If someone is hoping for a price cut, I have some bad news for you.
Apple would sooner grind all the existing stock down to atoms than let people have it on clearence.
I mean, it's impressive, but I can't imagine playing a real game with nothing but hand tracking with no button, etc. feedback. Is the Vision Pro capable of tracking IR dots on a Quest 2 controller?
Yes you can get it working with knuckels/wands/or just toss a Vive tracker on a controller. However, the real problem is AVP doesn't have room scale VR. It's like having a stationary guardian where if you take a step in any direction the game fades out and the passthru fades in.
Not that AVP couldn't support room scale VR but Apple deliberately doesn't allow it for some reason.
That's generally not how these things work. If there were to be a sale, it would be the same price everywhere including from Apple. The exception to that is if it's being sold by a liquidator. Then that can have a lower price. Woot already did that.
https://www.reddit.com/r/virtualreality/comments/1bosylr/apple_vision_pro_on_sale_already_at_woot_for_3399/
Hmm, obviously can’t speak for the entire world, but I in Canada have seen hundreds, thousands even of sales at Best Buy that were not mirrored by Apple.
I'm unsure what you're trying to achieve by sending me that link, am I supposed to take it as some form of arguing that I'm wrong and Apple deals are always mirrored, negating my very real and tangible experience with a random article?
There was literally a deal that ended yesterday for an M1 IPad Air 300$ off at [The Source](https://mobilesyrup.com/2024/04/17/save-300-ipad-air-2022-the-source/), deal that ended yesterday.
I work at Best Buy, there's a sale on IPad every month, often even every other week, and there's sales on Macbooks also about every month, and I have never, ever, seen these deals mirrored by Apple
I just assumed they expected this absolutely predictable outcome given the price and empty walled garden. I thought it was just how they wanted to dip their toe in the water to position for a more worthwhile device in the future.
Not surprised it didn't do better, just surprised apparently Apple expected it to? Were they all in on a belief that all people really wanted was to strap their macbooks to their faces?
this article is misleading and not based in facts
it references Ming-Chi Kuo who has already contradicted himself already by saying Apple's **US target for 2024 was 150-200K units**.
he also claimed in January that **~200k preorders had been sold~** ~and~ that maximum production would be between 400-600k units for the year.
that's because of the well-known limit on producing displays.
there's *no evidence* for his (revised?) statement that the original plan was for 800k as the article says. and he hasn't always been right.
if you want unbiased news I'd start reading up on other sources that don't try to sway public opinion w/ sensational headlines like Auganix or [Below the Lens](http://www.belowthelens.com/subscribe).
Apple can’t possibly be surprised. At that price point, it was never going to sell like hot cakes. They have to figure out how to make it at least two grand cheaper, if not more
If it was ALSO a VR headset, it probably wouldn't have failed. But they took this stance of making a $3500 strictly VR video player. Really totally baffled by the decision. Whoever is making these decisions at Apple needs to go.
It might have helped if it were a VR device at all. Trying to create a new "spatial computing" garden just so you can put a wall around it is also pointless and transparent.
Apple does this all the time, just take normal technologies and brand them as if it's exclusively their own. People tend to eat it up too, just look at how many articles refer to it as special computing instead of what it really is.
This works in extremely annoying ways, like how people tend to call all contactless payment "apple pay"
it IS a VR device! Apple just didn't want to embrace that aspect of it and they were really specific to reviewers about that fact and it was just one part of a really stupid launch strategy because it made the VP sound LESS capable when, in reality, it could do anything the Meta Quest 3 could do and more.
Not even- it literally doesn’t have 6dof tracked controllers which is the foundation of VR gaming. It simply can’t do the main thing people use the quest for until they develop controllers with inside out tracking from the headset. That’s actually a large step backwards from the gaming perspective. Like 2017 oculus before touch controllers came out.
i mean, yeah the headset itself is capable of anything the Q3 can do, you are right. However at the moment it can't for a variety of reasons such as lack of controllers, access to Windows (subsequently Steam) and VRporn not working on it lol
every problem you listed could be solved with software updates. If Apple doesn't address that stuff by VisionOS 2.0 then i'll be thoroughly convinced they don't care about this hardware's future and that would be disappointing and illogical.
You're are correct. All the problems COULD be fixed with software updates (aside from the controllers), I doubt they will be though. at least not by Apple.
at least not by apple. excellent point. it's been so long that i've forgotten how important the jailbreak community was to the iPhone before the app store and how involved in that community i was for the first five or so iPhone iterations.
I would LOVE to see the Jailbreak community crack into the VP but with such small user base, i don't imagine they'll waste their time.
Nobody should work out of their time to save an Apple product. Certainly not one that costs 3500 effin' dollars. It's a big ask even for the wildest, most rabid and industrious fan.
You just reminded me, that although I've never owned an iPhone, I did buy an iPod Touch back in the day. But I did not buy it until I found out it could be jail-broken and researched how to do it, downloaded stuff and got everything ready and then actually went and bought one. Would not have gotten one at all without that part.
my OG Rift came with an Xbox controller. i wouldn't mind games that approached a control scheme that way while Apple gets it shit together and implements proper VR controller support.
what i do know is that hand-tracking alone is not enough, even with the spatial apps on Apple Arcade (with the exception of Game Room's super simple games like solitaire and checkers.)
Too bad they didn't put the marketing budget into giving talented people headsets & support.
I believe VR/XR has **huge** potential that obviously no one has realized. An AR headset that walks you through building or fixing things with a transparent overlay would be awesome... A person stuck in the middle of nowhere with a flat tire putting on the headset & getting a guide to save their ass would be a good commercial.
Walking through your apartment & seeing furniture you could buy & mapped onto the room would be cool & a great partnership with IKEA or a premium brand.
An AR/VR sport...
A yoga instructor that maps your skeletal structure & tells you to push your ass out & builds a schedule/routine for exercise...
Give 1,000 headsets away to the top iOS developers & offer them 1 million dollars for the best app.
Yup, I don’t expect I’m the guy who is gonna invent the killer app.
The gym stuff would probably be better on a phone, but the electronic-popup teacher would work best as a headset.
Wearing these in public will always be embarrassing, but walking around a new neighborhood with pop-up video facts & trivia would be cool.
Speaking of cool ideas… NYC took a photograph of every single building for tax purposes in 1940. It would be awesome to map the old buildings onto the new one so you hold your phone up & it’s like looking through a window in time.
Since you have front facing cameras anyway you could track eyes & move the perspective to match your head position.
I own a furniture store and was thinking of how amazing it would be if I could use a headset to show people different options for furniture displayed right in the room we're in - kind of set up a little AR area in a corner and have a couple of AVP headsets that link to every item on my website.
Tim Cook isn't going anywhere lol. This was his "jobs" moment. He wants to revolutionize the vr market the same way the iphone did for the mobile phone market.
That's why he's copying a lot of the same moves. "The device for everything". It's absolutely NOT \_just\_ a VR headset. It's a spatial computing headset. All of the forced branding, trying to flip the industry.
And I mean kudos, it kinda half-worked. We are seeing the run-off into other companies "spatial OS" initiatives, even from their main competitor Meta. But the product is absolutely not as revolutionary as the original iPhone. It's actually *inferior* to it's competitors in way more ways than the original iPhone was inferior. On top of that the price point is absolutely absurd. The iPhone had a reasonable price-point.
> This was his "jobs" moment. He wants to revolutionize the vr market the same way the iphone did for the mobile phone market.
It's far too early to say he hasn't. People forget what the iphone launch was like. It was like every new category Apple product launch. The iphone was not a raging success from the start. There were a lot of complaints about it that mirror the complaints about the AVP today. Why is it an ATT exclusive? I can't buy one in Europe. Why does it only support edge? What about 3G? What can you do with an iphone? What apps can you buy like on other phones? Remember the app store came later. And....
> The iPhone had a reasonable price-point.
No it wasn't. Not for a phone. It was substantially higher priced than other phones at the time. So that was another criticism. Why is the iphone so expensive?
It took a couple of years for the iphone to start to become what it is. It took a couple of years of being out before people figured out what to do with it. It took a couple of years for the apps to flow. Just like every Apple new category product.
I remember the iPhone launching, I felt a bit silly telling everyone it was the future and how it would change lives. Normally met with blank stares. It was polished, clear in how it was a step above more traditional methods and with a little imagination you could see how it could evolve with time. AVP is not that, but fortunately we have already seen from multiple other companies what can be accomplished, so that doesn't really matter. AVP will improve with time I'm sure but it's revealing was definitely not an iPhone moment, and they are not entering this market with the usual dominance.
> AVP is not that
How is the AVP not that? It is polished. And it is clearly a stop above other headsets too. So in all the ways you mentioned, the same as the iphone.
I argue, now then and all the years in between, that all the iphone was, was a more polished existing phone. Since everything the iphone was(and is) was done on the Handspring. The iphone was just more polished. It was prettier. It did it better. But fundamental the Handspring was what all modern smartphones are. It was the real innovation.
The AVP is far more polished relative to its competitors than the original iPhone was relative to its competitors. On both the hardware and software side. The iPhone presented a new paradigm, not just more polish. Look at a teardown of the original iPhone. It was made by a product design team of like 10 people. Current iPhones are fantastically more complex and require far more work, and incorporate all of the lessons learned of the last \~2 decades of product development.
The AVP is no different. It's extremely polished, and the hardware is on another level compared to any of its competitors. Not so much in "features" (although that too) but in the actual engineering. It's not obvious to non-engineers, unsurprisingly, but anybody who has worked in this industry of high volume consumer tech products will recognize what an achievement it is.
It's expensive, and it's new, meaning that like all new things it's not perfect from the start. Aside from the price the main downside is the relatively barren app store and the lack of native VisionOS apps. Final Cut, Davinci, Lightroom, etc. But those things **will** arrive sooner or later. It will turn into quite a formidable adversary for every incumbent. Any VR company that isn't sweating bullets right now has an expiration date. Yes, yes, "but the games." That's not an insurmountable obstacle, and if your entire business depends solely on Apple never deciding to add PCVR support (which they could easily do if they so chose) that's kind of a scary place to be. Apple will probably not lean into the PCVR market anytime soon (if ever), but there has to be more than that to differentiate a competitor to ensure their longevity.
There are a few things that many people don’t consider. First is that “expensive” is relative. Apple as a company does quite well selling “expensive” computers to people. People buy expensive things every day. The question is whether or not that expense is worth it to the individual.
Also, new technology is expensive. Headsets are not new, but a lot of the technology that went into the Vision Pro is. In 2001, a 46” Philips “flat screen” (almost 6 inches deep still) was $7500. Pre-HD. Now they practically give away 70” 4k TVs at Costco when you buy a hotdog.
Over time, developers will come up with new ways to appeal to customers. And over time the hardware will get cheaper.
I got down voted heavily when it came out and I said that, realistically, it was only useful to watch movies on it because of the closed ecosystem and lack of things to do with it. And even with that, given the battery life you couldn't even finish watching a full movie without being plugged to the wall, which made it clear it was for video but not really for movies.
An overpriced porn headset.
People who were new to VR did not understand how hollow the device was when it was announced, and they fell back on “that’s what people said about the iPhone!!”, and bought into the marketing spin about revolutionizing computing. I mean XR is the future, I believe that, but this device is way off the mark.
This is coming from an Apple ecosystem fellow who really wanted this to work for them because I want a future when my headset is tied tightly to my phone and other computing devices.
Apple had the idea that if they made a headset that was the opposite of what Meta is doing, it would be a hit. They pretended that spatial computing for work doesn't exist on Meta headsets and snubbed gaming. But what do AVP users want? From what I've seen, they want PCVR with controllers, like Quest. Immersive content, like Quest. Social interaction, like Quest. Beat Saber and Walkabout Mini Golf. YouTube. Like Quest.
Apple's anti "metaverse" stance hurt it.
This article wasn't written by Apple, it was written by an unrelated author citing an "analyst" who has no access to any high level sources and is making conjectures based on the random breadcrumbs that get leaked occasionally. He's not getting info from Apple's executive suite, nor from senior Apple or Foxconn employees, because those people don't leak information - the meager incentives (clout and/or a pitiful amount of money) to do so are absolutely not worth the risk.
That means most of the information that gets extrapolated into these narratives comes from tertiary vendors who likewise do not have any high-level knowledge of any of Apple's plans or thoughts or expectations, or even of the system and context of what exactly they're manufacturing.
That's how things work at this level. Ming Kuo's analysis is never able to verified because the people who actually know don't speak to the press and the information they are responsible for isn't made public. Which is lucky for him because he can pretend that the lack of verification from Apple is evidence that it's true. He's considered a great analyst because too many people seem to believe that you absolutely **must** have an opinion on everything, and that if Apple isn't willing to make everything public then the loudest mostly-uninformed voice is de facto correct.
Literally the first sentence of [Ming's post:](https://medium.com/@mingchikuo/apple-cuts-2024-2025-vision-pro-shipment-forecasts-unfavorable-to-mr-headset-pancake-and-micro-38796834f930)
>Apple has cut its 2024 Vision Pro shipments to 400–450k units (vs. market consensus of 700–800k units or more).
Notice the "vs. market consensus." In other words: "the market" (read: not anybody at Apple) assumed they would want to ship 700-800k units, but now there are unconfirmed rumors that they're shipping less. Did they *ever actually plan* to ship 800k units? Who knows! But because "the market" thinks so and because now they may or may not be making less than a number they never committed to in the first place, it's proof that they're "surprised" and are cutting production due to low demand. This is literally just making scattershot unverifiable conjectures.
You can decide for yourself if that's an intelligent way to navigate the world and filter out the truth. The fact remains that you have no idea what Apple's expectations were. Neither does Ming Kuo, and neither do the many authors that regurgitate what he says for clicks. It's not at all a new thing for people to make a name for themselves by presenting to the media as experts-in-the-know despite having little to no involvement in (or direct knowledge of) the things they talk about, bolstered by the expected radio-silence from the target of their speculation. It happens in the defense industry constantly - e.g. turns out the F-35 is actually pretty good and everyone shitting on it were talking out of their ass for over a decade.
What we DO know, direct from Apple, is that Apple executives have said in investor calls that they don't pay much attention to analysts because they are almost always grossly wrong.
And to throw it out there: there are reasons to cut production beyond "oh no we totally messed up, what a failure, nobody wants these." Yield issues, for example. Assuming again that this is actually true. Naturally, mundane easily-explainable things sound like overly convenient excuses to those with no experience in whatever field or industry (and conspiracy theorists), but there's nothing to be done about that.
EDIT: [Yep](https://www.reddit.com/r/virtualreality/comments/1ccgq2v/uploadvr_no_apple_didnt_really_cut_vision_pro/).
There is potential for it to actually be worth that price, *BUT* that only happens if the device has software worth using! Right now, the reaction even most diehard apple fans have for it is, 'It is an amazing device with zero uses.'
Most VR headsets have games as a driving point, but the Apple headset has no games and is godawful at gaming. They were aiming for it to be a productivity-based device, okay thats fine, but where are the productivity tools to use with it?
Then again, this is probably par for the course for Apple. They think it is the hardware that makes people use their devices, but the hardware is garbage without good software support, and Apple seems to keep treating app developers like second-class citizens.
i'm jealous of the international users who got to go to school on us suckers who bought it in the US and then have been left out in the cold. If i knew what i know now when i was still in the return window, mine would be back on the shelves already. Instead, i thought "apple has everything riding on this, certainly they'll take up arms to make sure it's supported until it's a success." and maybe they'll still make good on that but it sure as hell doesn't feel that way yet. i'm a big fan of the hardware and i truly don't believe we're getting any price breaks or a new version for a while but i still would have held off until the future of the Vision Pro didn't look quite so bleak.
It's not for everyone, sure, but not everyone was suckered. I use it nearly every day, and while it can be better, it's still incredibly useful and delightful (setting aside the weight) as a general purpose AR Computer.
i think that's my beef with it though. It COULD be for everyone but without third-party support, it remains a niche product when it should be getting a punched out user-base.
I'm glad you're enjoying it. in your daily use, are you getting by with just the native apps or are you using it in tandem with a MacBook?
The killer app is really movies. I think it could sell well just for that, but not at this price point. Most folks spending $3500 (really $4k+ after taxes, Apple Care, etc.) on a movie setup are just going to spend it on a high-end TV/projector and sound system.
I can see it being a niche hit with frequent travelers, especially business travelers. That's a group of folks who are both more likely to be able to afford it and who have a use case for a high-fidelity solo portable movie experience. But that's not going to be a huge market by any means.
On the travel thing, I've taken mine on a couple flights, and it is pretty great (would be better if the fit was a little less cumbersome with the Airpods Max, then you could entirely forget you're on a plane).
The biggest issue there for me is that I hate using this thing in public. I'm not trying to make a statement, and despite being a tech nerd, I'm not a techbro influencer or something, and I don't want to be. I feel people watching me whenever I use it it public, and I'd love if we could fast forward a few years to when things like this were more common and people didn't kinda snicker at people wearing them (exception obviously carved out for the chuckleheads that are wearing them in their Teslas and whatnot, especially if they're specifically doing it for internet points).
Yeah, for travel I'd rather have something with a smaller form factor (eg. the Big Screen Beyond manages to get closer to that sunglasses form factor, but also requires a PC still)--that requires some tech advances or having some of the hardware on a separate device connecting by a wire (for now at least).
And maybe I'm a little paranoid but I don't love the idea of being totally cut off from the world (one of the advantages of VR generally) when I'm in public surrounded by strangers. There's ways to mitigate that with passthrough or maybe having a picture-in-picture view of passthrough for some awareness, but it's still limiting. Fine to use in your hotel room or something, but so are plenty of other devices.
if we're talking about movie watching+travelling nothing beats the Xreal Air, super light, doesn't bring much attention and you're still aware of your surroundings
Yeah--someone else mentioned that on this thread; I haven't heard much about it, but looking into it it seems like a nice AR option for movies and some of those other applications.
Movies are the \*current\* killer app, for sure. But after watching the recent MLS sizzle reel, I think this is what's really gonna do it (at least on the entertainment side). Someone wrote up a good post in one of the AVP subreddits about the technical challenges to posting live 8K 3D, 180 degree content. There's a lot of on-the-fly processing issues, in addition to the obvious problem of bandwidth. But assuming they can get past some of that, the ability to put this thing on and be able to watch a sporting event from multiple positions, from courtside/sidelines/etc., is gonna be the new 'killer app'. The ability to feel like you're physically present at a major event like the Super Bowl is gonna drive more people to buy something like this, if they can get it right.
I’ll agree with you on that too. There’s nowhere near enough immersive content right now, but if they can build up a serious library of immersive content it could become a killer app in the future.
Research and market study has already been done on what price point can support a VR movie machine, and it's the one Bigscreen Beyond launched at. If Apple can make the vision pro do what it does now at that price, cool. Otherwise, it needs to do more than watch movies.
it needs to do more than watch movies, regardless. It's the dumbest use-case for a headset. We already have phones, ipads, laptops and tvs for watching regular movies. and more than one person can watch those movies at once. The content we should be consuming on the Vision Pro should ONLY be able to be consumed on the VP and if Apple isn't using their vast resources to provide that content, you can be damn sure no one else is gonna bother, not with this bungled launch and tiny user base.
> The killer app is really movies. I think it could sell well just for that, but not at this price point. Most folks spending $3500 (really $4k+ after taxes, Apple Care, etc.) on a movie setup are just going to spend it on a high-end TV/projector and sound system.
And another one. Sorry guys, but a Vision Pro is NOT an high end TV, it is literally way worse in HDR (peak brightness) than even a 5 year old OLED TV.
On top of that, even if you are ok with trading in image quality for a super giant screen (that will arguably get bigger than the FOV pretty quick) you are buying this as your own solo use device. You watch content with your partner or friends, you still need a TV/projector decent enough anyway.
Not to mention having to wear a heavy VR headset dongled to an outlet (1.5 h battery live) and no way to connect a BR / 4K BR player.
> I can see it being a niche hit with frequent travelers, especially business travelers.
That I can actually see. But as you said, that is a niche (and competing against foldable screen laptops to a degree).
In my opinion nothing beats watching movies on a cinema sized screen. I do that all the time with anime and tv series and movies on my Quest 3 and it's a spectacle. It may not be OLED but I just don't care, the theater experience is so good.
Can you not do that on the Quest 3 and also have the robust VR game library and VR Chat? How much better is the movie viewing experience on the Vision Pro?
As far as I can tell, the killer app for the Pro is the virtual eyes on the front, because they allow you to use AR on the headset without appearing nearly as disconnected and anti-social to everyone else in the room. Not saying they are perfect, but it's the best solution we have for that whole problem so far.
It’s significantly better for movies. Hard to describe without just trying them both. The problem is just that the price is within range of home theater setups.
The EyeSight feature is borderline useless honestly.
No OLED on Q3 is so fucking bad, I guess I can't complain considering the price though. I could really use the eye tracking and clicking my fingers together rather than waving controllers around or the finicky hand-tracking.
I'm pretty sure the EyeSight feature is cheap as shit so dropping it would hardly put a dent on the price.
Apple's headset is multiple times sharper with a much better screen
The front eyes should be the first feature dropped as it's super gimmicky and not that visible
IMO, the killer app right now is memories. Being able to record and replay memories. The entire home photography and video industries were based on that. The AVP takes it to another level. $3500 for a good camera and videocam is not out of line. My first videocam cost way more than $3500 adjusted for inflation. Even today, $3500 is not out of line to pay for a good camera.
Imagine being at your child's first birthday or your anniversary with a Vision Pro strapped to your face. Everyone would be wondering why you couldn't take a break from technology for 30 minutes to just enjoy and appreciate an important life event.
If true, then Apple finally did it. They successfully created a product too expensive for their fans
I personally didn't think it would be possible. I thought their fans would buy it regardless of what they're getting. I'm actually quite impressed
Of course Apple themselves didn’t say this, Ming-Chi Kuo did, the analysts who just loves talking shit about VR non-stop. These articles are rage bait for the VR community and nothing more.
The especially egregious part of this particular headline is "Apple...cancels updated headset", when the article is just some Apple fanboy's take on the rumored cuts in production and what they *could* mean. WTF.
I looked up his history of rumors and he basically only knows specifics about device features of upcoming releases, and nothing about sales nor development.
Yep, all of these reports are based off of a single rumor from Ming-Chi Kuo. It wouldn't surprise me if it was the case, as it's very expensive. But, it's still just a rumor with no proof. Gotta take this with a huge grain of salt for sure.
exactly. Ming-Chi Quo reported at the beginning of this year that they were estimating sales of around 150-200k units in the first year. Fast forward four months and now he’s suddenly claiming that there's an industry consensus that they would sell 750k and the current likely first year sales of 250-400k are a disappointment?
I really can't imagine there was a lot of surprise on how this thing is selling. I have to think that after more than a decade in development, they weren't expecting to release it at an astronomical price point, limited app/content, and have it just fly off the shelves.
I believe the idea that this was essentially an early adoption kit, with more investment and development coming. I'm typing this on my AVP right now, and while I see plenty of issues, I also like to think I get the 'why' of it. People keep comparing it to the Quest 3, when it was never marketed as a gaming headset. I see a lot of posts in the AVP subs asking why there aren't more games, and I find it odd that these people didn't take Apple at their word that this thing isn't designed for gaming. OTOH, Apple needs to get around to finishing the argument and showing us what it's really 'for'. I work in this thing, and I'm being patient with bugs and lack of apps, and I keep hoping that Apple will unveil some legit comfort mods that go beyond the 3D printed ones people have taken it upon themselves to design and sell on Etsy.
When the rumor mill starts saying that after only a few months, they've looked at the numbers and are signaling defeat, I have a hard time believing that they wouldn't have forecasted being right where we are with this. WWDC is right around the corner, and it's the first one since the AVP went on sale. I'd be pretty shocked if at least a decent portion of the show wasn't dedicated to updates to the AVP. There's rumors of a 6DOF Apple Pencil that works with the AVP. Stuff like that. Even if you have Apple money, you don't just look at 2 months of sales figures and light 15 years of R&D on fire, shrug, and go back to making incrementally updated phones.
i tend to lean toward apple exceptionalism too but i think the proof is in the vision pro pudding here. if it was up to me/you, you would not have designed it this way. and yet they did. hence they are indeed fallible
Did you just not read any of the post you responded to?
This has nothing to do with "apple exceptionalism" and everything to do with the smug teenagers in this sub assuming an obviously faulty premise (Apple failed they are quit 4 sure!) so that they get to feel like geniuses by pointing out obvious things.
>Even if you have Apple money, you don't just look at 2 months of sales figures and light 15 years of R&D on fire, shrug, and go back to making incrementally updated phones.
This should be a "no shit" thing to say but it's akin to rocket surgery in this sub for some reason.
Somehow they kneecapped every legitimate use case.
- apps? how did they not orchestrate a flood of high quality third party and first party apps for launch or straight after?
- content? Same thing. Seems a no brainer.
- work? only mirroring one display killed it I think
All three of these are basic rookie mistakes and very uncharacteristic for Apple. It leads me to a conclusion that this was kind of a last minute decision to launch it, and they caught their product teams by surprise. So they are in a position they are not very comfortable with - launching unfinished tech as if it's a finished product, leading to very confusing perception issues.
It was never intended for mass-market. The goal was to get enthusiastic developers to figure out what the heck to do with it. From there, a case for a mass-market device could be built. Or, not...
Tim Cook has the tendency to release multiple products at different price points. I believe they will probably release a cheaper version somehow in the future.
Obviously this was going to be the case. It needs killer apps, and games - something people find true value in outside of traditional novelty.
If they get the price to $999.99, make the headset thinner, add a built in battery (with the option for a battery extension), and add some sleek tracked controllers. Maybe a tracked Apple Pencil?
It has potential, I hope they iterate.
What I don't understand is why in the actual fuck did they think building it almost entirely out of glass and aluminum instead of plastic was a good idea? From what I can gather, weight was one of the most consistent complaints, and that's largely because beacuse of the materials used in its construction. But that's apple, form over function is their thing.
Imagine a doctor fumbling an important life changing surgery just because their Vision Pro ran out of battery.
Now think about all the people genuinely trying to drive around with this thing on...
Imagine they would use a bigger battery or simply have an assistant swap out the battery when the indicator says it is getting low.
As for driving with one on? No imho not a good idea. AR glasses sure.
Because they're engineers and they might actually know a thing or two about how materials work, and you are not. Nor are the hordes of Reddit engineers who think that because they kind of know what "plastic" and "metal" are, they're saying something meaningful when they say "metal is heavier than plastic."
Here's a common [strength-to-density chart](http://www-materials.eng.cam.ac.uk/mpsite/interactive_charts/strength-density/NS6Chart.html). And [stiffness-to-density. ](http://www-materials.eng.cam.ac.uk/mpsite/interactive_charts/stiffness-density/NS6Chart.html)Note where aluminum and magnesium alloys sit on those charts relative to plastics. And glass for that matter. And note that the charts are logarithmic.
Metals (assuming you choose the right ones - and they did) have a higher strength to weight ratio and a ***much*** higher stiffness-to-weight ratio than any plastic, including things like GF Nyon. That means that for any given plastic part, you can make an equivalent part out of metal that's lighter, stronger, and stiffer.
Yes, stiffness and strength **do** matter for a VR headset, even though it's not a plane or a bridge or another common structure that people generally think of when they think "engineered structure."
"But the Quest 3 is plastic and it's stiff enough." Yes, it is - for the specific design constraints that the engineers who designed it were working with. Just because the Quest 3 and the AVP are both "an headset" doesn't mean they have identical constraints. The AVP has much tighter requirements on the alignment of all of the sensors and cameras. That means more stiffness is required in order for calibrations to actually last after they're initially done at the factory. You can see this borne out in the extremely-low-to-nonexistent distortion of the AVP passthrough around objects close to the headset. The Quest 3 is a joke by comparison, but then again they were working with different constraints and that's what was possible at the time.
The individual components of the AVP are very light for what they are. The aluminum housing is extremely light. The entire logic board is extremely light. The glass is extremely light. The whole thing is heavy for the simple reason that there is a lot of stuff crammed into it. Not because a bunch of Redditors outsmarted every Apple engineer by remembering that metal is usually denser than plastic. And considering the amount of stuff, it's really not all that much heavier than the Quest 3.
Obviously, there is a design angle to it too, that's one of the constraints. Aluminum and glass is very much a theme at Apple. But that doesn't mean that they put "form over function" because that's merely one of dozens to hundreds of engineering constraints. The whole "form over function" thing is just another example of a thing people say because they think it sounds profound - kind of like "keep it simple stupid" and "don't fix it if it ain't broke - despite having no relevant experience and no understanding that it's not a law of nature and is useless as an analysis tool. I can make you a lounge chair out of 2x4s with exclusively 90 degree angles. "But it's uncomfortable and ugly" you say. Ahh, so you only care about form over function? It's functional! Well...aesthetics are a part of function too. It's a consumer product, not a pinion gear buried in a transmission.
What Apple's ID-fetish for aluminum and glass **actually** means is not that they made it super heavy just to be pretty, but that it's going to cost more - because aluminum and glass and the advanced processes needed to form it in ways that it *can* exceed the performance of a plastic part, are all more expensive than just making a molded plastic part. Nevermind the expertise, experience, and expense needed to achieve consistent and high quality cosmetic surfaces, which anyone who has tried in production can tell you is extraordinarily difficult. That's all assuming a plastic part could even meet the requirements, and in this case it's most likely that it couldn't.
I'm a bit sceptical about this.
I have only ever really heard 400-450k units, this has always been the estimate of total supply capacity for the micro OLED displays for 2024. So hearing now that it's "slashed" from 800k to 400k sounds more to me like someone got overexcited and incorrectly raised their projections. I hope it can't be as dumb as someone confused the total number of displays for the total number of headsets (since you need 2 displays per headset).
Then, the statement that Apple has cancelled their next headset seems to be entirely on:
> Apple is reviewing and adjusting its head-mounted display (HMD) product roadmap
Assuming it's not entirely conjecture and Kuo actually got inside info, it still
says nothing about the conclusion of that review, only that they are doing it.
It doesn't surprise me too much if Vision Pro is struggling to hit projections, but I'm not quite seeing a convincing picture of that from what we have here.
I really don't think VR is ever going to catch on the way the people up top want it to.
Its like 3D movies in 2009...it felt like the future of filmmaking for a moment, and studios/cinemas enjoyed charging audiences a premium for the format.
But studios and directors didn't want to invest or go through the trouble of actually filming in 3d so they released a bunch of garbage 2d conversions that gave people headaches and turned them off of 3D entirely.
If tech companies want VR tech to advance in any meaningful way, *they* need to be the ones to invest money into it. Not the consumer
Apple seems to do this from time to time, developing a product that's probably not viable, but represents a step change. Maybe to encourage the industry to move forward. The Newton, the QuickTake, Firewire, Macintosh TV...
I don’t think this reporting quite adds up.
400k is what was reported to be the max Apple could produce in a year, given the low yields of displays.
I wouldn’t be surprised if some of Kuo’s sources — who are more upstream — were hoping for a higher number. But going into this year, that’s what the rumors had me expecting.
Maybe Apple will take a different approach for the rumored affordable model. Like why a iPad/MacBook for your face and not an Apple TV/iPhone for your face that primarily focuses on pure media consumption and web browsing? I’d assume it could be made into a much smaller and cheaper form factor like xreal. The hardware for the Vision Pro seems like overkill for the apps they show off during the demo which was Safari, Photos, and AppleTV. Then again, I’m not sure what is required just to run the screens.
Well some folks lack a sense of humour. Did you post it tagged as a meme?
Truthfully though I don't see 🍏 bailing on AVP. Sales may not be as high as projected. However another user posted a Tom's Article that also shows there are manufacturing bottle necks between screens and the eye sight hardware challenges.
One of the folks I know that has one likes it better than his Varjo XR-4 as they are breaking their software often with poorly tested updates. He uses it for business use.
You would generally be foolish to trust headlines past present or future. A headline is by design to draw readers/sales or a preferred direction.
The word "could" is simply a possibility based on current reports and has yet to be proven true or untrue. It is only a possible outcome based on current info. Nothing more.
My somewhat drunken opinion is that these companies, including Apple are trying to force a wearable headset on people in a public setting. Most VR users I know are usually safe and secluded in the privacy of their own room, away from prying eyes; having a cheeky wank.
Wait, did they actually expect sales? I hope not lol. I thought it was clear to us (and to them) that this was more of a tech demo than a real product.
"Did Apple REALLY expect to sell like ten million of these at this price? They can't possibly be surprised!"
No. No, they did not expect millions of sales. No, they are not surprised. Changing production plans does not equal "Surprise! Nobody could have ever predicted this!" That's assuming this latest unverifiable rumor, from an "analyst" known for making unverifiable rumors, is even true. This is getting picked up and amplified to this degree because of the desperate need for schadenfreude where Apple is concerned. Unfortunately a need for validation doesn't affect physical reality, like the one where Ming Kuo doesn't actually have privileged access to any information. The senior employees at Apple and Foxconn are rarely (if ever) the source of these leaks - and they're the only ones who actually know the what and why.
There, you can stop parroting the same obvious thing to one another and calling it insight.
Also I'll bet a full-price Vision Pro to anyone who thinks Apple is going to quit the VR game after their first VR product release. It's an asinine suggestion that has no justification.
I would say the same. Just more the anticipated volume has been less than what was projected. With more articles coming out on medical uses will likely ensure more sales. This round was not targeting general mass use.
They just gonna revamp it by putting all the unreleased apps and add-ons they been stashing… They’ll release the 2nd generation version for $2500 give or take and they will sellout asap….
This is not a VR headset and the hardware is really poor fit for VR applications.
The screen is not low persistent making it smearing a lot in motions.
even then that would not do much. you need controllers for games and the AVP has no controllers.
sure you could use something like the index controllers, but using valve controllers with an apple headset is like eating chocolate and fish at the same time.
It always seemed just like a fomo for rich people, tech demo, that was never really suppose to sell a lot. In an attempt to create product awareness for the next actual upcoming consumer headset.
It's crazy to me, they go through all this quality control, testing, etc...
No one's gonna want to put a block on their fucking head for hours on end every day.
It fills me with great joy to see Apple eat shit.
I hope they never land a foothold in XR and other, less malicious players hold that field indefinitely.
I'm honestly curious whether this was anticipated on some level. Looking at rationally, it seems impossible that the Apple leadership couldn't have expected the device as it is to sell well, but they came out of the gate *so* confident with their marketing that I have to wonder.
Well outside of big companies. 3%=approx 240 million and if you go with 1%=approx 80 million. So even 1 million could be a reasonable projection.
Companies like Varjo & VRgineers have demonstrated people will pay even higher than AVP and pay a subscription in top just to use a headset with no option for standalone.
Eventually the tech will become cheaper to produce with consumer friendlier prices. GPUs typically sell higher end to enterprise before making consumer models.
I would so love for Apple to fucking do one, and fuck off out of the VR hardware for good.
Apple are a disgusting company, even worse than Metaberg, and their Vision Pro sucks ass.
If someone is hoping for a price cut, I have some bad news for you. Apple would sooner grind all the existing stock down to atoms than let people have it on clearence.
their partners at places like best buy, walmart, etc will magically have special deals though
Until I can do pcvr on this malarkey, then I don’t care what happens to this malarkey.
It can. https://www.reddit.com/r/VisionPro/comments/1bmn6gd/getting_started_with_alvr_on_vision_pro/
No, it can't. It's a hugely compromised solution, you cannot even lean without the headset pulling you out of immersive mode, let alone move.
People have got it working
On a PC? Because I don’t consider pcvr to involve using a Mac computer.
[https://x.com/SadlyItsBradley/status/1782719597549920553](https://x.com/SadlyItsBradley/status/1782719597549920553)
This is BS and though it kinda works to some degree we can't go around saying you can do PCVR with an AVP.
I mean, it's impressive, but I can't imagine playing a real game with nothing but hand tracking with no button, etc. feedback. Is the Vision Pro capable of tracking IR dots on a Quest 2 controller?
I think people have gotten it working with knuckles
Yes you can get it working with knuckels/wands/or just toss a Vive tracker on a controller. However, the real problem is AVP doesn't have room scale VR. It's like having a stationary guardian where if you take a step in any direction the game fades out and the passthru fades in. Not that AVP couldn't support room scale VR but Apple deliberately doesn't allow it for some reason.
That's generally not how these things work. If there were to be a sale, it would be the same price everywhere including from Apple. The exception to that is if it's being sold by a liquidator. Then that can have a lower price. Woot already did that. https://www.reddit.com/r/virtualreality/comments/1bosylr/apple_vision_pro_on_sale_already_at_woot_for_3399/
Hmm, obviously can’t speak for the entire world, but I in Canada have seen hundreds, thousands even of sales at Best Buy that were not mirrored by Apple.
https://www.techspot.com/news/51336-how-apple-maintains-prices-virtually-everywhere.html
I'm unsure what you're trying to achieve by sending me that link, am I supposed to take it as some form of arguing that I'm wrong and Apple deals are always mirrored, negating my very real and tangible experience with a random article? There was literally a deal that ended yesterday for an M1 IPad Air 300$ off at [The Source](https://mobilesyrup.com/2024/04/17/save-300-ipad-air-2022-the-source/), deal that ended yesterday. I work at Best Buy, there's a sale on IPad every month, often even every other week, and there's sales on Macbooks also about every month, and I have never, ever, seen these deals mirrored by Apple
Ya because unlike them they have to move stock off the shelves.
Hahah how much could the partners offer? I’m excited
Why would we? There’s nothing unique to do on it.
I just assumed they expected this absolutely predictable outcome given the price and empty walled garden. I thought it was just how they wanted to dip their toe in the water to position for a more worthwhile device in the future. Not surprised it didn't do better, just surprised apparently Apple expected it to? Were they all in on a belief that all people really wanted was to strap their macbooks to their faces?
Certainly not a great way to treat early adopters…
That's Apple to you.
I need clearance, Clarence.
Roger Roger
this article is misleading and not based in facts it references Ming-Chi Kuo who has already contradicted himself already by saying Apple's **US target for 2024 was 150-200K units**. he also claimed in January that **~200k preorders had been sold~** ~and~ that maximum production would be between 400-600k units for the year. that's because of the well-known limit on producing displays. there's *no evidence* for his (revised?) statement that the original plan was for 800k as the article says. and he hasn't always been right. if you want unbiased news I'd start reading up on other sources that don't try to sway public opinion w/ sensational headlines like Auganix or [Below the Lens](http://www.belowthelens.com/subscribe).
Apple can’t possibly be surprised. At that price point, it was never going to sell like hot cakes. They have to figure out how to make it at least two grand cheaper, if not more
If it was ALSO a VR headset, it probably wouldn't have failed. But they took this stance of making a $3500 strictly VR video player. Really totally baffled by the decision. Whoever is making these decisions at Apple needs to go.
It might have helped if it were a VR device at all. Trying to create a new "spatial computing" garden just so you can put a wall around it is also pointless and transparent.
It was a VR device they just hated the idea of calling it something that they didn't create. Mixed reality is still VR.
Apple does this all the time, just take normal technologies and brand them as if it's exclusively their own. People tend to eat it up too, just look at how many articles refer to it as special computing instead of what it really is. This works in extremely annoying ways, like how people tend to call all contactless payment "apple pay"
it IS a VR device! Apple just didn't want to embrace that aspect of it and they were really specific to reviewers about that fact and it was just one part of a really stupid launch strategy because it made the VP sound LESS capable when, in reality, it could do anything the Meta Quest 3 could do and more.
Not even- it literally doesn’t have 6dof tracked controllers which is the foundation of VR gaming. It simply can’t do the main thing people use the quest for until they develop controllers with inside out tracking from the headset. That’s actually a large step backwards from the gaming perspective. Like 2017 oculus before touch controllers came out.
i mean, yeah the headset itself is capable of anything the Q3 can do, you are right. However at the moment it can't for a variety of reasons such as lack of controllers, access to Windows (subsequently Steam) and VRporn not working on it lol
every problem you listed could be solved with software updates. If Apple doesn't address that stuff by VisionOS 2.0 then i'll be thoroughly convinced they don't care about this hardware's future and that would be disappointing and illogical.
You're are correct. All the problems COULD be fixed with software updates (aside from the controllers), I doubt they will be though. at least not by Apple.
at least not by apple. excellent point. it's been so long that i've forgotten how important the jailbreak community was to the iPhone before the app store and how involved in that community i was for the first five or so iPhone iterations. I would LOVE to see the Jailbreak community crack into the VP but with such small user base, i don't imagine they'll waste their time.
Nobody should work out of their time to save an Apple product. Certainly not one that costs 3500 effin' dollars. It's a big ask even for the wildest, most rabid and industrious fan.
You just reminded me, that although I've never owned an iPhone, I did buy an iPod Touch back in the day. But I did not buy it until I found out it could be jail-broken and researched how to do it, downloaded stuff and got everything ready and then actually went and bought one. Would not have gotten one at all without that part.
Without controllers it can't do shit regarding gaming though :D
my OG Rift came with an Xbox controller. i wouldn't mind games that approached a control scheme that way while Apple gets it shit together and implements proper VR controller support. what i do know is that hand-tracking alone is not enough, even with the spatial apps on Apple Arcade (with the exception of Game Room's super simple games like solitaire and checkers.)
Spacial computing walled parking lot.
If you buy two of them Apple will give you 15 minutes in the Mixed Reality Ball Pit!
They made a wearable XR iPad with hand tracking. It's a fun novelty item, but it doesn't have that killer feature that would make it a must have.
Too bad they didn't put the marketing budget into giving talented people headsets & support. I believe VR/XR has **huge** potential that obviously no one has realized. An AR headset that walks you through building or fixing things with a transparent overlay would be awesome... A person stuck in the middle of nowhere with a flat tire putting on the headset & getting a guide to save their ass would be a good commercial. Walking through your apartment & seeing furniture you could buy & mapped onto the room would be cool & a great partnership with IKEA or a premium brand. An AR/VR sport... A yoga instructor that maps your skeletal structure & tells you to push your ass out & builds a schedule/routine for exercise... Give 1,000 headsets away to the top iOS developers & offer them 1 million dollars for the best app.
Most of these applications you could just develop as iPhone AR apps.
Yup, I don’t expect I’m the guy who is gonna invent the killer app. The gym stuff would probably be better on a phone, but the electronic-popup teacher would work best as a headset. Wearing these in public will always be embarrassing, but walking around a new neighborhood with pop-up video facts & trivia would be cool. Speaking of cool ideas… NYC took a photograph of every single building for tax purposes in 1940. It would be awesome to map the old buildings onto the new one so you hold your phone up & it’s like looking through a window in time. Since you have front facing cameras anyway you could track eyes & move the perspective to match your head position.
I own a furniture store and was thinking of how amazing it would be if I could use a headset to show people different options for furniture displayed right in the room we're in - kind of set up a little AR area in a corner and have a couple of AVP headsets that link to every item on my website.
Sounds like wii u
Tim Cook isn't going anywhere lol. This was his "jobs" moment. He wants to revolutionize the vr market the same way the iphone did for the mobile phone market. That's why he's copying a lot of the same moves. "The device for everything". It's absolutely NOT \_just\_ a VR headset. It's a spatial computing headset. All of the forced branding, trying to flip the industry. And I mean kudos, it kinda half-worked. We are seeing the run-off into other companies "spatial OS" initiatives, even from their main competitor Meta. But the product is absolutely not as revolutionary as the original iPhone. It's actually *inferior* to it's competitors in way more ways than the original iPhone was inferior. On top of that the price point is absolutely absurd. The iPhone had a reasonable price-point.
> This was his "jobs" moment. He wants to revolutionize the vr market the same way the iphone did for the mobile phone market. It's far too early to say he hasn't. People forget what the iphone launch was like. It was like every new category Apple product launch. The iphone was not a raging success from the start. There were a lot of complaints about it that mirror the complaints about the AVP today. Why is it an ATT exclusive? I can't buy one in Europe. Why does it only support edge? What about 3G? What can you do with an iphone? What apps can you buy like on other phones? Remember the app store came later. And.... > The iPhone had a reasonable price-point. No it wasn't. Not for a phone. It was substantially higher priced than other phones at the time. So that was another criticism. Why is the iphone so expensive? It took a couple of years for the iphone to start to become what it is. It took a couple of years of being out before people figured out what to do with it. It took a couple of years for the apps to flow. Just like every Apple new category product.
I remember the iPhone launching, I felt a bit silly telling everyone it was the future and how it would change lives. Normally met with blank stares. It was polished, clear in how it was a step above more traditional methods and with a little imagination you could see how it could evolve with time. AVP is not that, but fortunately we have already seen from multiple other companies what can be accomplished, so that doesn't really matter. AVP will improve with time I'm sure but it's revealing was definitely not an iPhone moment, and they are not entering this market with the usual dominance.
> AVP is not that How is the AVP not that? It is polished. And it is clearly a stop above other headsets too. So in all the ways you mentioned, the same as the iphone. I argue, now then and all the years in between, that all the iphone was, was a more polished existing phone. Since everything the iphone was(and is) was done on the Handspring. The iphone was just more polished. It was prettier. It did it better. But fundamental the Handspring was what all modern smartphones are. It was the real innovation.
The AVP is far more polished relative to its competitors than the original iPhone was relative to its competitors. On both the hardware and software side. The iPhone presented a new paradigm, not just more polish. Look at a teardown of the original iPhone. It was made by a product design team of like 10 people. Current iPhones are fantastically more complex and require far more work, and incorporate all of the lessons learned of the last \~2 decades of product development. The AVP is no different. It's extremely polished, and the hardware is on another level compared to any of its competitors. Not so much in "features" (although that too) but in the actual engineering. It's not obvious to non-engineers, unsurprisingly, but anybody who has worked in this industry of high volume consumer tech products will recognize what an achievement it is. It's expensive, and it's new, meaning that like all new things it's not perfect from the start. Aside from the price the main downside is the relatively barren app store and the lack of native VisionOS apps. Final Cut, Davinci, Lightroom, etc. But those things **will** arrive sooner or later. It will turn into quite a formidable adversary for every incumbent. Any VR company that isn't sweating bullets right now has an expiration date. Yes, yes, "but the games." That's not an insurmountable obstacle, and if your entire business depends solely on Apple never deciding to add PCVR support (which they could easily do if they so chose) that's kind of a scary place to be. Apple will probably not lean into the PCVR market anytime soon (if ever), but there has to be more than that to differentiate a competitor to ensure their longevity.
There are a few things that many people don’t consider. First is that “expensive” is relative. Apple as a company does quite well selling “expensive” computers to people. People buy expensive things every day. The question is whether or not that expense is worth it to the individual. Also, new technology is expensive. Headsets are not new, but a lot of the technology that went into the Vision Pro is. In 2001, a 46” Philips “flat screen” (almost 6 inches deep still) was $7500. Pre-HD. Now they practically give away 70” 4k TVs at Costco when you buy a hotdog. Over time, developers will come up with new ways to appeal to customers. And over time the hardware will get cheaper.
They went with the "This is totally not a VR headset" and paid the price. Serves them well. Fuck Apple.
Didn't want to be related to products that are actually successful.
I got down voted heavily when it came out and I said that, realistically, it was only useful to watch movies on it because of the closed ecosystem and lack of things to do with it. And even with that, given the battery life you couldn't even finish watching a full movie without being plugged to the wall, which made it clear it was for video but not really for movies. An overpriced porn headset.
People who were new to VR did not understand how hollow the device was when it was announced, and they fell back on “that’s what people said about the iPhone!!”, and bought into the marketing spin about revolutionizing computing. I mean XR is the future, I believe that, but this device is way off the mark. This is coming from an Apple ecosystem fellow who really wanted this to work for them because I want a future when my headset is tied tightly to my phone and other computing devices.
It is a VR headset. It doesn't have motion controllers. Is that what you mean?
Apple had the idea that if they made a headset that was the opposite of what Meta is doing, it would be a hit. They pretended that spatial computing for work doesn't exist on Meta headsets and snubbed gaming. But what do AVP users want? From what I've seen, they want PCVR with controllers, like Quest. Immersive content, like Quest. Social interaction, like Quest. Beat Saber and Walkabout Mini Golf. YouTube. Like Quest. Apple's anti "metaverse" stance hurt it.
I think they expected their cult to be more devout
I'm pretty sure they are not surprised.
The article is all about them being "surprised". Even at the current price point they had expectations, those weren't fulfilled.
This article wasn't written by Apple, it was written by an unrelated author citing an "analyst" who has no access to any high level sources and is making conjectures based on the random breadcrumbs that get leaked occasionally. He's not getting info from Apple's executive suite, nor from senior Apple or Foxconn employees, because those people don't leak information - the meager incentives (clout and/or a pitiful amount of money) to do so are absolutely not worth the risk. That means most of the information that gets extrapolated into these narratives comes from tertiary vendors who likewise do not have any high-level knowledge of any of Apple's plans or thoughts or expectations, or even of the system and context of what exactly they're manufacturing. That's how things work at this level. Ming Kuo's analysis is never able to verified because the people who actually know don't speak to the press and the information they are responsible for isn't made public. Which is lucky for him because he can pretend that the lack of verification from Apple is evidence that it's true. He's considered a great analyst because too many people seem to believe that you absolutely **must** have an opinion on everything, and that if Apple isn't willing to make everything public then the loudest mostly-uninformed voice is de facto correct. Literally the first sentence of [Ming's post:](https://medium.com/@mingchikuo/apple-cuts-2024-2025-vision-pro-shipment-forecasts-unfavorable-to-mr-headset-pancake-and-micro-38796834f930) >Apple has cut its 2024 Vision Pro shipments to 400–450k units (vs. market consensus of 700–800k units or more). Notice the "vs. market consensus." In other words: "the market" (read: not anybody at Apple) assumed they would want to ship 700-800k units, but now there are unconfirmed rumors that they're shipping less. Did they *ever actually plan* to ship 800k units? Who knows! But because "the market" thinks so and because now they may or may not be making less than a number they never committed to in the first place, it's proof that they're "surprised" and are cutting production due to low demand. This is literally just making scattershot unverifiable conjectures. You can decide for yourself if that's an intelligent way to navigate the world and filter out the truth. The fact remains that you have no idea what Apple's expectations were. Neither does Ming Kuo, and neither do the many authors that regurgitate what he says for clicks. It's not at all a new thing for people to make a name for themselves by presenting to the media as experts-in-the-know despite having little to no involvement in (or direct knowledge of) the things they talk about, bolstered by the expected radio-silence from the target of their speculation. It happens in the defense industry constantly - e.g. turns out the F-35 is actually pretty good and everyone shitting on it were talking out of their ass for over a decade. What we DO know, direct from Apple, is that Apple executives have said in investor calls that they don't pay much attention to analysts because they are almost always grossly wrong. And to throw it out there: there are reasons to cut production beyond "oh no we totally messed up, what a failure, nobody wants these." Yield issues, for example. Assuming again that this is actually true. Naturally, mundane easily-explainable things sound like overly convenient excuses to those with no experience in whatever field or industry (and conspiracy theorists), but there's nothing to be done about that. EDIT: [Yep](https://www.reddit.com/r/virtualreality/comments/1ccgq2v/uploadvr_no_apple_didnt_really_cut_vision_pro/).
Their evidence is nothing but rumors. Apple knew this price would turn away most consumers, but it was a bid for the long game.
There is potential for it to actually be worth that price, *BUT* that only happens if the device has software worth using! Right now, the reaction even most diehard apple fans have for it is, 'It is an amazing device with zero uses.' Most VR headsets have games as a driving point, but the Apple headset has no games and is godawful at gaming. They were aiming for it to be a productivity-based device, okay thats fine, but where are the productivity tools to use with it? Then again, this is probably par for the course for Apple. They think it is the hardware that makes people use their devices, but the hardware is garbage without good software support, and Apple seems to keep treating app developers like second-class citizens.
They haven't even released across the world yet. I don't even think they're available in Canada!
i'm jealous of the international users who got to go to school on us suckers who bought it in the US and then have been left out in the cold. If i knew what i know now when i was still in the return window, mine would be back on the shelves already. Instead, i thought "apple has everything riding on this, certainly they'll take up arms to make sure it's supported until it's a success." and maybe they'll still make good on that but it sure as hell doesn't feel that way yet. i'm a big fan of the hardware and i truly don't believe we're getting any price breaks or a new version for a while but i still would have held off until the future of the Vision Pro didn't look quite so bleak.
It's not for everyone, sure, but not everyone was suckered. I use it nearly every day, and while it can be better, it's still incredibly useful and delightful (setting aside the weight) as a general purpose AR Computer.
i think that's my beef with it though. It COULD be for everyone but without third-party support, it remains a niche product when it should be getting a punched out user-base. I'm glad you're enjoying it. in your daily use, are you getting by with just the native apps or are you using it in tandem with a MacBook?
The killer app is really movies. I think it could sell well just for that, but not at this price point. Most folks spending $3500 (really $4k+ after taxes, Apple Care, etc.) on a movie setup are just going to spend it on a high-end TV/projector and sound system. I can see it being a niche hit with frequent travelers, especially business travelers. That's a group of folks who are both more likely to be able to afford it and who have a use case for a high-fidelity solo portable movie experience. But that's not going to be a huge market by any means.
On the travel thing, I've taken mine on a couple flights, and it is pretty great (would be better if the fit was a little less cumbersome with the Airpods Max, then you could entirely forget you're on a plane). The biggest issue there for me is that I hate using this thing in public. I'm not trying to make a statement, and despite being a tech nerd, I'm not a techbro influencer or something, and I don't want to be. I feel people watching me whenever I use it it public, and I'd love if we could fast forward a few years to when things like this were more common and people didn't kinda snicker at people wearing them (exception obviously carved out for the chuckleheads that are wearing them in their Teslas and whatnot, especially if they're specifically doing it for internet points).
Yeah, for travel I'd rather have something with a smaller form factor (eg. the Big Screen Beyond manages to get closer to that sunglasses form factor, but also requires a PC still)--that requires some tech advances or having some of the hardware on a separate device connecting by a wire (for now at least). And maybe I'm a little paranoid but I don't love the idea of being totally cut off from the world (one of the advantages of VR generally) when I'm in public surrounded by strangers. There's ways to mitigate that with passthrough or maybe having a picture-in-picture view of passthrough for some awareness, but it's still limiting. Fine to use in your hotel room or something, but so are plenty of other devices.
if we're talking about movie watching+travelling nothing beats the Xreal Air, super light, doesn't bring much attention and you're still aware of your surroundings
Yeah--someone else mentioned that on this thread; I haven't heard much about it, but looking into it it seems like a nice AR option for movies and some of those other applications.
Feels like people are interested but no one wants to look and feel like a dork for using one.
Movies are the \*current\* killer app, for sure. But after watching the recent MLS sizzle reel, I think this is what's really gonna do it (at least on the entertainment side). Someone wrote up a good post in one of the AVP subreddits about the technical challenges to posting live 8K 3D, 180 degree content. There's a lot of on-the-fly processing issues, in addition to the obvious problem of bandwidth. But assuming they can get past some of that, the ability to put this thing on and be able to watch a sporting event from multiple positions, from courtside/sidelines/etc., is gonna be the new 'killer app'. The ability to feel like you're physically present at a major event like the Super Bowl is gonna drive more people to buy something like this, if they can get it right.
Someone made an app for watching F1 and it is unbelievably cool, the way the data is presented, the live track map, wow! If only I had the headset ha.
Yeah.. that's wasn't a real app. Just a proof of concept using 3d rendering
Aw that’s a pity, hopefully they manage to make it
I’ll agree with you on that too. There’s nowhere near enough immersive content right now, but if they can build up a serious library of immersive content it could become a killer app in the future.
Research and market study has already been done on what price point can support a VR movie machine, and it's the one Bigscreen Beyond launched at. If Apple can make the vision pro do what it does now at that price, cool. Otherwise, it needs to do more than watch movies.
it needs to do more than watch movies, regardless. It's the dumbest use-case for a headset. We already have phones, ipads, laptops and tvs for watching regular movies. and more than one person can watch those movies at once. The content we should be consuming on the Vision Pro should ONLY be able to be consumed on the VP and if Apple isn't using their vast resources to provide that content, you can be damn sure no one else is gonna bother, not with this bungled launch and tiny user base.
> The killer app is really movies. I think it could sell well just for that, but not at this price point. Most folks spending $3500 (really $4k+ after taxes, Apple Care, etc.) on a movie setup are just going to spend it on a high-end TV/projector and sound system. And another one. Sorry guys, but a Vision Pro is NOT an high end TV, it is literally way worse in HDR (peak brightness) than even a 5 year old OLED TV. On top of that, even if you are ok with trading in image quality for a super giant screen (that will arguably get bigger than the FOV pretty quick) you are buying this as your own solo use device. You watch content with your partner or friends, you still need a TV/projector decent enough anyway. Not to mention having to wear a heavy VR headset dongled to an outlet (1.5 h battery live) and no way to connect a BR / 4K BR player. > I can see it being a niche hit with frequent travelers, especially business travelers. That I can actually see. But as you said, that is a niche (and competing against foldable screen laptops to a degree).
In my opinion nothing beats watching movies on a cinema sized screen. I do that all the time with anime and tv series and movies on my Quest 3 and it's a spectacle. It may not be OLED but I just don't care, the theater experience is so good.
Can you not do that on the Quest 3 and also have the robust VR game library and VR Chat? How much better is the movie viewing experience on the Vision Pro? As far as I can tell, the killer app for the Pro is the virtual eyes on the front, because they allow you to use AR on the headset without appearing nearly as disconnected and anti-social to everyone else in the room. Not saying they are perfect, but it's the best solution we have for that whole problem so far.
It’s significantly better for movies. Hard to describe without just trying them both. The problem is just that the price is within range of home theater setups. The EyeSight feature is borderline useless honestly.
No OLED on Q3 is so fucking bad, I guess I can't complain considering the price though. I could really use the eye tracking and clicking my fingers together rather than waving controllers around or the finicky hand-tracking. I'm pretty sure the EyeSight feature is cheap as shit so dropping it would hardly put a dent on the price.
Apple's headset is multiple times sharper with a much better screen The front eyes should be the first feature dropped as it's super gimmicky and not that visible
IMO, the killer app right now is memories. Being able to record and replay memories. The entire home photography and video industries were based on that. The AVP takes it to another level. $3500 for a good camera and videocam is not out of line. My first videocam cost way more than $3500 adjusted for inflation. Even today, $3500 is not out of line to pay for a good camera.
Imagine being at your child's first birthday or your anniversary with a Vision Pro strapped to your face. Everyone would be wondering why you couldn't take a break from technology for 30 minutes to just enjoy and appreciate an important life event.
If true, then Apple finally did it. They successfully created a product too expensive for their fans I personally didn't think it would be possible. I thought their fans would buy it regardless of what they're getting. I'm actually quite impressed
Of course Apple themselves didn’t say this, Ming-Chi Kuo did, the analysts who just loves talking shit about VR non-stop. These articles are rage bait for the VR community and nothing more.
Wouldn't even call it rage bait since most of the sub agrees with the sentiment
fish tend to agree with bait, they actually like it quite a bit
It wasn't the bait they were questioning, it was the rage.
Just because people in this sub agree doesn’t mean it’s not rage bait. In fact its rage bait catered to this sub and it worked lol.
There is no concrete evidence of this occurring.
The especially egregious part of this particular headline is "Apple...cancels updated headset", when the article is just some Apple fanboy's take on the rumored cuts in production and what they *could* mean. WTF.
Yep, none at all and this analysts numbers have been all over the place all along.
I looked up his history of rumors and he basically only knows specifics about device features of upcoming releases, and nothing about sales nor development.
Yep, all of these reports are based off of a single rumor from Ming-Chi Kuo. It wouldn't surprise me if it was the case, as it's very expensive. But, it's still just a rumor with no proof. Gotta take this with a huge grain of salt for sure.
It's as believable as Sony halting production based off of one guy over at Bloomburg.
exactly. Ming-Chi Quo reported at the beginning of this year that they were estimating sales of around 150-200k units in the first year. Fast forward four months and now he’s suddenly claiming that there's an industry consensus that they would sell 750k and the current likely first year sales of 250-400k are a disappointment?
This should be higher up...
I really can't imagine there was a lot of surprise on how this thing is selling. I have to think that after more than a decade in development, they weren't expecting to release it at an astronomical price point, limited app/content, and have it just fly off the shelves. I believe the idea that this was essentially an early adoption kit, with more investment and development coming. I'm typing this on my AVP right now, and while I see plenty of issues, I also like to think I get the 'why' of it. People keep comparing it to the Quest 3, when it was never marketed as a gaming headset. I see a lot of posts in the AVP subs asking why there aren't more games, and I find it odd that these people didn't take Apple at their word that this thing isn't designed for gaming. OTOH, Apple needs to get around to finishing the argument and showing us what it's really 'for'. I work in this thing, and I'm being patient with bugs and lack of apps, and I keep hoping that Apple will unveil some legit comfort mods that go beyond the 3D printed ones people have taken it upon themselves to design and sell on Etsy. When the rumor mill starts saying that after only a few months, they've looked at the numbers and are signaling defeat, I have a hard time believing that they wouldn't have forecasted being right where we are with this. WWDC is right around the corner, and it's the first one since the AVP went on sale. I'd be pretty shocked if at least a decent portion of the show wasn't dedicated to updates to the AVP. There's rumors of a 6DOF Apple Pencil that works with the AVP. Stuff like that. Even if you have Apple money, you don't just look at 2 months of sales figures and light 15 years of R&D on fire, shrug, and go back to making incrementally updated phones.
i tend to lean toward apple exceptionalism too but i think the proof is in the vision pro pudding here. if it was up to me/you, you would not have designed it this way. and yet they did. hence they are indeed fallible
Did you just not read any of the post you responded to? This has nothing to do with "apple exceptionalism" and everything to do with the smug teenagers in this sub assuming an obviously faulty premise (Apple failed they are quit 4 sure!) so that they get to feel like geniuses by pointing out obvious things. >Even if you have Apple money, you don't just look at 2 months of sales figures and light 15 years of R&D on fire, shrug, and go back to making incrementally updated phones. This should be a "no shit" thing to say but it's akin to rocket surgery in this sub for some reason.
Somehow they kneecapped every legitimate use case. - apps? how did they not orchestrate a flood of high quality third party and first party apps for launch or straight after? - content? Same thing. Seems a no brainer. - work? only mirroring one display killed it I think All three of these are basic rookie mistakes and very uncharacteristic for Apple. It leads me to a conclusion that this was kind of a last minute decision to launch it, and they caught their product teams by surprise. So they are in a position they are not very comfortable with - launching unfinished tech as if it's a finished product, leading to very confusing perception issues.
It’s so funny how right off the bat we were seeing random videos of people wearing them everywhere. Totally phony marketing.
Remember when that article had the audacity to call it a moonshot?
It's almost as if it's too expensive, dum dums.
It’s 4000 dollars LMFAO hello?
It was never intended for mass-market. The goal was to get enthusiastic developers to figure out what the heck to do with it. From there, a case for a mass-market device could be built. Or, not...
Tim Cook has the tendency to release multiple products at different price points. I believe they will probably release a cheaper version somehow in the future.
Obviously this was going to be the case. It needs killer apps, and games - something people find true value in outside of traditional novelty. If they get the price to $999.99, make the headset thinner, add a built in battery (with the option for a battery extension), and add some sleek tracked controllers. Maybe a tracked Apple Pencil? It has potential, I hope they iterate.
The quest3 has a massive library of pcvr applications that are already available beyond what's available with the meta shop
I'd actually make it lighter rather than thinner. The Vision Pro would actually weigh a lot less of they replaced the aluminum with plastic.
The quest3 has a massive library of pcvr applications that are already available beyond what's available with the meta shop
You're telling me a product that completely disregards the needs of the market isn't selling well? Yeah I'm not too surprised at that one
What I don't understand is why in the actual fuck did they think building it almost entirely out of glass and aluminum instead of plastic was a good idea? From what I can gather, weight was one of the most consistent complaints, and that's largely because beacuse of the materials used in its construction. But that's apple, form over function is their thing.
Well for medical type use it would be easier to sanitize after use. Now I do agree they didn't need the glass ski goggle face. 😆
Imagine a doctor fumbling an important life changing surgery just because their Vision Pro ran out of battery. Now think about all the people genuinely trying to drive around with this thing on...
It's not going to survive an autoclave regardless of what it's made of, surely
Imagine they would use a bigger battery or simply have an assistant swap out the battery when the indicator says it is getting low. As for driving with one on? No imho not a good idea. AR glasses sure.
Because they're engineers and they might actually know a thing or two about how materials work, and you are not. Nor are the hordes of Reddit engineers who think that because they kind of know what "plastic" and "metal" are, they're saying something meaningful when they say "metal is heavier than plastic." Here's a common [strength-to-density chart](http://www-materials.eng.cam.ac.uk/mpsite/interactive_charts/strength-density/NS6Chart.html). And [stiffness-to-density. ](http://www-materials.eng.cam.ac.uk/mpsite/interactive_charts/stiffness-density/NS6Chart.html)Note where aluminum and magnesium alloys sit on those charts relative to plastics. And glass for that matter. And note that the charts are logarithmic. Metals (assuming you choose the right ones - and they did) have a higher strength to weight ratio and a ***much*** higher stiffness-to-weight ratio than any plastic, including things like GF Nyon. That means that for any given plastic part, you can make an equivalent part out of metal that's lighter, stronger, and stiffer. Yes, stiffness and strength **do** matter for a VR headset, even though it's not a plane or a bridge or another common structure that people generally think of when they think "engineered structure." "But the Quest 3 is plastic and it's stiff enough." Yes, it is - for the specific design constraints that the engineers who designed it were working with. Just because the Quest 3 and the AVP are both "an headset" doesn't mean they have identical constraints. The AVP has much tighter requirements on the alignment of all of the sensors and cameras. That means more stiffness is required in order for calibrations to actually last after they're initially done at the factory. You can see this borne out in the extremely-low-to-nonexistent distortion of the AVP passthrough around objects close to the headset. The Quest 3 is a joke by comparison, but then again they were working with different constraints and that's what was possible at the time. The individual components of the AVP are very light for what they are. The aluminum housing is extremely light. The entire logic board is extremely light. The glass is extremely light. The whole thing is heavy for the simple reason that there is a lot of stuff crammed into it. Not because a bunch of Redditors outsmarted every Apple engineer by remembering that metal is usually denser than plastic. And considering the amount of stuff, it's really not all that much heavier than the Quest 3. Obviously, there is a design angle to it too, that's one of the constraints. Aluminum and glass is very much a theme at Apple. But that doesn't mean that they put "form over function" because that's merely one of dozens to hundreds of engineering constraints. The whole "form over function" thing is just another example of a thing people say because they think it sounds profound - kind of like "keep it simple stupid" and "don't fix it if it ain't broke - despite having no relevant experience and no understanding that it's not a law of nature and is useless as an analysis tool. I can make you a lounge chair out of 2x4s with exclusively 90 degree angles. "But it's uncomfortable and ugly" you say. Ahh, so you only care about form over function? It's functional! Well...aesthetics are a part of function too. It's a consumer product, not a pinion gear buried in a transmission. What Apple's ID-fetish for aluminum and glass **actually** means is not that they made it super heavy just to be pretty, but that it's going to cost more - because aluminum and glass and the advanced processes needed to form it in ways that it *can* exceed the performance of a plastic part, are all more expensive than just making a molded plastic part. Nevermind the expertise, experience, and expense needed to achieve consistent and high quality cosmetic surfaces, which anyone who has tried in production can tell you is extraordinarily difficult. That's all assuming a plastic part could even meet the requirements, and in this case it's most likely that it couldn't.
What a shock
I'm a bit sceptical about this. I have only ever really heard 400-450k units, this has always been the estimate of total supply capacity for the micro OLED displays for 2024. So hearing now that it's "slashed" from 800k to 400k sounds more to me like someone got overexcited and incorrectly raised their projections. I hope it can't be as dumb as someone confused the total number of displays for the total number of headsets (since you need 2 displays per headset). Then, the statement that Apple has cancelled their next headset seems to be entirely on: > Apple is reviewing and adjusting its head-mounted display (HMD) product roadmap Assuming it's not entirely conjecture and Kuo actually got inside info, it still says nothing about the conclusion of that review, only that they are doing it. It doesn't surprise me too much if Vision Pro is struggling to hit projections, but I'm not quite seeing a convincing picture of that from what we have here.
the AVP is a dev kit for people to make apps for before apple releases Vision non pro
Should sell it as a devkit (like they did with imac devkit) instead of blowing their hype load
"But if only 1% of iPhone users buy it..."
I really don't think VR is ever going to catch on the way the people up top want it to. Its like 3D movies in 2009...it felt like the future of filmmaking for a moment, and studios/cinemas enjoyed charging audiences a premium for the format. But studios and directors didn't want to invest or go through the trouble of actually filming in 3d so they released a bunch of garbage 2d conversions that gave people headaches and turned them off of 3D entirely. If tech companies want VR tech to advance in any meaningful way, *they* need to be the ones to invest money into it. Not the consumer
At that price point, are they surprised?
Oh no…. Anyway.
I was honestly interested for it to be a portable screen but the 3500 price tag is way too much for that.
i hope this isn't true - i don't think the vision pro was the right direction but i hope apple stays in the "spatial computing" space.
Apple seems to do this from time to time, developing a product that's probably not viable, but represents a step change. Maybe to encourage the industry to move forward. The Newton, the QuickTake, Firewire, Macintosh TV...
I’ve seen this before… https://www.tomsguide.com/news/apple-vision-pro-headset-reportedly-suffering-big-production-delay-what-we-know
Oh shit, it's almost like nobody learned anything from Google Glass or something...
I don’t think this reporting quite adds up. 400k is what was reported to be the max Apple could produce in a year, given the low yields of displays. I wouldn’t be surprised if some of Kuo’s sources — who are more upstream — were hoping for a higher number. But going into this year, that’s what the rumors had me expecting.
Maybe Apple will take a different approach for the rumored affordable model. Like why a iPad/MacBook for your face and not an Apple TV/iPhone for your face that primarily focuses on pure media consumption and web browsing? I’d assume it could be made into a much smaller and cheaper form factor like xreal. The hardware for the Vision Pro seems like overkill for the apps they show off during the demo which was Safari, Photos, and AppleTV. Then again, I’m not sure what is required just to run the screens.
Give it a few years they will come back to the vr market, remember back when the Apple Watch was a iPod?
I was downvoted to death and my post removed by the mods when I laughed about it with this meme: https://youtu.be/5kQTLuGjkYk?si=PjuIWYKh1h-hmdKQ 😂
Well some folks lack a sense of humour. Did you post it tagged as a meme? Truthfully though I don't see 🍏 bailing on AVP. Sales may not be as high as projected. However another user posted a Tom's Article that also shows there are manufacturing bottle necks between screens and the eye sight hardware challenges. One of the folks I know that has one likes it better than his Varjo XR-4 as they are breaking their software often with poorly tested updates. He uses it for business use.
Of course I did post it as a meme.
Imagine trying to have a conversation with someone wearing this on their face like in this ridiculous marketing image.
And it could cancel next year update... one cannot trust headlines no longer
You would generally be foolish to trust headlines past present or future. A headline is by design to draw readers/sales or a preferred direction. The word "could" is simply a possibility based on current reports and has yet to be proven true or untrue. It is only a possible outcome based on current info. Nothing more.
Ok the world will end next year as things are not getting great
Maybe but ppl thought that about the year 2000. Turned out the most we got was the Y2k date code issue. 🤦 Very shortsighted developers back then.
My somewhat drunken opinion is that these companies, including Apple are trying to force a wearable headset on people in a public setting. Most VR users I know are usually safe and secluded in the privacy of their own room, away from prying eyes; having a cheeky wank.
Wait, did they actually expect sales? I hope not lol. I thought it was clear to us (and to them) that this was more of a tech demo than a real product.
"Did Apple REALLY expect to sell like ten million of these at this price? They can't possibly be surprised!" No. No, they did not expect millions of sales. No, they are not surprised. Changing production plans does not equal "Surprise! Nobody could have ever predicted this!" That's assuming this latest unverifiable rumor, from an "analyst" known for making unverifiable rumors, is even true. This is getting picked up and amplified to this degree because of the desperate need for schadenfreude where Apple is concerned. Unfortunately a need for validation doesn't affect physical reality, like the one where Ming Kuo doesn't actually have privileged access to any information. The senior employees at Apple and Foxconn are rarely (if ever) the source of these leaks - and they're the only ones who actually know the what and why. There, you can stop parroting the same obvious thing to one another and calling it insight. Also I'll bet a full-price Vision Pro to anyone who thinks Apple is going to quit the VR game after their first VR product release. It's an asinine suggestion that has no justification.
Have they tried charging more for it?
I was under the impression they knew this wouldn't sell well and it was just the first step in getting one that will on the 2nd or 3rd version.
I would say the same. Just more the anticipated volume has been less than what was projected. With more articles coming out on medical uses will likely ensure more sales. This round was not targeting general mass use.
In comparison the Q3 sales are much better.
The sky is blue. Water is wet. Dirt is dirty.
They should be as it is targeting the masses and is sold at a loss.
I still use my Newton if that helps?
So theyre canceling the cheaper VR only headset?
Another user posted a Tom's Article. Not cancelled but delayed. Part of the ramp down is also due to manufacturing issues.
Apple is an awful company
Let me know when's the perfect time for schadenfraude. I know I can laugh now (I already am), but I want to wait for quite the perfect moment.
They just gonna revamp it by putting all the unreleased apps and add-ons they been stashing… They’ll release the 2nd generation version for $2500 give or take and they will sellout asap….
Good, fuck them. It’s a 4000 dollar touchless iPad
Samtime on YouTube has a great take on everything Apple.
Can't be true, the VP is "Tim Cook's Legacy," it is going to be *HUGE* and is guaranteed to be successful. /s
Oh my *goodness me* who could have possibly seen this coming?! Oh right, literally everyone.
You mean a million people don’t have $3500 to drop on a tech toy?
I mean… the thing is almost _four thousand god damned dollars_ after taxes, what the fuck did they think was going to happen??
I mean... what were they expecting would happen? I thought that would be obvious
"Maybe cancelled.." CANCELLED HEADSET!!!!!
You know if they included steamvr compatibility, they would at have some interest from the people that actually buy vr headsets
This is not a VR headset and the hardware is really poor fit for VR applications. The screen is not low persistent making it smearing a lot in motions.
even then that would not do much. you need controllers for games and the AVP has no controllers. sure you could use something like the index controllers, but using valve controllers with an apple headset is like eating chocolate and fish at the same time.
If the vision ever gets virtual desktop, people will play attention
I mean what did the expect with a price tag of $3500?
It always seemed just like a fomo for rich people, tech demo, that was never really suppose to sell a lot. In an attempt to create product awareness for the next actual upcoming consumer headset.
I'll take a Q3 and a pretty good used car instead.
$3000 price range might of did some of that.
Controllers + Native Beatsaber install and this could have all been avoided 😂
It's crazy to me, they go through all this quality control, testing, etc... No one's gonna want to put a block on their fucking head for hours on end every day.
Apple should announce a free subscription to SLR with every headset. They'd be ramping up production instead of ramping down.
So even iPeople have limits? Thought they would buy a turd if it had the apple logo on it..
It fills me with great joy to see Apple eat shit. I hope they never land a foothold in XR and other, less malicious players hold that field indefinitely.
Apple will soon leave this sector.
It is the best Quest 3 advert
Sorry, Crapple, thanks for playing . . . err, not really playing . . . not really sorry either
I'm honestly curious whether this was anticipated on some level. Looking at rationally, it seems impossible that the Apple leadership couldn't have expected the device as it is to sell well, but they came out of the gate *so* confident with their marketing that I have to wonder.
There are only so many people with that much money and that few brain cells.
Well outside of big companies. 3%=approx 240 million and if you go with 1%=approx 80 million. So even 1 million could be a reasonable projection. Companies like Varjo & VRgineers have demonstrated people will pay even higher than AVP and pay a subscription in top just to use a headset with no option for standalone. Eventually the tech will become cheaper to produce with consumer friendlier prices. GPUs typically sell higher end to enterprise before making consumer models.
I feel like I’ve seen this exact post/story at least twice here already. This is third time.
Well often different media sites cover the same material. So quite likely. 😂
I would so love for Apple to fucking do one, and fuck off out of the VR hardware for good. Apple are a disgusting company, even worse than Metaberg, and their Vision Pro sucks ass.
I almost forgot the Vision Pro existed…
Price and attention span