"The comparison of its cost being in the same ballpark as a high-end television, sound system, computer, and camera but providing more value "may be factually true" but is still "quite misleading," suggests Gurman. TVs are intended to be shared, unlike the headset's single-user existence, not to mention that potential Vision Pro buyers probably already own the mentioned hardware."
Gurman is the one being misleading. Buying a 4K OLED TV that can be shared with other viewers is limited to the sizes that are currently available on the market. Can you buy a movie theater screen sized OLED TV? No. Can you buy a drive-in theater sized OLED TV? No. But those are experiences that Apple Vision Pro can provide. And the price for a 98 inch 4K OLED is currently in the $12K to $14K range...enough to buy multiple Apple VPs.
You can always sit closer to your TV screen if you want it to fit more of your field of vision and you are the only person watching it.
And there is nothing cheap anywhere in the Apple product line. Different prices, different capabilities...none of it "cheap."
I wouldn’t go as far as saying that.
Apple has gone cheap(er):
iPhone SE Non Pro iPhones iPad Entry level MacBooks Entry level iMacs
I would go as far to guess that Apple does have a cheaper version that will ship mid year 2024.
I think this was a giant consumer feedback session from developers and the public.
I doubt Apple has even started manufacturing them. I would hope that we start to see pics of parts of the cheaper model now that we know what it is and what it will look like.
The difference is that none of the items you mention compromise the experience of using an iPhone, iPad, Mac, ... in fundamental ways, while this cheaper VP that Gurman has pulled out of thin air would absolutely do so.
And there is nothing cheap anywhere in the Apple product line. Different prices, different capabilities...none of it "cheap."
I wouldn’t go as far as saying that.
Apple has gone cheap(er):
iPhone SE Non Pro iPhones iPad Entry level MacBooks Entry level iMacs
I would go as far to guess that Apple does have a cheaper version that will ship mid year 2024.
I think this was a giant consumer feedback session from developers and the public.
I doubt Apple has even started manufacturing them. I would hope that we start to see pics of parts of the cheaper model now that we know what it is and what it will look like.
The difference is that none of the items you mention compromise the experience of using an iPhone, iPad, Mac, ... in fundamental ways, while this cheaper VP that Gurman has pulled out of thin air would absolutely do so.
Depends on what they cheap out on. A plastic enclosure would be cheaper than an aluminium one, but would probably not compromise the experience much, hell it'd make the thing lighter so might improve it. Ditching the earpieces so people can use their own AirPods would probably be experience neutral as well, providing users actually had the AirPods.
And there is nothing cheap anywhere in the Apple product line. Different prices, different capabilities...none of it "cheap."
I wouldn’t go as far as saying that.
Apple has gone cheap(er):
iPhone SE Non Pro iPhones iPad Entry level MacBooks Entry level iMacs
I would go as far to guess that Apple does have a cheaper version that will ship mid year 2024.
I think this was a giant consumer feedback session from developers and the public.
I doubt Apple has even started manufacturing them. I would hope that we start to see pics of parts of the cheaper model now that we know what it is and what it will look like.
The difference is that none of the items you mention compromise the experience of using an iPhone, iPad, Mac, ... in fundamental ways, while this cheaper VP that Gurman has pulled out of thin air would absolutely do so.
Depends on what they cheap out on. A plastic enclosure would be cheaper than an aluminium one, but would probably not compromise the experience much, hell it'd make the thing lighter so might improve it. Ditching the earpieces so people can use their own AirPods would probably be experience neutral as well, providing users actually had the AirPods.
I’ll be surprised if it doesn’t ship with an M3 processor at launch. I wouldn’t buy one until it does.
Why? What's so special about the M3, a chip that we don't know anything about? Why not wait for an M4 instead? Or, conversely, what's wrong with the M2?
A 13 inch MacBook Pro moderately equipped 24GB memory and 512GB SSD is 1900 dollars, if you add 11 camera’s and one Apple R1 processor probably the cost is 2500-2700 dollars? if not more, the price of the Apple Vision Pro is probably priced fairly. It is basically a miniaturize MacBook Pro laptop with 11 additional cameras and another new desktop class R1 SOC. (whose true specs haven’t been shared yet? Also, I don’t think Apple has shared with the public the total memory used?)
I don’t see how the Apple Vision Pro could ever be less than two grand realistically, usually the more you miniaturize something the higher the price.
It could easily dip below the $2,000 mark but that would mean slapping it into the regular VR space.
Removing bells and whistles to hit a lower end customer is very much part of the plan IMO.
Just like there are Pro and Non-Pro lines for Macs, phones and tablets.
In this particular case there are a plethora of actual products or announced products that are already in the public eye so it made no sense for Apple not to go there, yet.
Apple isn't going to remove "bells and whistles"; that's just nonsense, but sure, this is the part where you outline what those "bells and whistles" are that could be removed. Knock yourself out.
Obviously, Apple will cost reduce components through redesign and take advantage of quantity pricing power, and more performant hardware, but that isn't going to generate all that much impact on the next iteration.
Lowering resolution, removing iris scanner, removing 3D camera, using controllers instead of the camera array/eye tracker.
Easy, and it allows for one of Apple’s preferred tricks: upsell.
There are plenty of ways to bring the price down and catch lower hanging fruit who would, and this is the kicker, purchase equivalent devices from competitors.
LOL!
You amaze me with your lack of intellect...or is it just your narcissism?
Do you really believe that Apple would go to all the trouble, and the expense, to develop a UI that doesn't require a controller, market it at a two hour event and beyond, receive almost universal praise for that UI, just as an upsell "trick"?
I hope you realise that there is no real magic in physical controllers. They are cheap too.
It would be supremely easy to implement and would reduce the BOM in terms of cost and complexity.
They need not be handheld either. Remember the suggestion of rings? Who knows!?
As for the idea of developing a UI at expense that doesn't require a controller and then accepting one, well, maybe the idea of using a mouse and keyboard with an iPad is beyond your comprehension. Oh well!
Intellect, you say?
Remember, I'm not saying they are going to do anything specifically.
I'm saying what could be done.
Just ideas.
I think the cost cutting won’t happen in hardware, but in software capability if the Vision Pro, can run all of the existing Mac OS software that most people like to use on a Mac, Apple may upsell that way, if it is able to run 95% of the software currently on a Mac (Cad, 3D, and certain draw programs probably not, due to unique controls), however there will be people that will try to use the Vision Pro as a laptop replacement. (that’s where developers come in)
But that remains to be seen, but in time I think there would be many people by the second generation who will, and those people will probably use a iPhone and a Vision Pro and that’s it. In the end, it depends on how good that new interface is, if it’s able to do everything, a keyboard, a mouse, and a trackpad can do, that would be the upsell.
Also that MagSafe battery power cable has to have some type of wired data input/output like the Gigabit Ethernet power cable on the 24 inch iMac?
A 13 inch MacBook Pro moderately equipped 24GB memory and 512GB SSD is 1900 dollars, if you add 11 camera’s and one Apple R1 processor probably the cost is 2500-2700 dollars? if not more, the price of the Apple Vision Pro is probably priced fairly. It is basically a miniaturize MacBook Pro laptop with 11 additional cameras and another new desktop class R1 SOC. (whose true specs haven’t been shared yet? Also, I don’t think Apple has shared with the public the total memory used?)
I don’t see how the Apple Vision Pro could ever be less than two grand realistically, usually the more you miniaturize something the higher the price.
It could easily dip below the $2,000 mark but that would mean slapping it into the regular VR space.
Removing bells and whistles to hit a lower end customer is very much part of the plan IMO.
Just like there are Pro and Non-Pro lines for Macs, phones and tablets.
In this particular case there are a plethora of actual products or announced products that are already in the public eye so it made no sense for Apple not to go there, yet.
Apple isn't going to remove "bells and whistles"; that's just nonsense, but sure, this is the part where you outline what those "bells and whistles" are that could be removed. Knock yourself out.
Obviously, Apple will cost reduce components through redesign and take advantage of quantity pricing power, and more performant hardware, but that isn't going to generate all that much impact on the next iteration.
Lowering resolution, removing iris scanner, removing 3D camera, using controllers instead of the camera array/eye tracker.
Easy, and it allows for one of Apple’s preferred tricks: upsell.
There are plenty of ways to bring the price down and catch lower hanging fruit who would, and this is the kicker, purchase equivalent devices from competitors.
LOL!
You amaze me with your lack of intellect...or is it just your narcissism?
Do you really believe that Apple would go to all the trouble, and the expense, to develop a UI that doesn't require a controller, market it at a two hour event and beyond, receive almost universal praise for that UI, just as an upsell "trick"?
I hope you realise that there is no real magic in physical controllers. They are cheap too.
It would be supremely easy to implement and would reduce the BOM in terms of cost and complexity.
They need not be handheld either. Remember the suggestion of rings? Who knows!?
As for the idea of developing a UI at expense that doesn't require a controller and then accepting one, well, maybe the idea of using a mouse and keyboard with an iPad is beyond your comprehension. Oh well!
Intellect, you say?
Remember, I'm not saying they are going to do anything specifically.
I'm saying what could be done.
Just ideas.
I think the cost cutting won’t happen in hardware, but in software capability if the Vision Pro, can run all of the existing Mac OS software that most people like to use on a Mac, Apple may upsell that way, if it is able to run 95% of the software currently on a Mac (Cad, 3D, and certain draw programs probably not, due to unique controls), however there will be people that will try to use the Vision Pro as a laptop replacement. (that’s where developers come in)
But that remains to be seen, but in time I think there would be many people by the second generation who will, and those people will probably use a iPhone and a Vision Pro and that’s it. In the end, it depends on how good that new interface is, if it’s able to do everything, a keyboard, a mouse, and a trackpad can do it, that would be the upsell.
There's no reason to actually believe this rumor. Gurman is not some oracle who knows what Apple is doing, he's simply guessing what he thinks they will do, and as he often is he may be completely wrong, particularly because in this case his guess seems to be largely based on what other companies would do.
I’ll be surprised if it doesn’t ship with an M3 processor at launch. I wouldn’t buy one until it does.
Why? What's so special about the M3, a chip that we don't know anything about? Why not wait for an M4 instead? Or, conversely, what's wrong with the M2?
I'm waiting for the M5. It will likely ship with Steve Job's memory engrams. That unit must survive.
I’ll be surprised if it doesn’t ship with an M3 processor at launch. I wouldn’t buy one until it does.
Why? What's so special about the M3, a chip that we don't know anything about? Why not wait for an M4 instead? Or, conversely, what's wrong with the M2?
Well, the "special" thing about the M3 is that it will likely be released before the time the AVP is released, and it will then be the highest performance processor Apple has available (limiting consideration to each generation's base chip).
It's possible that Apple could bump it to the M3, but they also know when that will be out, and it's possible they chose the M2 for reasons other than that they can make demo units with it today. Reasons like cost, for example.
This follows the HomePod model. First release was the high end model, followed by a scaled down cheaper model.
Probably true, but how much would be sacrificed in this scaled down model? And, by how much? (Eventually, even this level of tech will reduce greatly in price, sure.)
But, would I pay even $600 for Vision Pro? I don't think so, as I can't think of a use-case worth it to me. I suppose at some point, I'd buy it for the novelty or a game. At the level of tech of the Vision Pro, it might be nice to have a remote-display capability at certain times. But, even then, I kind of doubt the comfort would allow it to replace my traditional desktop and display (and then there is the whole input aspect... I can't sit on the couch comfortably with keyboard/trackpad/mouse, so that greatly limits that fantasy).
This isn't to say there aren't uses. Like I've said, verticals. I'm sure companies dealing with architecture, construction, etc. will find them useful for certain kinds of visualization. Or, for example, Adam Curry (podcaster extraordinaire) mentioned the other day he'd love to have one if all his studio setup could be thrown up into a less-limited virtual space while he's recording. But, that kind of thing fits what I'm saying. Limited vertical market, relatively short-term use.
... For me, $3500 would be well worth it if I could use it to experience a virtual 3x4k *seamless* display for my MBP (or whatever). Then the idea of ancillary benefits would be a carrot on top. But that’s me. You’re likely different. Are you in the initial addressable market (with the budget) or not?
No wrong answers here
Keep in mind you actually have to wear this thing to experience that, though. It sounds great, yet I can't see wearing one for hours at a time, like I work on my desktop setup.
anonymouse said: I think Gurman has lost his mind on this one. He's basically saying they'll eliminate everything that makes the VP experience something special to hit a lower price point, just to have a cheap version on the market, even if it doesn't give an experience anything like the VP. Doesn't seem like a very Apple-like approach to the issue of price.
I think this first version of the VP is the baseline. Anything with less functionality won't fly. Eventually there will be a gen 2 that extends it beyond that baseline while at the same time the component costs come down, and this gen 1 version will be sold alongside it for a lower price. But stripping components and functionality to turn it into a lesser experience is not something I think will happen.
I think you're spot-on. What would they cut (currently)?
hammeroftruth said: I wouldn’t go as far as saying that.
Apple has gone cheap(er):
iPhone SE Non Pro iPhones ...
Those things all work fine for the core functionality. They are just missing some extra features or speed. If you drop things from the Vision Pro, I don't think you have a compelling experience any longer. Even though it is incredibly high-end compared to the competition, it is really quite minimalistic in terms of achieving the goal. It's just barely there in terms of going from an interesting toy, to something that might be actually useful.
chutzpah said: Depends on what they cheap out on. A plastic enclosure would be cheaper than an aluminium one, but would probably not compromise the experience much, hell it'd make the thing lighter so might improve it. Ditching the earpieces so people can use their own AirPods would probably be experience neutral as well, providing users actually had the AirPods.
True, but also wouldn't reduce the cost/price much.
I’ll be surprised if it doesn’t ship with an M3 processor at launch. I wouldn’t buy one until it does.
Why? What's so special about the M3, a chip that we don't know anything about? Why not wait for an M4 instead? Or, conversely, what's wrong with the M2?
No doubt. I'm holding out for an M3 (in a Mac Studio) because I'm hoping it will have RT and be more competitive with a $1500 PC (I'll otherwise have to buy). But, I'm not just holding out because the next one will be even better, or because I'm feeling somehow cheated if 'the latest thing' isn't in there.
danox said: I think the cost cutting won’t happen in hardware, but in software capability if the Vision Pro, can run all of the existing Mac OS software that most people like to use on a Mac, Apple may upsell that way, if it is able to run 95% of the software currently on a Mac (Cad, 3D, and certain draw programs probably not, due to unique controls), however there will be people that will try to use the Vision Pro as a laptop replacement. (that’s where developers come in)
But that remains to be seen, but in time I think there would be many people by the second generation who will, and those people will probably use a iPhone and a Vision Pro and that’s it. In the end, it depends on how good that new interface is, if it’s able to do everything, a keyboard, a mouse, and a trackpad can do, that would be the upsell.
Also that MagSafe battery power cable has to have some type of wired data input/output like the Gigabit Ethernet power cable on the 24 inch iMac?
I think you just highlighted a few of the many problems. But, the ultimate one is that technology keeps marching forward, and physics realities. There is a reason those CAD/3D people want a Studio Ultra, and aren't now using their iPhone 14 (or even iPad) connected to a monitor. The processing power to be competitive with the desktop will take tons more power and heat-dissipation than is possible for such a device.
I'm more interested in the spatial/remote display capability to be used with a Mac, if they do the interface correctly such that bunches of Mac apps could be included among the iOS ones in VR space. But, even then, I think the long-term wearing aspects are going to dampen the upsides.
Comments
I think the cost cutting won’t happen in hardware, but in software capability if the Vision Pro, can run all of the existing Mac OS software that most people like to use on a Mac, Apple may upsell that way, if it is able to run 95% of the software currently on a Mac (Cad, 3D, and certain draw programs probably not, due to unique controls), however there will be people that will try to use the Vision Pro as a laptop replacement. (that’s where developers come in)
But that remains to be seen, but in time I think there would be many people by the second generation who will, and those people will probably use a iPhone and a Vision Pro and that’s it. In the end, it depends on how good that new interface is, if it’s able to do everything, a keyboard, a mouse, and a trackpad can do, that would be the upsell.
Also that MagSafe battery power cable has to have some type of wired data input/output like the Gigabit Ethernet power cable on the 24 inch iMac?
It's possible that Apple could bump it to the M3, but they also know when that will be out, and it's possible they chose the M2 for reasons other than that they can make demo units with it today. Reasons like cost, for example.
But, would I pay even $600 for Vision Pro? I don't think so, as I can't think of a use-case worth it to me. I suppose at some point, I'd buy it for the novelty or a game. At the level of tech of the Vision Pro, it might be nice to have a remote-display capability at certain times. But, even then, I kind of doubt the comfort would allow it to replace my traditional desktop and display (and then there is the whole input aspect... I can't sit on the couch comfortably with keyboard/trackpad/mouse, so that greatly limits that fantasy).
This isn't to say there aren't uses. Like I've said, verticals. I'm sure companies dealing with architecture, construction, etc. will find them useful for certain kinds of visualization. Or, for example, Adam Curry (podcaster extraordinaire) mentioned the other day he'd love to have one if all his studio setup could be thrown up into a less-limited virtual space while he's recording. But, that kind of thing fits what I'm saying. Limited vertical market, relatively short-term use.
Keep in mind you actually have to wear this thing to experience that, though. It sounds great, yet I can't see wearing one for hours at a time, like I work on my desktop setup.
I think you're spot-on. What would they cut (currently)?
Those things all work fine for the core functionality. They are just missing some extra features or speed. If you drop things from the Vision Pro, I don't think you have a compelling experience any longer. Even though it is incredibly high-end compared to the competition, it is really quite minimalistic in terms of achieving the goal. It's just barely there in terms of going from an interesting toy, to something that might be actually useful.
No doubt. I'm holding out for an M3 (in a Mac Studio) because I'm hoping it will have RT and be more competitive with a $1500 PC (I'll otherwise have to buy). But, I'm not just holding out because the next one will be even better, or because I'm feeling somehow cheated if 'the latest thing' isn't in there.
I think you just highlighted a few of the many problems. But, the ultimate one is that technology keeps marching forward, and physics realities. There is a reason those CAD/3D people want a Studio Ultra, and aren't now using their iPhone 14 (or even iPad) connected to a monitor. The processing power to be competitive with the desktop will take tons more power and heat-dissipation than is possible for such a device.
I'm more interested in the spatial/remote display capability to be used with a Mac, if they do the interface correctly such that bunches of Mac apps could be included among the iOS ones in VR space. But, even then, I think the long-term wearing aspects are going to dampen the upsides.