays, and UI elements appearing solid in front of you in your real world is amazing and intuitive. I haven't used Vision Pro yet, but being able to grab a browser window on the Quest 3 with my hand and position it somewhere else in the room just feels right. I think you're going to have a hard time convincing Vision Pro users to give up the experience (once they've had it). Apple will find ways to make it lighter and more comfortable and more affordable, but I don't think they'll be able to fit all the cameras for eye tracking and hand tracking in a device the size of eyeglasses. I don't think they'll be able to display app screens and UI elements that look solid and steady and at the correct distance by superimposing them on your actual vision. Maybe they'll figure this out. I just don't see the path.

If they are to succeed it will be by convincing people that it really is useful, so that when the next thing rolls around we'll be able to say,

Look at Apple Vision. When it first came out people were saying it would flop because no one would want to use it.

To which the naysayers (for the new device) would respond,

But this is different. Apple Vision had obvious and self-evident uses, and this new thing is ugly and totally unnecessary.

We did have Google glasses, which had a similar concept of overlaying information onto the real world in a set of very comfortable glasses. I'm not sure why they failed, I think it was probably a combination of too little too soon and Google's penchant for abandoning projects. It's my understanding that they are still around in specialized industries.

I don't know if I necessarily agree the technology isn't there yet, I think Apple just wanted to also have VR in the mix and the technology for VR in small glasses definitely isn't there yet. Again just my personal opinion, but if Apple made a set of glasses with AR overlays coupled with killer apps and devs working on real world applications of having information available at a glance, along with a great virtual display/desktop function, we'd be talking an entirely different story and IMO level of consumer enthusiasm.

 

[Abobrek]

I remember rumors about Apple Glasses (iGlasses) back when the iWatch was still a rumor. I remember thinking that I didn't wear glasses (since I had Lasik) and I didn't wear a wristwatch (since my phone was always with me), so these were two products I would pass on.

I changed my mind about the Apple Watch. And I do wear glasses again.

Those early iGlasses rumors had regular-looking glasses superimposing text and graphics on the real world. Some rumors had these images beamed directly into your eyeballs with lasers or something.

My guess is that the technology to make this happen isn't close to ready, and their efforts in that direction resulted in an un-Apple experience for the users. They would be limited to basically an Apple Watch's functionality.

The experience of having apps, displays, and UI elements appearing solid in front of you in your real world is amazing and intuitive. I haven't used Vision Pro yet, but being able to grab a browser window on the Quest 3 with my hand and position it somewhere else in the room just feels right. I think you're going to have a hard time convincing Vision Pro users to give up the experience (once they've had it). Apple will find ways to make it lighter and more comfortable and more affordable, but I don't think they'll be able to fit all the cameras for eye tracking and hand tracking in a device the size of eyeglasses. I don't think they'll be able to display app screens and UI elements that look solid and steady and at the correct distance by superimposing them on your actual vision. Maybe they'll figure this out. I just don't see the path.

If they are to succeed it will be by convincing people that it really is useful, so that when the next thing rolls around we'll be able to say,

Look at Apple Vision. When it first came out people were saying it would flop because no one would want to use it.

To which the naysayers (for the new device) would respond,

But this is different. Apple Vision had obvious and self-evident uses, and this new thing is ugly and totally unnecessary.

Check out the offerings of XReal (they have been around a few years) Just remember, just because Apple isn’t doing it doesn’t mean that it CANNOT be done. There are many other TRUE AR glasses out there but it won’t be mentioned on an Apple website, such as this because it shows how truly Apple is far behind the competitors.

 

[Abobrek]

We did have Google glasses, which had a similar concept of overlaying information onto the real world in a set of very comfortable glasses. I'm not sure why they failed, I think it was probably a combination of too little too soon and Google's penchant for abandoning projects. It's my understanding that they are still around in specialized industries.

I don't know if I necessarily agree the technology isn't there yet, I think Apple just wanted to also have VR in the mix and the technology for VR in small glasses definitely isn't there yet. Again just my personal opinion, but if Apple made a set of glasses with AR overlays coupled with killer apps and devs working on real world applications of having information available at a glance, along with a great virtual display/desktop function, we'd be talking an entirely different story and IMO level of consumer enthusiasm.

Google Search: XReal

 

[Timo_Existencia]

yeah okay well me too. over my blackberry work gave me. iPhone 1 for the win! But I understand those that say it wasn't for them until iPhone 4. To them I always say there wouldn't have been a 4 if not for people like me (and you) who saw the promise in iPhone 1. The same is going to be true for AVP 4.

Sure. But I'm not a fan of comparing V1 device to imaginary perfect device in the future. And I'm not saying that everyone has to buy the AVP V1. Of course not. I'm convinced that this V1 device gives me immediate benefit. It's better than anything else on the market today in terms of what I need/want it to do.

Yes, my V1 iPhone didn't have copy/paste. But again, compared to what else was on the market? Compared to the phone I abandoned? It was a revolution. Even in V1.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Good points, I wonder, will the VP be "socially acceptable" to consumers with the marketing materials so far?

Meaning people seen using the VP in mixed social company, that they might be will looked at oddly in regards to some addiction, being distracted, just a odd way carrying on conversations with it being worn, irregardless whether its a normal home/work environments. One might even be thought of as impolite wearing it when active socially, rather then only while in a private home/work environment.

I can only speak for me. In social interactive settings, I would not use it. Then again, in social interactive settings, I also will not pull out an iDevice either... not even answer a phone call. If I need to do something on any screen, I excuse myself and then deal with whatever it is privately. Many times, I opt to leave the iDevice behind... in the car so I am as present as possible.

As such, I don't imagine this problem being prevalent. Sure, some people will likely be into the thing to that level, like some people will be at dinner in body but completely absent in mind (social media, texting, etc). But in settings where one is interacting with other people, I have to think they take it off... just like the motorcycle rider will remove their helmet, the diver will remove their mask, the welder will remove the mask, skier's, etc.

I will be personally surprised if it is a lot different than that... but then again, I'm personally surprised at how checked out people can be in social situations (on their phones). I'm surprised when watching major sporting events and seeing people in very expensive courtside seats pretty much not watching the event (eyes on phone). So maybe there is a future NBA championship where most people who have paid thousands of dollars for prime seating are all seemingly "away" in their Vpro. If so, that's their business. Good luck to them.

 

[Lounge vibes 05]

Oh boy, some of the folk here on MacRumours are going to be mad or be walking back (is that the phrase?) their enthusiastic predictions. (Yes, you all know who you are…)

How often have we been told with absolute certainty by the proponents of Apple Vision Pro that we're going to be able to have our Macs connected to:
"Multiple displays!
Huuuuuuuuuge displays!
As many as you want!
An infinity of displays!
Apple take my cash right now!"

Hmmmmm.

To be fair, most of the built-in visionOS apps are going to be quite comparable to their Mac counterparts, so there isn’t really necessarily anything restricting you from using the mirrored Mac display to do a main task, and treating the accompanying visionOS apps as the other monitors.
IE: you could be looking at Final Cut Pro on your mirrored Mac display, but then using the visionOS versions of Safari, Mail, and Messages to accompany it.

 

[Timo_Existencia]

We did have Google glasses, which had a similar concept of overlaying information onto the real world in a set of very comfortable glasses. I'm not sure why they failed, I think it was probably a combination of too little too soon and Google's penchant for abandoning projects. It's my understanding that they are still around in specialized industries.

It always felt to me that Google gave up way too early.

I don't know if I necessarily agree the technology isn't there yet, I think Apple just wanted to also have VR in the mix and the technology for VR in small glasses definitely isn't there yet. Again just my personal opinion, but if Apple made a set of glasses with AR overlays coupled with killer apps and devs working on real world applications of having information available at a glance, along with a great virtual display/desktop function, we'd be talking an entirely different story and IMO level of consumer enthusiasm.

The good thing is that now Vision OS exists. Apple has entered the space and the OS can later be ported/tweaked to work in different forms. I'd love to see Apple develop a google glass type of device. And clearly that tech is already possible.

 

[Realityck]

To be fair, most of the built-in visionOS apps are going to be quite comparable to their Mac counterparts, so there isn’t really necessarily anything restricting you from using the mirrored Mac display to do a main task, and treating the accompanying visionOS apps as the other monitors.
IE: you could be looking at Final Cut Pro on your mirrored Mac display, but then using the visionOS versions of Safari, Mail, and Messages to accompany it.

Do we know that for sure? I thought Vison Pro would present ported apps that resembled the interface depth more closely to iPadOS apps (ignoring spatial axis display of information) then the application depth on MacOS.

 

[WarmWinterHat]

Good points, I wonder, will the VP be "socially acceptable" to consumers with the marketing materials so far?

Meaning people seen using the VP in mixed social company, that they might be will looked at oddly in regards to some addiction, being distracted, just a odd way carrying on conversations with it being worn, irregardless whether its a normal home/work environments. One might even be thought of as impolite wearing it when active socially, rather then only while in a private home/work environment.

I don't think it will be socially acceptable anytime soon. Personally, I won't even use my phone in a social setting, and always lay it face down on the table if it's not in my pocket.

Remember glassholes? That stigma hasn't abated in the slightest, despite 10 years of time.

 

[Timo_Existencia]

To be fair, most of the built-in visionOS apps are going to be quite comparable to their Mac counterparts, so there isn’t really necessarily anything restricting you from using the mirrored Mac display to do a main task, and treating the accompanying visionOS apps as the other monitors.
IE: you could be looking at Final Cut Pro on your mirrored Mac display, but then using the visionOS versions of Safari, Mail, and Messages to accompany it.

OR, just use the Vision OS version of Final Cut Pro

 

[spinedoc77]

Google Search: XReal

Yep! I've been eyeballing these for the past week or so, really incredible tech. They don't stand up to the VP, only 1080p screens and smaller FOV, etc etc, and of course no VR. But at $399 I plan on picking up a set for the virtual screen. Plus they are universal with any DP compatible device. If I ever want to get back into VR, which I really don't after owing a Quest 2 for a while, I would just pick up a Quest 3.

 

[contacos]

My question is: if you can have multiple app windows open placed where ever you want in a 360° field of view and can switch between them just by looking at one, why would you need to mirror more than one display? Maybe I'm misunderstanding how the AVP works in this regard, but it seems to me the only limitation would be RAM? Won't know until it is released and I'm able to try one out in person.

The scenario I am describing seems like it would be similar to having multiple displays or spaces, and the only drawback is the 2D screen on a Mac might seem jumbled because app windows might be stacked on top of one another, but they wouldn't be in the virtual world on the AVP?

This scenario screams neck pain to me to be honest

 

[Timo_Existencia]

Remember glassholes? That stigma hasn't abated in the slightest, despite 10 years of time.

Funny anecdote...I was good friends, at the time, with a bar owner who banned Google Glass in his bar. He got a lot of national press and coverage. I disagreed with him; we spoke about it a lot. In the end, I think he was simply doing a brilliant version of marketing. And, to be fair, he all but outlawed even smart phones in his bar. He refused to provide wifi, and had signs that tried to shame people who were using their phones in his bar.

Unbearable Wearable

 

[CharlesShaw]

I think because the keyword in the name “Pro”. This sort of implies there will be a non-pro version, and presumably cheaper.

That makes sense. The pro models can then continue to get lighter and smaller, as that tech will cost more.

 

[Lounge vibes 05]

I made an edit. Another big gripe is that it's not cross-compatible. If I could live in an all Mac world, I would, but I don't, and can't. My job/company/field (healthcare) is all PC.

Run parallels on the Mac, mirror the Mac to the vision pro, and boom!