Cheaper Apple Vision headset rumored to cost $2000, arriving in 2026

AppleInsider

A new report claims that both a successor to the Apple Vision Pro and a different, less expensive Apple Vision headset are likely to launch within the next two years.

Work continues on a successor to the Apple Vision Pro, alongside a less-expensive version.

Rumors suggest that the lower-end Apple Vision headset would likely cost around $2,000, compared to the $3,499 Apple Vision Pro. It would allegedly use a less-powerful chip and lower-resolution screens than the higher-end model.

Bloomberg's report suggests the lower-end headset would drop some technology seen in the Apple Vision Pro, such as the Eyesight feature. That required a lenticular display on the outside of the headset, allowing others to "see" the wearer's eyes.

The lower-end Apple Vision is likely to be powered by an A-series chip used in a future iPhone lineup rather than the M2 that currently runs the Apple Vision Pro. As for materials, it seems reasonable to assume that it will make greater use of lighter materials to make it less weighty on the wearer's head.

A successor to the current Apple Vision Pro is expected to ship alongside the lower-end Apple Vision model. This will give Apple the opportunity to offer consumers interested in an AR/VR headset a choice of features and price points.

Apple is said to expect to sell twice as many of the Apple Vision headset as it will the Apple Vision Pro, due to the lower price tag. Work continues on a second Apple Vision Pro, but the primary hardware change is currently expected to be an upgrade to the processor.

Both are expected to arrive at some point in 2026. Apple is said to also be working on an augmented-reality "smart glasses" project alongside the Apple Vision and Apple Vision Pro headsets.

Rumor Score: Possible

Read on AppleInsider

DAalseth

Dropping EyeSignt is more than the screen on the outside. It’s the cameras that looked at the wearers face, and all of the processing overhead to assemble and ‘undistort’ the eyes into the image on the front. This all was more cost and processing overhead that did not adde to the users experience. This is a very good first step. 

retrogusto

DAalseth said:

Dropping EyeSignt is more than the screen on the outside. It’s the cameras that looked at the wearers face, and all of the processing overhead to assemble and ‘undistort’ the eyes into the image on the front. This all was more cost and processing overhead that did not adde to the users experience. This is a very good first step. 

I wonder if some of those cameras might be needed for the digital avatar feature, but a lot of people would probably also be willing to give that up too if it meant a lighter and less expensive device. And some of the hardware will probably also just cost less over time, so they may not need to make too many sacrifices to produce a cheaper model. 

DAalseth

retrogusto said:

DAalseth said:

Dropping EyeSignt is more than the screen on the outside. It’s the cameras that looked at the wearers face, and all of the processing overhead to assemble and ‘undistort’ the eyes into the image on the front. This all was more cost and processing overhead that did not adde to the users experience. This is a very good first step. 

I wonder if some of those cameras might be needed for the digital avatar feature, but a lot of people would probably also be willing to give that up too if it meant a lighter and less expensive device. And some of the hardware will probably also just cost less over time, so they may not need to make too many sacrifices to produce a cheaper model. 

As others have said elsewhere, it may not make sense to go to a “less powerful chip”. Now that the M4 is out, the M2 IS the less powerful chip.