Future Apple Vision: What to expect from Apple's next headsets

Posted:
in Apple Vision Pro

Apple's follow-up to the Apple Vision Pro could improve upon an already pretty solid design. Here's what's been rumored about Apple's continued pushes into Spatial Computing.

Sleek virtual reality headset with a large, reflective black visor and an adjustable gray strap, displayed against a blurred background.
An Apple Vision Pro at an Apple Store



Since the launch of the Apple Vision Pro at WWDC 2023 and the release of the headset in February 2024, Apple has enjoyed some success with its headset. It's been celebrated for its design and how it can help in industries such as medical care.

However, as a $3,500 mixed-reality headset that's still in its first generation, it has also struggled a bit to secure sales.

As with pretty much every product Apple produces, after launch, the rumor mill's attention gravitates towards the next version of the device. Here's what the speculation about Apple's headset follow-up says is on the way.

Double Apple Vision



Apple is never working on only one generation of device. It has the luxury and financial ability to have multiple products in development.

Even in the early days of headset rumors, Apple was said to be working on multiple headset designs. For example, in late 2022, it was said Apple had two headsets in the works beyond the first headset release, as well as the rumored Apple Glass smart glasses.

Hands holding a virtual reality headset, focusing on the lenses inside.
The consumer Apple Vision may downgrade the displays.



Supposedly under the codename "N602," the second-generational release was said to consist of two variants. One version would provide an improvement over the first Apple Vision Pro to consumers, as a premium option.

The other, the more consumer-grade edition, would be a low-priced alternative, potentially changing the specification to cut costs.

A year later in November 2023, the rumors continued the narrative of there being a premium follow-up with high specifications. A second mass-market edition with a lower price was also expected.

Half the Apple Vision Pro cost



That November 2023 report indicated that the consumer-grade version of the Apple Vision Pro follow-up could end up being a lot cheaper for Apple to make.

While the report doesn't state a price to consumers, the ultimate price tag would depend on what Apple could do to cut the cost of production.

Close-up of a finger holding a sleek, high-tech visor with a reflective black surface and embedded circular sensors.
You may see fewer cameras on a future cheaper Apple Vision headset.



It was claimed that Apple aimed to reduce the Bill of Materials down to half of what the Apple Vision Pro costs.

In October, it was proposed the cost could be brought down to between $1,500 to $2,500, thanks to some considerable hardware trimming.

By May 2024, leakers were reiterating the $1,500 to $2,500 price tag.

Apple Vision's specifications diet



To bring the cost down, Apple has to make significant cuts to some of its highest-priced components.

In June 2023, a report proposed that the three highest costs are the camera and sensor array, the use of two Apple Silicon chips, and twin 4K microLED displays.

These cuts could take the form of using fewer external cameras for the sensor array than used in the Apple Vision Pro. Apple could also replace the dual chips for a single Apple Silicon chip, or even an A-series version as used in its iPhone lineup.

The displays could also be switched to slightly lower-resolution versions.

A simpler headband design, the use of AirPods for spatial audio, the loss of the 3D camera feature, and removing automatic interpupillary distance adjustments could also be on the block.

However, while the report offered that the external EyeSight display would remain, the outlet changed its tune by October. Instead, the screen would be removed, saving costs.

Apple Vision may not be self-sufficient



The Apple Vision Pro is known as an all-in-one device, in that it can work independently of other hardware. Unlike earlier VR headsets, it doesn't need to be tethered to a host that can handle most of its processing.

That may not be the case for the next version. As part of the cost-cutting and weight loss for the headset, Apple may need to look to using a host device.

A pair of sleek virtual reality goggles on a white table next to a silver rectangular device, with a blurred colorful background.
The Apple Vision Pro is tethered to a battery.



In June 2024, a report claimed that the Apple Vision could end up being a tethered piece of hardware, connected to an iPhone or Mac.

For Apple, this would not only cut the cost by reducing onboard processing, but it would also build a "tier" system into the range. While the Apple Vision Pro models could be working on their own, the non-Pro could be the tethered versions.

Next Apple Vision in 2025 -- maybe



The next iteration of the Apple Vision Pro could end up being closer than people think. At least, according to some reports.

In February 2024, Bloomberg offered that there could be at least 18 months from the date of publication until a new headset is introduced. That would put a headset launch in late summer 2025.

However, the report doesn't go into detail about the timing, nor whether it is a hunch or based on external sources.

By June, there were claims that Apple was reaching out to manufacturers of small OLED-on-Silicon panels for a new mixed-reality headset. While Sony is a current supplier for the Apple Vision Pro, Apple had apparently sent a request to its usual display partners LG and Samsung.

The report at the time said that the panels would measure 2 to 2.1 inches in size, larger than the 1.42 inches of the Apple Vision Pro's panels. However, they would also be just half the resolution, meaning they could be used in the consumer-grade version.

As for the second-generation premium model, June also saw claims from a supplier that work had stalled. However, progress on the consumer-grade model was still ongoing.

A weight lifted



While the specifications, features, and pricing of the headset are still largely unknown, one thing that should change is the weight.

Before the release of the Apple Vision Pro, a report claimed the current version was determined to be "too heavy for some users" in testing. Neck strain complaints were apparently raised by testers.

Modern virtual reality headset with a sleek design, large lenses, and a comfortable, adjustable fabric strap.
The current Apple Vision Pro design is quite heavy



This was a sentiment shared by AppleInsider itself with its own trial of the device. After an hour and a half of use, "light neck fatigue" was encountered.

The complaints have apparently been taken onboard by Apple, and will be a factor in the production of future headsets.

The next Apple Vision could still leave a hole in your wallet, and may not necessarily offer the same performance as the first headset outing. At least you won't be in as much pain.



Read on AppleInsider

«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 26
    stashmanstashman Posts: 91member
    Adaptive optics (focal distances change, depending on what you’re looking at within the scene) is something that Apple really needs to add to make VR/AR viable for long sessions.
    williamlondon
  • Reply 2 of 26
    miiwtwomiiwtwo Posts: 58member
    Play For Dream MR is the perfect example than you can make a huge device for less money, but we know apple  B)
    edited July 1
  • Reply 3 of 26
    When anyone… tries to predict the future… I just remember him/he a couple of things.

    1— Alan Kay —famous American scientist— uses to say: “The best way to predict the future is inventing it.” That is what Apple does!

    2— Before predicting the future… say 5 years in advance… please do the following test.
    See yourself in July 2019. Did you imagine that by now… we have Apple Silicon devides? And that we are int  4th versions of them? (If you are honest with yourself… you will admit that you thought we would still be on Intel!)
    Did you think that Apple would deliver a complete developed Vision Pro?
    Did you think that Apple would deliver… small things… like Emergency SOS by Satellite?
    Did you think that Apple would present… Apple Intelligence… with the privacy-protecting Persons Cloud Compute?

    I'm sure that… neither you nor me… thought that things in 2019… maybe just one chip with Apple silicon.
    After that test… rewrite your article!
    AfarstarAlex1N
  • Reply 4 of 26
    bloggerblogbloggerblog Posts: 2,480member
    I hope Apple doesn’t sacrifice display quality in an effort to make it cheaper 
    rmusikantowmeterestnzwilliamlondonslow n easydanox
  • Reply 5 of 26
    thrangthrang Posts: 1,024member
    I hope Apple doesn’t sacrifice display quality in an effort to make it cheaper 
    In fact, we need much more resolution (pixels per degree) than less. Right now it's 34 ppd, which is excellent among headsets, but less than half of an iPhone or iPad held at normal distance. I could not get over the softness of text and icons during two demos, so between that, below average pass-through quality, and glare in many instances, I could not purchase as much as I (thought) I wanted before the demos...
    meterestnzAlex1Nslow n easydanox
  • Reply 6 of 26
    dave marshdave marsh Posts: 352member
    An interesting speculation, indeed.  To reduce costs, there will definitely be a trade-off over components/features.  After using the Vision Pro for the past five months, I’d comment that the weight issue is WHERE the weight is, not how much it is.  I used to ride a motorcycle in my youth and wearing a heavy helmet all day wasn’t an issue, since it sat on top of my head, not hanging off my face.  So, a proper head strap setup should handle that.  

    Seoncdly, I’d suggest that the emotional appeal of 3D family images taken with the Vision Pro are a killer feature, and should not be removed from a future less expensive model.  That feature alone certainly has driven sales.

    Now, if they’d just deal with the lack of prism support in optical inserts for double vision customers, I’d be fully satisfied.  It should be straightforward to use software to let the customer tweak the image alignment from each 4K screen to provide full functionality for vision impaired customers.
    Alex1Nslow n easy
  • Reply 7 of 26
    charlesncharlesn Posts: 939member
    "However, as a $3,500 mixed-reality headset that's still in its first generation, it has also struggled a bit to secure sales."

     You state this as a fact. And yet the fact is, you have ZERO facts to back this up. NONE. You link to a report from Kuo, who has been all over the map in his assessments about how Vision Pro is doing -- so which Kuo quote do you want to believe? And even his baseless assessment that orders have been cut is based on the totally faulty premise that they were cut vs a "market consensus" for expected sales that doesn't even exist! There has never been a "market consensus" for estimated Vision Pro sales--like Kuo's own quotes, brokerage house estimates have been all over the map. The 700K-800K "market consensus" figure in the Kuo report is a complete fiction and totally made up. I'm sorry, but as an Apple news site, you have a greater responsibility not to be publishing bullshite piled onto a mountain of guano as "fact." No one in their right mind, and certainly not Apple, would expect that a $3500 v1.0 device of an all-new computing platform was going to be a big seller out of the gate.

    Who is VP 1.0 for? Think about it: well-heeled early adopters, the wealthy who simply like owning the latest toys plus developers and companies looking to explore and exploit the capabilities and possibilities that this new platform offers. That's a very limited market and entirely expected. The larger market success of Vision Pro was always going to be tied to future iterations of the product at the inevitably lower price points and more mature development of both the hardware and OS that are necessary to attract that bigger market.

    Anyone writing off Vision Pro now is obviously ignorant of basic Apple history: it took many years for the Mac to break through from niche computer to larger market success.
    edited July 1 muthuk_vanalingamrmusikantowwilliamlondondanoxKierkegaardenAlex1Nslow n easyaderutterdewmeStrangeDays
  • Reply 8 of 26
    y2any2an Posts: 202member
    Apple sells value, not price cuts. The iPhone became more essential and a better value proposition for the price by incorporating better cameras and taking over the pocket camera space. Apple already signalled the value proposition in professional spaces by emphasising the simulated dual and extra-wide monitor support - bringing Vision Pro close in value to something professionals could buy instead. I expect this to be the trajectory: constant price, better value. Concern over sales is misplaced; this is a technology development platform and what Apple showed at WWDC is that there are great products in the works right now. I would wait a year for those products and the dev platform to harden before looking at sales. 

    I’m also sure that work on a junior platform will inherit the best from the Pro, but the key design criteria will be weight. The Pro version will move to M4 while the junior model will use M2 or M3 (A series? Doubtful. Need much higher multitasking support, and games are crucial.) The use of a metal frame in the Pro is interesting as it added to the weight; I would call it good for prototyping but not mass production for a wearable, so expect to see innovation in materials. 

    danoxAlex1Nslow n easymattinoz
  • Reply 9 of 26
    JamesCudeJamesCude Posts: 54member
    Sales have struggled “a bit” as in quite a lot.
    williamlondonnubus
  • Reply 10 of 26
    charlesn said:
    "However, as a $3,500 mixed-reality headset that's still in its first generation, it has also struggled a bit to secure sales."

     You state this as a fact. And yet the fact is, you have ZERO facts to back this up. NONE. You link to a report from Kuo, who has been all over the map in his assessments about how Vision Pro is doing -- so which Kuo quote do you want to believe? And even his baseless assessment that orders have been cut is based on the totally faulty premise that they were cut vs a "market consensus" for expected sales that doesn't even exist! There has never been a "market consensus" for estimated Vision Pro sales--like Kuo's own quotes, brokerage house estimates have been all over the map. The 700K-800K "market consensus" figure in the Kuo report is a complete fiction and totally made up. I'm sorry, but as an Apple news site, you have a greater responsibility not to be publishing bullshite piled onto a mountain of guano as "fact." No one in their right mind, and certainly not Apple, would expect that a $3500 v1.0 device of an all-new computing platform was going to be a big seller out of the gate.

    Who is VP 1.0 for? Think about it: well-heeled early adopters, the wealthy who simply like owning the latest toys plus developers and companies looking to explore and exploit the capabilities and possibilities that this new platform offers. That's a very limited market and entirely expected. The larger market success of Vision Pro was always going to be tied to future iterations of the product at the inevitably lower price points and more mature development of both the hardware and OS that are necessary to attract that bigger market.

    Anyone writing off Vision Pro now is obviously ignorant of basic Apple history: it took many years for the Mac to break through from niche computer to larger market success.
    Well said.  It surprises me that even some “journalists” these days don’t put the work into verifying the truth of what they report on. Many people are so easily manipulated in believing anything, no matter how absurd, and without anything to back it up.
    Alex1NmattinozStrangeDays
  • Reply 11 of 26
    williamlondonwilliamlondon Posts: 1,379member
    JamesCude said:
    Sales have struggled “a bit” as in quite a lot.
    And your proof of that is what, pulled out of your backside?
    StrangeDays
  • Reply 12 of 26
    CheeseFreezeCheeseFreeze Posts: 1,297member
    I have an Apple Vision Pro. It’s a devkit version and got it for free. The only real difference with the final version is that there’s an additional USB-C port and tiny cable sticking out. 

    It’s clumsy and uncomfortable to wear. It’s too heavy. The face mask thingie connects magnetically and constantly falls off when you pick it up. 
    The external battery feels like I’m using an old school HTC Vive again.

    But the biggest problem is: there is not much you can do with it. You have your apps, like Mail, but it’s easier and more productive to use your MacBook or iPhone. 
    You can have multiple screens all around you but I never wanted that anyway. Not if I have to lose out on productivity. The eye tracking and select gesture works really well but it doesn’t replace a keyboard and mouse.
    Most games are projected flat, on a place - yes, 3D games. Some of them are nice but there’s not a single game that is an instant hit like Beat Saber. The FaceTime avatar is nice but incredibly creepy. I tried it with a coworker who has an AVP as well.

    There is no real added value compared to, say, a Meta Quest 3, even with the very useful eye tracking. The content discovery experience is sterile, cold, boring, while the Quest has amazing games and simply ‘knows’ that it is its own medium and not trying to be a new sort of computer for productivity.
    Similarly the AVP provides no added value to a phone, desktop or tablet either. 

    AVP is one of these few initiatives at Apple that will not pan out. They have the money to keep it alive but it’s clear they don’t know what to do with their own invention. 
    muthuk_vanalingamnubuswilliamlondondewme
  • Reply 13 of 26
    slow n easyslow n easy Posts: 362member
    I would never want a lesser Apple Vision Pro. The reason I haven’t bought one yet is because it’s not good enough yet, not because it’s too expensive. They need to address the weight issue by maybe using different materials or maybe by better weight distribution. I wouldn’t mind if they got rid of the front facing screen because I have no use for that, but the camera resolution needs to increase, not decrease. Battery life also needs to be a lot better. I didn’t buy the watch until the Series 4 because that is when it was good enough in my opinion. I’m sure that I will love the Apple Vision Pro, but I’ll sit out the first few iterations of it.
    williamlondondanox
  • Reply 14 of 26
    aderutteraderutter Posts: 618member
    For me the best compromise will be using iphone, ipad or mac for the brains, airpods for the ears and new input abilities tied to the Apple Watch, maybe even add a Ring for the non-Watch hand. 
  • Reply 15 of 26
    charlesncharlesn Posts: 939member
    AVP is one of these few initiatives at Apple that will not pan out. They have the money to keep it alive but it’s clear they don’t know what to do with their own invention. 
    You obviously would have killed Apple Watch in the crib, too, because let's talk about v1.0 of that product: other than keeping time, it could do virtually nothing on its own unless you had it tethered to an iPhone that had to be with you. (So one could logically ask: why the hell do I need the watch if I have to have my iPhone with me anyway? I'll just use my phone!) The best that could be said about Watch v1.0 is that it was a tiny screen extension of your iPhone, but otherwise pretty useless and also incredibly slow. The marketing of Apple Watch positioned it more as fashion accessory than anything else with its easily swappable bands. And who can ever forget the ridiculous, celeb-bait 18K gold Apple Watch Edition priced up to $17,000, depending on the buckle.

    So... given that disastrous beginning, where is Apple Watch today? It is, by many orders of magnitude, the most successful watch in the 200 year history of watches. Not only has it left every other watch brand in the dust, it eclipsed the entire Swiss watch industry in sales years ago. But that didn't happen overnight. It took several YEARS of new models before the Watch was truly independent of the iPhone. And it took several YEARS of new models before a central purpose for Watch evolved that will carry it forward for years to come--a central purpose not considered for v1.0: health tracking. We're still in the early innings of sensor development for health purposes, but sales will absolutely explode when real-time blood pressure and glucose level monitoring are possible, and that's only a matter of time. 

    If you know anything about Apple history, and clearly you do not, many of its greatest successes, including the Mac, itself, took years to evolve beyond v1.0 into the hit products we now know them to be. Just to be clear: I'm not claiming that Vision Pro is going to be a hit. I can't know that. No one can. But what I can state with absolute certainty is whether it will become a hit or not will take several years of iterations to determine. Apple has been down this road before and--most importantly--has the cash to sustain the continued development that's necessary. 


    edited July 2 KierkegaardenwilliamlondonStrangeDaysdanox
  • Reply 16 of 26
    I have an Apple Vision Pro. It’s a devkit version and got it for free. The only real difference with the final version is that there’s an additional USB-C port and tiny cable sticking out. 

    It’s clumsy and uncomfortable to wear. It’s too heavy. The face mask thingie connects magnetically and constantly falls off when you pick it up. 
    The external battery feels like I’m using an old school HTC Vive again.

    But the biggest problem is: there is not much you can do with it. You have your apps, like Mail, but it’s easier and more productive to use your MacBook or iPhone. 
    You can have multiple screens all around you but I never wanted that anyway. Not if I have to lose out on productivity. The eye tracking and select gesture works really well but it doesn’t replace a keyboard and mouse.
    Most games are projected flat, on a place - yes, 3D games. Some of them are nice but there’s not a single game that is an instant hit like Beat Saber. The FaceTime avatar is nice but incredibly creepy. I tried it with a coworker who has an AVP as well.

    There is no real added value compared to, say, a Meta Quest 3, even with the very useful eye tracking. The content discovery experience is sterile, cold, boring, while the Quest has amazing games and simply ‘knows’ that it is its own medium and not trying to be a new sort of computer for productivity.
    Similarly the AVP provides no added value to a phone, desktop or tablet either. 

    AVP is one of these few initiatives at Apple that will not pan out. They have the money to keep it alive but it’s clear they don’t know what to do with their own invention. 
    It sounds like you’re not the customer for this product. Your complaints about comfort and use cases are subjective. You find it uncomfortable, but others are fine with the comfort. You prefer to use a single screen interface on a MacBook or iPhone, but others are more productive having multiple screens to work with in the spatial environment. I think FaceTime calls using the Persona is one of the best features, but others may disagree.  You complain about the light seal detaching, but mine has never detached accidentally because I don’t try to pick up the device by the light seal.

    For a first generation product, I am blown away by how refined and useful the Vision Pro is.  It is not for everyone, as no product is, but I have no doubt that Apple has a long term vision and road map for this device.  For those with a good imagination about where this technology could go, that is exciting.
    williamlondon
  • Reply 17 of 26
    nubusnubus Posts: 478member
    charlesn said:
    AVP is one of these few initiatives at Apple that will not pan out. They have the money to keep it alive but it’s clear they don’t know what to do with their own invention. 
    You obviously would have killed Apple Watch in the crib, too, because let's talk about v1.0 of that product: other than keeping time, it could do virtually nothing on its own unless you had it tethered to an iPhone 
    Watch 0-series hardware was OK and iPhone dependency as well. Problem was market positioning. Apple fixed that with a focus on health.

    AVP… where will Apple take it? The R&D cost must be paid. Northrop-Apple or another major vertical?  For consumers AVP is mainly for rich couch potatoes without family or friends. Most people want to be social when watching a game or movie. We want to drink a beer and have some snacks.

    AVP is tech looking for a market. New hardware is only needed when we know where to use the tech or for testing more concepts.
    williamlondon
  • Reply 18 of 26
    charlesncharlesn Posts: 939member
    nubus said:
    charlesn said:
    AVP is one of these few initiatives at Apple that will not pan out. They have the money to keep it alive but it’s clear they don’t know what to do with their own invention. 
    You obviously would have killed Apple Watch in the crib, too, because let's talk about v1.0 of that product: other than keeping time, it could do virtually nothing on its own unless you had it tethered to an iPhone 
    Watch 0-series hardware was OK and iPhone dependency as well. Problem was market positioning. Apple fixed that with a focus on health.

    AVP… where will Apple take it? The R&D cost must be paid. Northrop-Apple or another major vertical?  For consumers AVP is mainly for rich couch potatoes without family or friends. Most people want to be social when watching a game or movie. We want to drink a beer and have some snacks.

    AVP is tech looking for a market. New hardware is only needed when we know where to use the tech or for testing more concepts.
    Apple has been down this road before with a v1.0 product. The original Macintosh, especially at its price point, was tech looking for a market. The original iPad--which was widely panned as "Just a big iPhone and who needs that?"--was tech looking for a market. The Watch was tech looking for a market. What these products have in common with VP is that they brought a new set of capabilities and possibilities that were developed and utilized over time to evolve them into the hit products they became. The instant naysayers of VP are ignorant of Apple history and how it became the world's most valuable company. And that's fine--your opinions are meaningless and Apple will continue on its path to creating the next great thing. 
    StrangeDays
  • Reply 19 of 26
    dewmedewme Posts: 5,534member
    The Apple Vision Pro has been in customer's hands for exactly five (5) months as of today. I think it is a bit premature to make any bold declarations about its future at this point. It hasn't even gotten its first baby tooth yet and is still crawling around in diapers. 

    As a buyer of the first release of Apple Watch, which didn't even earn itself a series number, I don't know whether I would categorize the AVP's future growth potential as being analogous to the Apple Watch. Nobody was talking about a supposed need to cost reduce the Apple Watch Series ? to bring down its price point in ways that could potentially degrade its capabilities. It already had a fairly wide range of pricing options from the reasonable (Aluminum) to the absolutely absurd (Edition). I still found the Series ? very useful as an iPhone companion/remote, full featured watch with alarms and timers, step counter, and a convenient way to catch a glimpse of either, messages, emails, notifications, etc. Subsequent releases of the Apple Watch consistently ratcheted up the performance, number of features, quality of the features, and focused more on personal health management. Connectivity kept getting better too with the addition of LTE support and battery life improved. The trajectory was always up, up, and up, never down. Apple didn't trying to match what others were doing in the same space, they went big and set the high bar for the entire market.

    Some of the "get cheap quick" measures that are being bandied about for the Apple Vision Pro are quite the opposite of the trajectories that Apple tends to follow. I suppose you could harken back to the Apple Lisa being in over its head on price that contributed to the motivation that drove the Apple MacIntosh to target a much more reasonable price target while pulling some of the highlights from the Lisa. I don't see a direct analogy with the Apple Vision Pro being the "Lisa" to some unknown and cost reduced "Apple Vision Not-So-Pro." The Lisa had no contemporaries that I'm aware of that it was looking to one-up. With nobody else already in the pool, Apple could afford to take an alternative path with the Lisa concept, even to the point of targeting a much lower price point. The pool was empty at that point for the type of computer Apple wants to build. The Apple Vision Pro isn't jumping into an empty pool. There are already other players in the pool. In typical Apple fashion, Apple was in no mood to play at the same level and the same game the others were already playing. Apple went big with the intent to blow the existing players out of the water on as many fronts as they could. But obviously, there were some things they couldn't dominate just like the MacIntosh couldn't derail the PC and PC clones.

    I have a hard time seeing Apple backtracking on the vision they established with the Vision Pro simply to bring the price down. If they took that approach with the iPhone, which was considered way too expensive by the other players already in the market upon its first release, the second release of the iPhone would have had a physical keyboard and cost $300 USD. Apple didn't retreat at all, they just kept on improving the iPhone in every way they could and even grew the price points over time to reflect the far greater capabilities. They kept their foot on the gas. I believe Apple will keep their foot on the gas with Vision Pro and further enhance and improve the product and everything around it. They will keep pushing to leave the competition further behind them by redefining what a VR/AR headset can do, i.e., spatial computing. Apple isn't trying to build a better gaming headset. At some point the other players in this market will realize they either have to try to emulate what Apple is doing or resign themselves to building headsets that aren't going after the same kind of customers Apple is satisfying with its more advanced products that go beyond entertainment and gaming and open up new opportunities in areas like productivity enhancement, healthcare, 3D design, simulation, 3D dynamic and interactive modelling, spatial man-machine interfaces, human-robot collaboration, remote presence, etc. 

    Finally, one of the very first things you learn in Marketing 101 is that you never want to compete based on price. A race to the bottom is a losers game. It results in scenarios where businesses like gas stations and drug stores have to sell candy, beer, cigarettes, week old hotdogs, and huge tubs of sugary soft drinks to make a profit because their primary business purpose, like selling gasoline or filling prescriptions, is no longer profitable. Bad game to be in.


  • Reply 20 of 26
    I find it interesting that people consider the Apple Vision Pro primarily a media consumption device when in my experience it has been a fabulous productivity increaser. I often use it in concert with my MacBook Pro, going back-and-forth between vision apps, and Mac Apps. It is ideal for zoom meetings and for seeing documents being displayed. I find I spend more time in productivity activities than I do in media consumption, although I do like it for media consumption. I also love the fact that one can do spatial Home movies. Typically I will use my Vision Pro from 4 to 6 hours a day, and forget that I’m even wearing it. I use the solo strap combined with a second soul strap to support the weight from above with some custom clips. I found this to be a near perfect solution. So far the device has been worth every penny, and I bought the most expensive one.
    williamlondondewme
Sign In or Register to comment.