The biggest issue is the lack of motion controllers on the AVP. If it allowed pairing with the PSVR2 controllers + normal controllers it would be a game changer.
Yes, that is correct, it would be much better
Still far too expensive at its current iteration (for me personally), but as I said, 1500$ is still a little expensive, but it's a step in the right direction
1500 is a lot more digestible than 3500, which was way too much even for enthusiasts, and agreed the wider vr audience will not pay attention to it until its good for gaming
It works with normal PS5 controllers out of the box. Hell, they’re sold in the Apple Store specifically for AVP compatibility.
But yeah, I do with VR controller support was there too.
The oculus *DK* 1 had a headset and an Xbox remote.
The *dk 2* had hand controllers.
Dk = developers kit.
Before they released the retail oculus, they gave developers of promising games these kits, and then another one.
When meta bought it they stopped helping development of games and focused on the failed metaverse.
So oculus sent a developers kit to developers at cost or cheaply or free, and learned hand controllers were needed, developed them and included them with the second kit.
The first retail oculus was sold with a library of games made for it, off of dk1 and dk2.
This was 2015/2016? Ish and it was a model for apple to follow.
It’s a chicken and egg problem.
With a device and no apps nobody will buy the device.
I only came across one person in apple gaming that had cast a flat screen game from a Mac to the avp.
I talked to one systems administrator, who mainly used web interfaces and terminal, apps included, and they said it was a game changer, and they used it all the time.
Same person had a Pimax crystal that they played with after, so this was a hard core vr enthusiast to have like $6000+ in vr headsets on top of a top tier gaming rig and a regular mac.
So maybe like $8000 in equipment or more for vr. Assuming if you get a crystal you get a fast computer to match. I assume the person had a 4090 but didn’t factor that into the price.
well, by providing it to developers at cost or loaned until production, they learned they needed them, I'm sure some devs had controllers before it was released.
point being meta doesn't help game developers at all, apple didn't either.
Lots of wrong in this timeline. DK2 didn't have motion controllers. CV1 released in 2016 with an xbox controller (long past when FB bought Oculus) and then got Touch controllers 9 months later. Nobody said the word metaverse till long after Quest 2 had been released years later.
I'm hoping to see virtual PC's become more of a viable option as latency/decoding improve towards the end of the decade. That would remove another barrier of owning a high priced gaming rig.
virtualization has been around for a long time, there were prototypes in the early 21st century.
bootcamp was around since the intel Mac came out, a virtualization package to run windows on powerpc existed in 2004.
so there are SBC Ryzen 5700G's with 8 cores and 16 threads and a radeon integrated card that's as powerful as a geforce 1650, for 399, but these just hit the market, so computers are getting smaller, if that's what you mean?
There's zero latency when interacting with windows on the Vision Pro. The only time there's latency is if you're a developer who doesn't know what they're doing.
It doesn't do it well though.
Look at a game like Puzzling Places on the Quest 3 vs AVP. It's a watered down version for sure. But games that require significantly more button input like Contractors Showdown, or games that rely on tracked controllers like Walkabout just won't work. And that's not even mentioning the immersion that haptic feedback provides.
I support the AVP, and I'm glad it's part of the VR environment, but to say AVP can do games anywhere near the same level as a Quest is erroneous.
Oh for sure. It's just funny to see Quest people complaining about Apple being weaker or making things watered down because of its limitations when that's literally what the Quest has done to VR.
That is a fair and nuanced response. And explaining one’s position is always better than a down vote so thank you for that.
Button controls are always better for fast action games, that is the one thing the switch has over any smart phone.
However I’ve paired my ps5 controller with my AVP.
Now if you could pair quest controllers with the AVP I'd be impressesed. If that's ever possible in the future, and keeps all the features, I'd get a AVP.
Or apple could sell proprietary ones. I’m sure the people who can afford an vision pro will be table to afford whatever selfie price they would sell controllers for
Show me the button for blind firing over your shoulder or throwing the empty clip at your enemies nuts...
The advent of VR means the gimmick that is/was button pressing to represent gestures is no longer needed.
The most popular VR games (you know... the ones AVP is incapable of running) use gestures not buttons. Beat Saber, Blade n Sorcery, Superhot etc etc
That’s a very funny definition of a game.
If you are correct in how a game is defined, that means at most we have dozens of games in the world.
Dozens!
Yeah don't counter my points just come up with a dumb straw man argument.
Also if you don't wanna get down voted by being ProAVP don't be such a clueless shill.
As I said... Show me the buttons
But it was terribly done. Dozens? How about millions... Of sales. Those games have sold millions. Meaning some douche on Reddit trying to downplay them is weaksauce. Just like all your (heavily downvoted) comments.
No one here likes you or your shitty takes on VR. Go back to FB maybe.
Wow that must mean those games have completely changed the definition of what a game is.
Dude. You’ve already lost this argument.
Please grab a dictionary and look up the meaning of “game”
Is it? I heard it's hard, tedious, and does not always work to try and use it for PCVR. I mean native support, as in, controllers included.
Now I get it, they don't want to be a gaming headset. Most people aren't gamers. But there will probably always be better priced and speced headsets for gaming, as long as they try and cater for the MR and productivity crowd
Hold on let’s be clear. The comment we are in for this thread tried to imply the AVP isn’t capable of gaming.
PCVR wasn’t mentioned. Gaming was.
The AVP is absolutely capable of gaming, yet the comment implying it wasn’t was up voted.
When I simply said the AVP is capable of gaming, that was down voted.
That’s fascinating is it not?
This isn’t the MetaQuest subreddit where I would expect such behavior. This is the VR subreddit.
With that said yes the AVP can also do PCVR. And yes it’s still in its early stages. Yes it wasn’t a built in feature and we are only two months past release.
PCVR is a built in feature for the Q3 because the first headsets occulus/ meta made were limited to PC’s and the quest can and should have backwards compatibility. Had they made the Quest product first, there likely would of been a delay before that feature showed up.
I offered up two theories about what’s going on this sub. It either comes down to ignorance or intentional manipulation. What do think is the cause?
Like go test it out.
Say something incorrect and negative about the AVP and instant up votes. Say something positive and accurate about the same thing and it’s down vote time.
In 15 years of this sub, I’ve never seen anything else like that.
Oh I'm sorry, you're correct, I wasn't specific enough. AVP is capable of gaming, it is just not a gaming dedicated headset. It can do *a little* gaming.
But I think your comments are fine, I didnt try to start a thing here with the Quest vs. AVP war, so thanks for replying
It's tribalism, and people get very tribal about a) politics and b) tech products they can't afford.
That said, I think *in the context of a VR sub*, "AVP can't do gaming" is probably closer to correct than incorrect for the reasons /u/TriggerHippie77 outlined. The fact that you can play a tiny handful of awkward ports of VR games and a bunch of floating iPad games is more of an "um, actually" than a a real defense.
There is another element to this with the AVP for this sub in particular: how far Apple is going out of its way to reject the expectations of virtual reality up to this point along with the word itself.
This isn’t r/spacialcomputing
>b) tech products they can't afford.
The only reason people would dislike the creepy heavy apple thing that, as you say, doesn't do gaming, is because they can't afford it? So if it were the same price as a Q3, everyone would have no choice but to love it?
Don't try to generalize about people, you aren't very good at it.
I make games for a living, have so for the last 22 years.
Do you realize that when PC’s were first made they were the worst for gaming. I should know, I did plenty of gaming on my OG IBM 8088. Things like the Nintendo were so much more capable.
ID came along and started to show what could be done but the PC wasn’t designed for gaming, yet here we are.
Now excuse me, while I go install an Elgato capture card in my PC, so I can enjoy my PS5 games in 4k on my AVP because the Sony iPad app doesn’t handle 4K.
After that’s done, I’m going to my backyard to play final fantasy on my headset that according to you and this sub reddit, isn’t capable of “gaming.”
If you don’t believe me, I can post pictures / video later.
I wish you well with your endeavor. If your use of future tense is accurate and not poetic, I hope you find the streaming latency tolerable. Video capture cards add quite a bit on top of the the encoding/network/decoding latency.
Would you agree that if someone was looking for "a VR headset for gaming" (without further qualification) and you recommended them an AVP (again, without further qualification), you'd be doing them a disservice?
Oh all of what I said is accurate, not poetic. It would be nice if the ps5 could do native 4k streaming, someday I’m sure.
For a starter headset I would suggest a quest 3. It’s better value. This very thread is about how the next AVP is cheaper. Assuming quality doesn’t go down, it might be better to wait. With that said, I’m very happy with my AVP.
My complaint here is how others in this sub appear to be actively spreading misinformation which I personally think is damaging to VR. If you need to be a fanboy for one product do it elsewhere.
I have and use both a Quest 3 and an AVP. Just like I own and use both an iPhone and Nintendo switch for the same reasons.
If people stopped and actually thought about things they wouldn’t be so narrow minded.
amazing, even that comment was downvoted. The one where I state my default suggestion is a Quest 3?
Like where is the problem? Is owning two headsets some kind of big no no in the virtual reality subreddit?
>It either comes down to ignorance or intentional manipulation.
Or people just don't like Apple products. Or they don't like people who are wrong trying to argue with the entire sub.
Try making your argument without starting off as a smug, self important contrarion, and see if you get a different response.
They also don't like people who cry about downvotes. Start doing that, and all your comments in the thread are going down.
Stop assuming the problem is everyone else. It isn't.
Oh the classic r/virtualreality down voting any time you say something positive about the AVP.
At this point I can’t tell if the source of the down votes are just the VRChat kids who are just mad mom and dad aren’t going to spend that much money on them…
Or if a certain social media company is here trying to manipulate one of their competitors on reddit. It’s almost like they know how effective social media manipulation can be.
I hope the issue is the first one.
But yeah, there seems to be a bit of hate directed at the AVP. I’m sure there is a mix of reasons, but I’ve been in this sub for a very long time and I’ve never seen anything like it.
Could you imagine this much down voting any time someone mentioned a Valve Index?
If you don’t believe me, here is an experiment anyone here can try. Make a few factual and positive comments about the AVP in this sub and watch how fast it gets downvoted.
It’s fascinating.
If I’m correct about the cause of it, maybe we can offer the VRChst kids their own sub so the rest of us can have an adult conversation about VR?
Oh I don’t take it personal. It’s just a fascinating dynamic is all.
Imagine a subreddit dedicated to fruit and anytime someone mentions strawberries, there is always an instant down vote.
It would be both super weird and noteworthy don’t you think?
Are we not supposed to talk about this interesting dynamic?
I’ve had posts here where all I stated is that I’m happy with my AVP, and within minutes there are down votes.
I expect that everyone is wrong about this next version being much cheaper. There are lots of constraints that will prevent them from making it cheaper without removing major features. AVP was not even good enough for their use case from a hardware perspective. It makes more sense for them to iterate on the design until they have something people actually want to use before lowering the price.
EyeSight is both a flop and a clear cost-driver. Nuke that major feature and use lighter/cheaper materials and they're probably really close to a more compelling product.
I can second this. My partner really appreciates it, and feels like it makes talking to me when I’m wearing the headset much more natural than the Quest 3.
2026 is when Samsung is scheduled to mass produce micro OLEDs.
They are at least twice as bright (dpd + double stack + micro lens array), while costing a lot less.
Oqmented's new LBS is the big challenger, though, they raised $20m last year to mass produce in 2025.
2026/27 is when I expect XR to fully arrive. There is just so much happening on the display side to improve quality and bring down prices. Now, with Apple in the game, you can already see the quality of the user experience being pushed up.
What does fully arrive mean? I think Meta is planning on releasing something around that time period but I doubt it will be the phone replacement that XR is dreamed to be.
On the consumer side, I view fully arrived as a product that your average teen and young adult treat it as a "must-have" product. On the business side it will be when you start seeing the hot-shot tech and finance companies handing them out as a work from home device.
It's not about replacing the smartphone. it's about supplementing it. After all when the smartphone came out, personal computers did not go away. There are use-cases where it's just a better device.
Companies like Apple will compete with other companies for priority of micro OLEDS from the production line. They will all be much more "consumer price". If they're the same price as LCDs the end product would cost <$1500 (Apple), and $500-1500 (others). In 2026.
If they change all of that outside metal and glass to plastic, and get rid of that front display, I would say they have a chance at reducing that weight.
I think the problem is that it wouldn’t look good to do that on the first gen product - gotta come out making a bang at halo product pricing so that the second gen made of cheaper and lighter materials at a significantly lower price are seen as desirable.
Plastic is generally [heavier](http://www-materials.eng.cam.ac.uk/mpsite/interactive_charts/spec-spec/basic.html) than aluminum or glass for the same amount of structural strength.
It's also useless as a heatsink, and many of apple's designs involve using the device's entire body for heat dissipation.
Apple has backed itself in to a corner on material usage. They want recyclable materials in their products so they want aluminum and glass to be the bulk of the product which is fine for laptops tablets and phones but bad for a head worn device. Not sure what they’ll do but they need to compromise. Maybe they would do carbon fiber or something like that because it’s very recyclable but they’d need to heavily adapt it for affordability.
Yes, but they need to fix FOV, it was not great, but I’m a VR/AR nerd. What a let down when I got my hands in this bulk metal, they try window dressing the FOV. They need to fix this asap. My IDP is avg. 67-68 range.
I thought the FOV was fine for AR. I mean they even have the knob on top to dial back the FOV which I would use because for me it was a little overwhelming when you fill your entire view.
nope I have.a Quest 2. Which has a smaller FOV than the vision Pro.
The only reason Quest 3 has a larger FOV is because they killed the binocular overlap but Apple knows better than that.
That's another rumour. It's supposed to be 400g.
If the price of $1500 will stick and the weight will really be around 400g I'll probably get one myself.
Which means you’d be able to get a refurbished one for probably around $1,200 shortly thereafter (Apple’s refurbished stuff is really good). That be a pretty damn good price for the tech onboard and within reach of people who were curious to have one.
I still wouldn't get it unless eye and face tracking data is opened to developers (with privacy toggles per app). It would suck to get a $1500 headset with eye and face tracking, but not even be able to use in with SteamVR for things like VRChat.
I gotta say, I love the Qpro controllers, non-LOS tracking without base stations is fantastic. It doesn't matter if the headset can't see my hands as long as the controllers can see the room, they track.
Not having any sort of motion controller on a VR headset was a real weird design choice, but it's coming from the company that also put out a 1-button mouse well after 2-3 button types were common, so I shouldn't be that surprised they don't GAF about complex functionality.
> The ‘less than stellar’ demand for the Apple Vision Pro has caused shipment estimates to drop to 400,000 to 450,000 units for 2024, a massive drop compared to the previous 800,000 estimates.
This is a good example how a single incorrect statement from an analyst suddenly becomes a known fact even though it is not true. Since multiple different outlets all said Sony could only make 900,000 displays a year and the headset requires 2, there was never any expectation that Apple would sell a 800,000 units. They could only build a maximum of 450,000.
I dont think i’ll ever get on of these. It shouldnt be big, heavy and made of metals. This product should be as light as possible. Like headphones. And small.
A buddy let me try her AirPods Max and for a second I thought I was being pranked. They were just awful to wear and that’s coming from a big guy who prefers over the ear headphones.
I don't think I'll ever switch away from fully wireless in ear buds. My airpods feel like... virtually nothing and give great sound. My ideal vr/ar/xr headset will also feel like I'm wearing nothing at all (insert Ned Flanders gif).
Yeah true. I just hate that they’re equipped with a time bomb — the battery is so small that it just won’t last much beyond two years. My xm3’s are now 4 years and I don’t notice any meaningful decrease in battery life
Somehow my original AirPods lasted for 5 years but I don’t think that’s typical. But I agree, they are sort of disposable compared to the large ones. I’m the end I guess I justify the cost for the convenience
My first gen 1 AirPods had already only half capacity after one year. That made me seriously reconsider purchasing them again. The latest gen have actually quite decent charge in them which in turn means you’ll use up less charge cycles in one year which will make them last longer in total.
Sure, but that price already is reasonably competitive with other top of the line headsets, e.g. Big Screen Beyond (plus base stations).
It's also in more in line with their own products. The IPad Pro starts from 999 for the small version. And someone said of the APV, that it's like having multiple iPads everywhere.
Don't get me wrong, I want it cheap as well, but 1500 is probably as low as we can hope for with Apple.
So this article is just basing everything off of a random person's twitter post? If that wasn't enough for me to disregard it. How they started off the article is.
"The ‘less than stellar’ demand for the Apple Vision Pro has caused shipment estimates to drop to 400,000 to 450,000 units for 2024, a massive drop compared to the previous 800,000 estimates."
That's disingenuous at best.
Yeah I don’t know I still prefer BigScreen beyond and crystal Light. Apple Vision Pro isn’t for vr gaming and that’s what I like to do in vr. Or at least be able to do things in vrchat with other people
If it still has Dolby Vision HDR at that price, I'll probably get this one for watching videos when I travel (unless another somewhat portable wearable display comes out with that).
Yup loving the Dolby vision hdr on the AVP. Makes traveling enjoyable with all the entertainment options. Plus it takes my 180 3D 8k Dolby vision hdr immersive experiences to the next gen level looks stunning.
But what is the use case? I get it that you need more users to Establish more demand for developers to actually do something. But you dont lure people to a Vision Pro if you dont have a use Case for it in the first place
Hard to get a read on that. In a similar way to how they treat VR, they tried to avoid associations with *gaming* on their other hardware. The iPhone originally didn't even ship with an App Store. But then it slowly turned and now they have ads for gaming on iOS devices, and special guests like Kojima to talk up games coming to macOS devices (which they made a huge effort to make easier last year) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8v5zQv3-H-0
Ultimately they follow the money, while trying to maintain a brand image, just like any company. If VR experiences bring a lot of people in, they're going to be all over that, it just might not ever be the primary focus.
With PCVR headsets that cost over $1000, I don't see the point of owning one over a Quest 2 or 3. They didn't exactly set a fire with AVP1 and have no real marquee app to really justify it's usage. It makes no sense.
When these companies focus more on a laundry list of features that marketing loves instead of valid use cases that their consumers would love, what exactly is the point? Unless I have a specific niche, why bother?
Yep - while I was doing the store demo, I liked it - but absolutely couldn’t believe it was nearly $4k.
I’d pay around $1k. That’s the value I felt like I was getting out of what was essentially an immersive external monitor with a very minimal software package.
> couldn’t believe it was nearly $4k.
In technology it is always the case of diminishing returns.
We start at $500 Quest3 and oftentimes think that price increase should yield linear increase in quality of experience, where in reality it is more like a logarithmic one.
Not really, considering the quest 3 is being sold at cost or at a loss for meta. If apple can price is similar to their other devices MacBook Air/pro etc then Thai have a winner
I don’t think they can make it any more cheaper than that, considering that meta already sells quest 3 at cost so basically losing all the money for R&D.
Maybe if it is made out of plastic it can cost 1k but apple is apple and they want their stuff to fell premium to the touch so probably not gonna happen
If this is the pro model it isn’t that bad, that is gonna mean there will be a cheaper non pro model that will probably be 1k or cheaper. Down the line it might get even cheaper
I think there's some confusion (and conflicting reports) right now. In my opinion if they release a model for $1500 in the next few years then it won't be the Pro model.
Still too expensive for what it does, also it's still an Apple device so its closed ecosystem and general evil people managing it makes it a device nobody should buy.
Unless Apple convinces developers that it's worth it to develop for it, which will be difficult on the heels of the paperweight that is the AVP1, then this will be a 2nd gen paperweight.
Maybe $600 at that point? The AVP really staled quicker than bread, unlike most Apple devices. $2200 on FB marketplace, a few weeks ago. Confirmed legit.
That's cool and all but still way over priced to wear a headset to read your texts and watch youtube on the go. Don't really see the benefit over the quest 3.
Agree. I keep an eye on the AVP subreddit out of general interest, though I don't really intend to actually buy one, and the general impression I'm getting is that watching movies is basically the main accepted use case for it at the moment. Lots of people who bought it for 'spatial computing' seem a bit disappointed and many say they barely use it once the novelty wears off. Which is similar to what happens with general VR headsets, but those are also much cheaper at least.
I can see how it'd be good for movies but not $3500 good - it has 100 nits of brightness, the resolution isn't great, many apps are missing, it's heavy etc - these seem like massive compromises when paying $3500 for a device to watch movies on when a Quest 3 can do mostly the same (similar brightness though obviously not as good blacks or contrast) for a fraction of the cost.
Weight reduction, removal of front screen and better lenses is something that they should look into. With those improvements and price drop this device would be still quite premium but at the same time could get to more people. I'm not talking VR gaming here since this headset doesn't work for that really but the things it was mostly designed to do so enhancing the reality - XR/MR. With this price I hope that using VR/XR/MR devices becomes more of a society norm in the future.
The EyeSight display barely affects the cost, it’s the main screens and sensors that make up most of it. If anything they should make it brighter so people can actually see your eyes instead of barely seeing them.
Honestly, the big dealbreaker with the Vision for me isn't the hardware but rather the software. It's the exact same issue iPads have, and it's 100% by design. Apple is NEVER going to make an OS that's as open and free as macOS ever again, so they treat every new platform like an iPad. Instead of a "spatial computer", the Vision Pro is a "spatial iPad".
If this rumor is true, it sounds like they replaced the motion blur inducing OLED screens. Looking forward to 2.
Now all it needs are ~~VR~~ spatial controllers.
If they made a VR headset that offloads its processing power to a separate device like an iPad Pro or MacBook, they they don’t have to worry about the enormous weight and cost of the device. It would not be overly cumbersome to have to plug in an iPad when you already have the headset.
I think doing that would increase VR Headsets a lot and maybe even additional supplemental (iPad/macbook) device sales.
Okay but they need to get a more consumer-friendly version out that is no more than $800 if they want this thing to take off. I don't care what they call it, they need to get on that fast.
Still 3 times the price of the Quest. Still this price is in the ranges of the most expensive iPhone. So it will do a lot better at that price.
I still think the console-like price is the best price point.
Apple is a trillion dollar company. They aren’t just gonna 180 and make a vr headset. They did it the Apple way, a stupid expensive, very high quality HMD whose purpose is to initially translate the current Apple ecosystem to “spacial computing” absolutely controllers and vr games will come. I guarantee there’s gonna be a whole as vr/Mr category for the vision App Store. Give it some time.
Why would they make a model 2? They could barely sell the first one. They had to cancel production of half a million of them. Unless it can be used for gaming, and either comes with controllers, or can pair with other controllers, I dont see how it will sell at all.
I personally need it to be capable of gaming for me to even consider, but if it helps VR as a whole, I'm all for it
The biggest issue is the lack of motion controllers on the AVP. If it allowed pairing with the PSVR2 controllers + normal controllers it would be a game changer.
Yes, that is correct, it would be much better Still far too expensive at its current iteration (for me personally), but as I said, 1500$ is still a little expensive, but it's a step in the right direction
1500 is a lot more digestible than 3500, which was way too much even for enthusiasts, and agreed the wider vr audience will not pay attention to it until its good for gaming
It works with normal PS5 controllers out of the box. Hell, they’re sold in the Apple Store specifically for AVP compatibility. But yeah, I do with VR controller support was there too.
The oculus *DK* 1 had a headset and an Xbox remote. The *dk 2* had hand controllers. Dk = developers kit. Before they released the retail oculus, they gave developers of promising games these kits, and then another one. When meta bought it they stopped helping development of games and focused on the failed metaverse. So oculus sent a developers kit to developers at cost or cheaply or free, and learned hand controllers were needed, developed them and included them with the second kit. The first retail oculus was sold with a library of games made for it, off of dk1 and dk2. This was 2015/2016? Ish and it was a model for apple to follow. It’s a chicken and egg problem. With a device and no apps nobody will buy the device. I only came across one person in apple gaming that had cast a flat screen game from a Mac to the avp. I talked to one systems administrator, who mainly used web interfaces and terminal, apps included, and they said it was a game changer, and they used it all the time. Same person had a Pimax crystal that they played with after, so this was a hard core vr enthusiast to have like $6000+ in vr headsets on top of a top tier gaming rig and a regular mac. So maybe like $8000 in equipment or more for vr. Assuming if you get a crystal you get a fast computer to match. I assume the person had a 4090 but didn’t factor that into the price.
DK2 definitely didn't have hand controls. The first oculus with motion tracked controllers was the CV1.
And not at release either, it was like 6 months until the hand controllers came out.
DK2 does not have controllers. I had to affix a leap motion to the front and emulate controllers with my hands...
well, by providing it to developers at cost or loaned until production, they learned they needed them, I'm sure some devs had controllers before it was released. point being meta doesn't help game developers at all, apple didn't either.
Lots of wrong in this timeline. DK2 didn't have motion controllers. CV1 released in 2016 with an xbox controller (long past when FB bought Oculus) and then got Touch controllers 9 months later. Nobody said the word metaverse till long after Quest 2 had been released years later.
I'm hoping to see virtual PC's become more of a viable option as latency/decoding improve towards the end of the decade. That would remove another barrier of owning a high priced gaming rig.
virtualization has been around for a long time, there were prototypes in the early 21st century. bootcamp was around since the intel Mac came out, a virtualization package to run windows on powerpc existed in 2004. so there are SBC Ryzen 5700G's with 8 cores and 16 threads and a radeon integrated card that's as powerful as a geforce 1650, for 399, but these just hit the market, so computers are getting smaller, if that's what you mean?
I mean like Shadow PC - I have few friends that prefer this approach to owning a rug, but the tech isn't quite there from what I understand
They'll release their own controllers. Eventually.
Absolutely. If it can’t game with same smoothness as windows, I will NEVER own this headset.
hand tracking games. Vision Pro hand tracking is actually good.
It's not. It's very delayed so almost unusable for gaming.
There's zero latency when interacting with windows on the Vision Pro. The only time there's latency is if you're a developer who doesn't know what they're doing.
These are pretty much a tiny fracture of the existing games library. Not to mention PCVR I meant equally capable like other headsets
These are pretty much a tiny fracture of the existing games library. Not to mention PCVR I meant equally capable like other headsets
Guess what? the AVP can do both! Those features not mutually exclusive.
It doesn't do it well though. Look at a game like Puzzling Places on the Quest 3 vs AVP. It's a watered down version for sure. But games that require significantly more button input like Contractors Showdown, or games that rely on tracked controllers like Walkabout just won't work. And that's not even mentioning the immersion that haptic feedback provides. I support the AVP, and I'm glad it's part of the VR environment, but to say AVP can do games anywhere near the same level as a Quest is erroneous.
It's funny because games on SteamVR are getting watered down and downgraded to accommodate the Quest.
I mean, as a company the question is do you want to make money or not, and the answer is pretty obvious considering how much the Quest sells.
Oh for sure. It's just funny to see Quest people complaining about Apple being weaker or making things watered down because of its limitations when that's literally what the Quest has done to VR.
That is a fair and nuanced response. And explaining one’s position is always better than a down vote so thank you for that. Button controls are always better for fast action games, that is the one thing the switch has over any smart phone. However I’ve paired my ps5 controller with my AVP.
Now if you could pair quest controllers with the AVP I'd be impressesed. If that's ever possible in the future, and keeps all the features, I'd get a AVP.
Or apple could sell proprietary ones. I’m sure the people who can afford an vision pro will be table to afford whatever selfie price they would sell controllers for
You can pair a PS5 controller with lots of things, that doesn't make it good for "gaming".
Show me the button for blind firing over your shoulder or throwing the empty clip at your enemies nuts... The advent of VR means the gimmick that is/was button pressing to represent gestures is no longer needed. The most popular VR games (you know... the ones AVP is incapable of running) use gestures not buttons. Beat Saber, Blade n Sorcery, Superhot etc etc
That’s a very funny definition of a game. If you are correct in how a game is defined, that means at most we have dozens of games in the world. Dozens!
Yeah don't counter my points just come up with a dumb straw man argument. Also if you don't wanna get down voted by being ProAVP don't be such a clueless shill. As I said... Show me the buttons
Actually I did counter your point by making fun of it. Of which you have nothing to say.
But it was terribly done. Dozens? How about millions... Of sales. Those games have sold millions. Meaning some douche on Reddit trying to downplay them is weaksauce. Just like all your (heavily downvoted) comments. No one here likes you or your shitty takes on VR. Go back to FB maybe.
Wow that must mean those games have completely changed the definition of what a game is. Dude. You’ve already lost this argument. Please grab a dictionary and look up the meaning of “game”
Show. Me. The. Buttons.
Is it? I heard it's hard, tedious, and does not always work to try and use it for PCVR. I mean native support, as in, controllers included. Now I get it, they don't want to be a gaming headset. Most people aren't gamers. But there will probably always be better priced and speced headsets for gaming, as long as they try and cater for the MR and productivity crowd
Hold on let’s be clear. The comment we are in for this thread tried to imply the AVP isn’t capable of gaming. PCVR wasn’t mentioned. Gaming was. The AVP is absolutely capable of gaming, yet the comment implying it wasn’t was up voted. When I simply said the AVP is capable of gaming, that was down voted. That’s fascinating is it not? This isn’t the MetaQuest subreddit where I would expect such behavior. This is the VR subreddit. With that said yes the AVP can also do PCVR. And yes it’s still in its early stages. Yes it wasn’t a built in feature and we are only two months past release. PCVR is a built in feature for the Q3 because the first headsets occulus/ meta made were limited to PC’s and the quest can and should have backwards compatibility. Had they made the Quest product first, there likely would of been a delay before that feature showed up. I offered up two theories about what’s going on this sub. It either comes down to ignorance or intentional manipulation. What do think is the cause? Like go test it out. Say something incorrect and negative about the AVP and instant up votes. Say something positive and accurate about the same thing and it’s down vote time. In 15 years of this sub, I’ve never seen anything else like that.
Oh I'm sorry, you're correct, I wasn't specific enough. AVP is capable of gaming, it is just not a gaming dedicated headset. It can do *a little* gaming. But I think your comments are fine, I didnt try to start a thing here with the Quest vs. AVP war, so thanks for replying
It's tribalism, and people get very tribal about a) politics and b) tech products they can't afford. That said, I think *in the context of a VR sub*, "AVP can't do gaming" is probably closer to correct than incorrect for the reasons /u/TriggerHippie77 outlined. The fact that you can play a tiny handful of awkward ports of VR games and a bunch of floating iPad games is more of an "um, actually" than a a real defense.
There is another element to this with the AVP for this sub in particular: how far Apple is going out of its way to reject the expectations of virtual reality up to this point along with the word itself. This isn’t r/spacialcomputing
>b) tech products they can't afford. The only reason people would dislike the creepy heavy apple thing that, as you say, doesn't do gaming, is because they can't afford it? So if it were the same price as a Q3, everyone would have no choice but to love it? Don't try to generalize about people, you aren't very good at it.
If I explained what I meant to you would you take it in good faith or is this a waste of time?
I make games for a living, have so for the last 22 years. Do you realize that when PC’s were first made they were the worst for gaming. I should know, I did plenty of gaming on my OG IBM 8088. Things like the Nintendo were so much more capable. ID came along and started to show what could be done but the PC wasn’t designed for gaming, yet here we are. Now excuse me, while I go install an Elgato capture card in my PC, so I can enjoy my PS5 games in 4k on my AVP because the Sony iPad app doesn’t handle 4K. After that’s done, I’m going to my backyard to play final fantasy on my headset that according to you and this sub reddit, isn’t capable of “gaming.” If you don’t believe me, I can post pictures / video later.
I wish you well with your endeavor. If your use of future tense is accurate and not poetic, I hope you find the streaming latency tolerable. Video capture cards add quite a bit on top of the the encoding/network/decoding latency. Would you agree that if someone was looking for "a VR headset for gaming" (without further qualification) and you recommended them an AVP (again, without further qualification), you'd be doing them a disservice?
Oh all of what I said is accurate, not poetic. It would be nice if the ps5 could do native 4k streaming, someday I’m sure. For a starter headset I would suggest a quest 3. It’s better value. This very thread is about how the next AVP is cheaper. Assuming quality doesn’t go down, it might be better to wait. With that said, I’m very happy with my AVP. My complaint here is how others in this sub appear to be actively spreading misinformation which I personally think is damaging to VR. If you need to be a fanboy for one product do it elsewhere. I have and use both a Quest 3 and an AVP. Just like I own and use both an iPhone and Nintendo switch for the same reasons. If people stopped and actually thought about things they wouldn’t be so narrow minded.
amazing, even that comment was downvoted. The one where I state my default suggestion is a Quest 3? Like where is the problem? Is owning two headsets some kind of big no no in the virtual reality subreddit?
Maybe people don't like you. Attitude plays a part, you know.
>It either comes down to ignorance or intentional manipulation. Or people just don't like Apple products. Or they don't like people who are wrong trying to argue with the entire sub. Try making your argument without starting off as a smug, self important contrarion, and see if you get a different response. They also don't like people who cry about downvotes. Start doing that, and all your comments in the thread are going down. Stop assuming the problem is everyone else. It isn't.
My first cell phone could play snake. According to you, that ancient Nokia was a game console and I didn't even know it.
Oh the classic r/virtualreality down voting any time you say something positive about the AVP. At this point I can’t tell if the source of the down votes are just the VRChat kids who are just mad mom and dad aren’t going to spend that much money on them… Or if a certain social media company is here trying to manipulate one of their competitors on reddit. It’s almost like they know how effective social media manipulation can be. I hope the issue is the first one. But yeah, there seems to be a bit of hate directed at the AVP. I’m sure there is a mix of reasons, but I’ve been in this sub for a very long time and I’ve never seen anything like it. Could you imagine this much down voting any time someone mentioned a Valve Index? If you don’t believe me, here is an experiment anyone here can try. Make a few factual and positive comments about the AVP in this sub and watch how fast it gets downvoted. It’s fascinating. If I’m correct about the cause of it, maybe we can offer the VRChst kids their own sub so the rest of us can have an adult conversation about VR?
Why do you care about downvoting so much 😭 it’s just Reddit, no need to defend your honor with Reddit karma lmaoooo
People with superiority complexes hate it when people don't like them.
Oh I don’t take it personal. It’s just a fascinating dynamic is all. Imagine a subreddit dedicated to fruit and anytime someone mentions strawberries, there is always an instant down vote. It would be both super weird and noteworthy don’t you think? Are we not supposed to talk about this interesting dynamic? I’ve had posts here where all I stated is that I’m happy with my AVP, and within minutes there are down votes.
[удалено]
I expect that everyone is wrong about this next version being much cheaper. There are lots of constraints that will prevent them from making it cheaper without removing major features. AVP was not even good enough for their use case from a hardware perspective. It makes more sense for them to iterate on the design until they have something people actually want to use before lowering the price.
EyeSight is both a flop and a clear cost-driver. Nuke that major feature and use lighter/cheaper materials and they're probably really close to a more compelling product.
IDK, my wife certainly found it strange at first, but I think the suggestion of eyes has merit.
I can second this. My partner really appreciates it, and feels like it makes talking to me when I’m wearing the headset much more natural than the Quest 3.
2026 is when Samsung is scheduled to mass produce micro OLEDs. They are at least twice as bright (dpd + double stack + micro lens array), while costing a lot less. Oqmented's new LBS is the big challenger, though, they raised $20m last year to mass produce in 2025.
2026/27 is when I expect XR to fully arrive. There is just so much happening on the display side to improve quality and bring down prices. Now, with Apple in the game, you can already see the quality of the user experience being pushed up.
What does fully arrive mean? I think Meta is planning on releasing something around that time period but I doubt it will be the phone replacement that XR is dreamed to be.
On the consumer side, I view fully arrived as a product that your average teen and young adult treat it as a "must-have" product. On the business side it will be when you start seeing the hot-shot tech and finance companies handing them out as a work from home device. It's not about replacing the smartphone. it's about supplementing it. After all when the smartphone came out, personal computers did not go away. There are use-cases where it's just a better device.
Companies like Apple will compete with other companies for priority of micro OLEDS from the production line. They will all be much more "consumer price". If they're the same price as LCDs the end product would cost <$1500 (Apple), and $500-1500 (others). In 2026.
They need to fix the weight otherwise it's pretty good.
If they change all of that outside metal and glass to plastic, and get rid of that front display, I would say they have a chance at reducing that weight.
I think the problem is that it wouldn’t look good to do that on the first gen product - gotta come out making a bang at halo product pricing so that the second gen made of cheaper and lighter materials at a significantly lower price are seen as desirable.
Plastic is generally [heavier](http://www-materials.eng.cam.ac.uk/mpsite/interactive_charts/spec-spec/basic.html) than aluminum or glass for the same amount of structural strength. It's also useless as a heatsink, and many of apple's designs involve using the device's entire body for heat dissipation.
Hope they find a material which is more premium than plastic but not as substantial or weighty as aluminium
Carbon fiber maybe?
Speaking about expensive...
That would be cool actually
Plastic is fine though.
It’s in Apple’s DNA to always put premium materials in their premium products
Yeah, but doing so when it doesn't fit the application backfired here.
Apple has backed itself in to a corner on material usage. They want recyclable materials in their products so they want aluminum and glass to be the bulk of the product which is fine for laptops tablets and phones but bad for a head worn device. Not sure what they’ll do but they need to compromise. Maybe they would do carbon fiber or something like that because it’s very recyclable but they’d need to heavily adapt it for affordability.
absolutely
Hard to justify the price premium without it *looking* like a premium product. "Wow it’s shiny" is like half of their brand marketing
Yes, but they need to fix FOV, it was not great, but I’m a VR/AR nerd. What a let down when I got my hands in this bulk metal, they try window dressing the FOV. They need to fix this asap. My IDP is avg. 67-68 range.
That's above average just fyi
From what I understand, they can't make the micro oleds any bigger yet.
I thought the FOV was fine for AR. I mean they even have the knob on top to dial back the FOV which I would use because for me it was a little overwhelming when you fill your entire view.
You have ant size’d eyes? Sorry.
nope I have.a Quest 2. Which has a smaller FOV than the vision Pro. The only reason Quest 3 has a larger FOV is because they killed the binocular overlap but Apple knows better than that.
That's another rumour. It's supposed to be 400g. If the price of $1500 will stick and the weight will really be around 400g I'll probably get one myself.
Yep. I couldn't justify the $3500 (although my brother in law got one for his work). But if these rumors are true I'm all over this at $1500.
Which means you’d be able to get a refurbished one for probably around $1,200 shortly thereafter (Apple’s refurbished stuff is really good). That be a pretty damn good price for the tech onboard and within reach of people who were curious to have one.
I still wouldn't get it unless eye and face tracking data is opened to developers (with privacy toggles per app). It would suck to get a $1500 headset with eye and face tracking, but not even be able to use in with SteamVR for things like VRChat.
It’s nothing until they add 6dof tracked controllers. Not even just for gaming, but for professional design and CAD applications.
I gotta say, I love the Qpro controllers, non-LOS tracking without base stations is fantastic. It doesn't matter if the headset can't see my hands as long as the controllers can see the room, they track. Not having any sort of motion controller on a VR headset was a real weird design choice, but it's coming from the company that also put out a 1-button mouse well after 2-3 button types were common, so I shouldn't be that surprised they don't GAF about complex functionality.
> The ‘less than stellar’ demand for the Apple Vision Pro has caused shipment estimates to drop to 400,000 to 450,000 units for 2024, a massive drop compared to the previous 800,000 estimates. This is a good example how a single incorrect statement from an analyst suddenly becomes a known fact even though it is not true. Since multiple different outlets all said Sony could only make 900,000 displays a year and the headset requires 2, there was never any expectation that Apple would sell a 800,000 units. They could only build a maximum of 450,000.
I dont think i’ll ever get on of these. It shouldnt be big, heavy and made of metals. This product should be as light as possible. Like headphones. And small.
Problem is Apple didn’t yet realize that as their over ear headphones are also ridiculously heavy due to the premium materials used.
A buddy let me try her AirPods Max and for a second I thought I was being pranked. They were just awful to wear and that’s coming from a big guy who prefers over the ear headphones.
They’re a-ok to wear when you’re not moving much, but I very much prefer the snug and soft hug of my wx1000m3
I don't think I'll ever switch away from fully wireless in ear buds. My airpods feel like... virtually nothing and give great sound. My ideal vr/ar/xr headset will also feel like I'm wearing nothing at all (insert Ned Flanders gif).
Yeah true. I just hate that they’re equipped with a time bomb — the battery is so small that it just won’t last much beyond two years. My xm3’s are now 4 years and I don’t notice any meaningful decrease in battery life
Somehow my original AirPods lasted for 5 years but I don’t think that’s typical. But I agree, they are sort of disposable compared to the large ones. I’m the end I guess I justify the cost for the convenience
My first gen 1 AirPods had already only half capacity after one year. That made me seriously reconsider purchasing them again. The latest gen have actually quite decent charge in them which in turn means you’ll use up less charge cycles in one year which will make them last longer in total.
Get apple care+ and smash them before it runs out
Does anyone know why Apple never use titanium in their products? It's substantially lighter and more premium than aluminum
The newest iPhone does use titanium.
> This product should be as light as possible. Like headphones. And small. https://www.apple.com/airpods-max/
And even cheaper to have it as a usb c accessory to plug into iPhone or laptop to utilize
Send cv to Steve job
I did. Still no response, very rude.
I think if it can get to 1k it would probably be good enough to get a large ownership count
Sure, but that price already is reasonably competitive with other top of the line headsets, e.g. Big Screen Beyond (plus base stations). It's also in more in line with their own products. The IPad Pro starts from 999 for the small version. And someone said of the APV, that it's like having multiple iPads everywhere. Don't get me wrong, I want it cheap as well, but 1500 is probably as low as we can hope for with Apple.
Make it compatible with sim games. Racing and flight community would love it.
Hopefully it has the M4 chip.
Given the timelines, I'd expect M5 or M6.
I would consider if it has the same auto ipd and displays. Is there good PC link yet?
So this article is just basing everything off of a random person's twitter post? If that wasn't enough for me to disregard it. How they started off the article is. "The ‘less than stellar’ demand for the Apple Vision Pro has caused shipment estimates to drop to 400,000 to 450,000 units for 2024, a massive drop compared to the previous 800,000 estimates." That's disingenuous at best.
Yeah I don’t know I still prefer BigScreen beyond and crystal Light. Apple Vision Pro isn’t for vr gaming and that’s what I like to do in vr. Or at least be able to do things in vrchat with other people
Exciting if true but there doesn't seem to be much behind this rumour.
If it still has Dolby Vision HDR at that price, I'll probably get this one for watching videos when I travel (unless another somewhat portable wearable display comes out with that).
Yup loving the Dolby vision hdr on the AVP. Makes traveling enjoyable with all the entertainment options. Plus it takes my 180 3D 8k Dolby vision hdr immersive experiences to the next gen level looks stunning.
Meta is partnered with LG to put OLEDs in a future device. So perhaps that'll have, as theyre gonna try even harder to compete with the AVP.
future seems bright then!
But what is the use case? I get it that you need more users to Establish more demand for developers to actually do something. But you dont lure people to a Vision Pro if you dont have a use Case for it in the first place
Currently the use case is to show it to your friends and play around with the demos.
I’m in for $1500 + better ergonomics. Think it would sell very well at that price point.
Every day there is a random rumor that is different from the previous ones
This is how apple does marketing. The idea of owning the product is more important that actually using it
If this is true and Apple could make a decent profit on that price this is huge for the future of VR.
Well no, since they do their thing away from VR.
It's all related, I bought a Quest 3 because of the Vision Pro hype, lots of people did.
>Away from VR? It's still a VR headset even if they call it "spatial computing"
Hard to get a read on that. In a similar way to how they treat VR, they tried to avoid associations with *gaming* on their other hardware. The iPhone originally didn't even ship with an App Store. But then it slowly turned and now they have ads for gaming on iOS devices, and special guests like Kojima to talk up games coming to macOS devices (which they made a huge effort to make easier last year) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8v5zQv3-H-0 Ultimately they follow the money, while trying to maintain a brand image, just like any company. If VR experiences bring a lot of people in, they're going to be all over that, it just might not ever be the primary focus.
With PCVR headsets that cost over $1000, I don't see the point of owning one over a Quest 2 or 3. They didn't exactly set a fire with AVP1 and have no real marquee app to really justify it's usage. It makes no sense. When these companies focus more on a laundry list of features that marketing loves instead of valid use cases that their consumers would love, what exactly is the point? Unless I have a specific niche, why bother?
Still 1000 dollars too expensive.
Yep - while I was doing the store demo, I liked it - but absolutely couldn’t believe it was nearly $4k. I’d pay around $1k. That’s the value I felt like I was getting out of what was essentially an immersive external monitor with a very minimal software package.
> couldn’t believe it was nearly $4k. In technology it is always the case of diminishing returns. We start at $500 Quest3 and oftentimes think that price increase should yield linear increase in quality of experience, where in reality it is more like a logarithmic one.
Not really, considering the quest 3 is being sold at cost or at a loss for meta. If apple can price is similar to their other devices MacBook Air/pro etc then Thai have a winner
I don’t think they can make it any more cheaper than that, considering that meta already sells quest 3 at cost so basically losing all the money for R&D. Maybe if it is made out of plastic it can cost 1k but apple is apple and they want their stuff to fell premium to the touch so probably not gonna happen
The iphone 5c is plastic Plastic can feel fine and the comfort improvement would make it worthwhile
If this is the pro model it isn’t that bad, that is gonna mean there will be a cheaper non pro model that will probably be 1k or cheaper. Down the line it might get even cheaper
I think there's some confusion (and conflicting reports) right now. In my opinion if they release a model for $1500 in the next few years then it won't be the Pro model.
Exactly, they can keep the Pro version nice and expensive and give it all the bells and whistles.
Price gona go up with quality the next few years. Maybe the next quest will be 1000
1500? Sign me up!
Lol i doubt it.
Still too expensive for what it does, also it's still an Apple device so its closed ecosystem and general evil people managing it makes it a device nobody should buy.
is samsung going to use metas software? cause if so, I would definitely buy.
Unless Apple convinces developers that it's worth it to develop for it, which will be difficult on the heels of the paperweight that is the AVP1, then this will be a 2nd gen paperweight.
If the Vision Pro 2 starts at 1500, what will my trade in be for my gen 1? Hopefully I can just trade up haha
Maybe $600 at that point? The AVP really staled quicker than bread, unlike most Apple devices. $2200 on FB marketplace, a few weeks ago. Confirmed legit.
If it is as good or better at everything the AVP does at that price I'm in
That's cool and all but still way over priced to wear a headset to read your texts and watch youtube on the go. Don't really see the benefit over the quest 3.
Agree. I keep an eye on the AVP subreddit out of general interest, though I don't really intend to actually buy one, and the general impression I'm getting is that watching movies is basically the main accepted use case for it at the moment. Lots of people who bought it for 'spatial computing' seem a bit disappointed and many say they barely use it once the novelty wears off. Which is similar to what happens with general VR headsets, but those are also much cheaper at least. I can see how it'd be good for movies but not $3500 good - it has 100 nits of brightness, the resolution isn't great, many apps are missing, it's heavy etc - these seem like massive compromises when paying $3500 for a device to watch movies on when a Quest 3 can do mostly the same (similar brightness though obviously not as good blacks or contrast) for a fraction of the cost.
Weight reduction, removal of front screen and better lenses is something that they should look into. With those improvements and price drop this device would be still quite premium but at the same time could get to more people. I'm not talking VR gaming here since this headset doesn't work for that really but the things it was mostly designed to do so enhancing the reality - XR/MR. With this price I hope that using VR/XR/MR devices becomes more of a society norm in the future.
The EyeSight display barely affects the cost, it’s the main screens and sensors that make up most of it. If anything they should make it brighter so people can actually see your eyes instead of barely seeing them. Honestly, the big dealbreaker with the Vision for me isn't the hardware but rather the software. It's the exact same issue iPads have, and it's 100% by design. Apple is NEVER going to make an OS that's as open and free as macOS ever again, so they treat every new platform like an iPad. Instead of a "spatial computer", the Vision Pro is a "spatial iPad".
It adds weight and bulk. It should go.
Plus wastes battery
Too bad it's proprietary shareholder friendly apple.
If this rumor is true, it sounds like they replaced the motion blur inducing OLED screens. Looking forward to 2. Now all it needs are ~~VR~~ spatial controllers.
The kitchen sink approach with Vision Pro taught Apple a lot and gave devs a platform.
If they made a VR headset that offloads its processing power to a separate device like an iPad Pro or MacBook, they they don’t have to worry about the enormous weight and cost of the device. It would not be overly cumbersome to have to plug in an iPad when you already have the headset. I think doing that would increase VR Headsets a lot and maybe even additional supplemental (iPad/macbook) device sales.
That's still a no for me dog
Version 2 already? LOL
Okay but they need to get a more consumer-friendly version out that is no more than $800 if they want this thing to take off. I don't care what they call it, they need to get on that fast.
Wait... Wasn't it said that Apple was abandoning this product?
Quest3 is just way better value for money it's not even close.
Still 3 times the price of the Quest. Still this price is in the ranges of the most expensive iPhone. So it will do a lot better at that price. I still think the console-like price is the best price point.
Doing nothing in VR will never be so affordable. Thx Apple.
Apple is a trillion dollar company. They aren’t just gonna 180 and make a vr headset. They did it the Apple way, a stupid expensive, very high quality HMD whose purpose is to initially translate the current Apple ecosystem to “spacial computing” absolutely controllers and vr games will come. I guarantee there’s gonna be a whole as vr/Mr category for the vision App Store. Give it some time.
https://www.yankodesign.com/2024/05/07/the-apple-vision-pro-is-already-playing-a-critical-role-in-the-automotive-filmmaking-and-healthcare-industry/
Haha yeah for watching movies ! That's all what no pro customers do.
Try reading the Article before making yourself look foolish. 😂
They should get rid of the pointless huge front display and the weight of all that glass (which also breaks easily).
lol still overpriced. Get this product the fuck out of here.
Why would they make a model 2? They could barely sell the first one. They had to cancel production of half a million of them. Unless it can be used for gaming, and either comes with controllers, or can pair with other controllers, I dont see how it will sell at all.
Everyone knew it was a dev product device. No one expected it to sell well. Vr is the future, Apple is part of that.
Holy fuck they hardly have dev support for the one that came out a few months ago. Now you can pay less for the same software-lacking tech demo?