The fact that so many people are looking for weak excuses to say how it will fall is proof that it's a winner. If this was something pathetic it would've been ignored already. I certainly didn't go to any MS HaloLens or Google Glass-focused forums to detail every feature I didn't think was good enough or cheap enough for my needs. I looked at, I saw these were poorly implemented, had a laugh, and then moved on. Hell, I had even forgotten that MS HaloLens even existed until this thread.
I still don't know yet whether Apple Vision is for me, but it's definitely a brilliant level of engineering.
It's always the same. Everything Apple ever comes out with will fail, according to certain folks that frequent this site and many others. Just remember how much all these were going to 'fail'; iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, Apple silicon, and I probably missed a few. After all the times they have been made to look like total morons you'd think they'd learn, but no... I've made several million dollars with AAPL because I thought they were all winners; it's a shame some people didn't have more faith.
Did they mention how you are supposed to connect it to a computer to play VR games with it? I didn’t see mention of an additional cable or anything. Can it be plugged into a Windows machine as well? If not, it’s pretty useless for gaming. If the only games you can play on it are the ones you can download from the VR App Store, I don’t see how this is going to work as anything but an executive toy. No one is going to spend that much money to play Apple Arcade games.
Pretty amazing for a 1.0 product ... but the price is going to scare away a lot of regular folks.
The price will come down rapidly. In a few years, it may cost not much more than what the highest-end iPhone costs today.
Initially, it'll be pitched to developers, high-end gamers, corporations, universities, etc., and Apple will probably sell no more than a few hundred thousand. In five years' time, the company could be selling many tens of millions. Also, the fact that it seems to be thoroughly integrated with the iPhone, the iPad and the Mac will make the entire ecosystem of apps available right from the get-go makes it all the more attractive.
For the wide swath of functionality and level of refinement this product delivers in 2023 I actually think the price is fair and reasonable. I think it is an amazing device and I'm shocked that Apple could create something so technologically sophisticated and compelling at the level they did, in what is once again, a 1.0 product. My biggest concern with this product has nothing at all to do with price or functionality. I'm seriously concerned that some people will get totally lost in the augmented and virtual reality that this device creates and will become totally detached from physical reality. It seemed like a lot of the launch video was first person perspective, a singular soul sitting alone on the sofa or in a chair with this device strapped to their head. That could be you. Just add a feeding tube and catheter and you can stay there forever, all by yourself, alone and physically distanced from every single person on earth.
It's been hard enough to get people back into the office after working from home during the pandemic. This new product makes contemporary group meeting/collaboration apps like Zoom look like they were developed by the Flintstones. This will make getting people back in the office nearly impossible. Maybe that's a good thing for some folks.
Again, this reaction is based on what Apple has shown with a product at what is the lowest level of functionality and processing power that it will ever have. This is an iPhone 1 level and we know where it went to grow to what is now the iPhone 14 Pro. The Vision Pro may follow a similar pattern.
To all of the folks who are convulsing about the price, why are your reactions to this leading edge of what is a new product category any different than the pricing associated with the earliest incarnations of other high-end consumer tech products like 8K televisions that listed for $5000-$80,000, or even current high-end 11.2 AV receivers that sell in the $4000 range? We're living in an age where the average selling price of new cars is $50,000. I bet a lot of those new cars have vanity features and add-ons that cost more than the Vision Pro.
Will I buy a Vision Pro 1.0? Maybe. I will certainly test drive it to see whether it is even usable with my retinal/macular issues and post cataract surgery monovision. During the presentation they mentioned that the device uses foveated VR or something to that effect. I do not have a normal foveal contour in one of my eyes, which causes image distortion, specifically, straight lines appear curved exactly at my focal point. However, I'm more afraid that if my wife sees the commercials and it shows someone sitting alone immersed in an alternate universe with the thing strapped to their face she'll be much less than enthusiastic about the device and its potential negative impact on normal human interaction.
I'm fully expecting that the military and certain civilian agencies, like air traffic controllers, are going to go bonkers over the capabilities that this product demonstrates. I'm sure that other companies have shown working prototypes with similar capabilities, but Apple will be selling a commercial off the shelf product, not a prototype.
I still don't know yet whether Apple Vision is for me, but it's definitely a brilliant level of engineering.
It is. The amount of thought that went into it is obvious. But I also feel comfortable stating that Apple is not going into this expecting consumers to embrace this first version. It has its limitations for the price being demanded. it will be close to a year before even this one comes to the market, so look towards what 2025 brings.
Look at the original Mac cost, or the original MacBook Air cost. Look where those are now. How long has the Mac endured? Didn't one of the announcers (Craig?) just say that the 13" MBA was best selling laptop on the market?
Jobs only wanted to do 1% of the then the smartphone market and that was rife with limitations compared to other devices, which I can't say about Apple Vision Pro.
What I see what when I look at Apple Vision Pro is what the future holds for this product category. As of today, this is what all VR/AR is measured against... which is impressive since it's not even being released until the next calendar year.
That's what makes Apple special here. The hardest work has been done and I'm guessing that's been at least 5 years of direct work and possibly up to a decade, then you have all the vertical integration of technologies that will make it hard to compete with Apple price for true apples-to-apples comparisons on a given tech as well the SW integration that they've been perfecting and connecting across multiple categories in ways that no one else can because no one else can.
PS: Was this the first time Cook used the "One more thing..." line since Jobs' passing? I'm thinking it is. This is big.
It does not seem like a very Apple-y product, but that's not unexpected either. It's a first gen, and according to reports was intended for developers anyway. Three years out they may have something. At the moment it seems like it was pushed out to the retail market before it's fully hatched, and I'm not sure why altho I could guess there's some other nearly-finished products from potential competitors coming before the year is out.
No doubt some regular users here will rush to buy a Vision Pro anyway; after all, it's from Apple. By the time it's fully developed in gen 3 I would expect it to be half to a third of the current price. That's when it may capture my interest. Or not.
Well, it just saved me from buying more monitors, so it's pretty cheap. 3D camera capability looks fun.
Meanwhile, Google and Meta are furiously working back at the drawing board... Another Oh shi! moment for those guys, just like with iPhone and Apple Watch.
So to be clear, this will act as a monitor for the Mac as well? I render heaps of output from Wolfram Mathematica as 3D plots. I can see Wolfram introducing a VisionPro 3D rendering engine. The tech incorporated is astounding for the bulk volume of the device.
Folks forget that this is a pro “labeled” device meaning it’s going to have that “pro” price. To be honest, it’s the best AR/VR device that I’ve seen. I like that it’s a potential monitor replacement. Instead of two studio displays you can strap the Vision Pro on and have multiple displays everywhere.
I wear glasses and have my whole life. Will the device word for me???
It looks like it was supposed to be actual glasses but apple rushed it. So it’s scuba gear now.
I’d say don’t bother yet. When they get their act together and make a pair of glasses/sunglasses that does this, that might be great. But right now, it’s a bill gates level nerd toy. Which is fine if you have the cash and want a toy to tinker with. And there was a rumor that there would be corrective lenses on offer. Still waiting on that one.
But if you have always worn glasses, I don’t know that you’d want a screen so close to each eye for long periods of time.
What about any of this would lead you to think that this was supposed to be Google Glass 2.0? Yeah, that was such a home run even Google decided that one iteration was enough. Are you familiar with VR at all? Because if you were, it would be apparent why glasses or sunglasses wouldn't work, even assuming you could cram all this tech into a pair while having the glasses still appear totally normal. And no, you're not still waiting for corrective lenses to be on offer, but I guess you didn't watch the presentation which is pretty typical for troll posts. Apple is partnering with Zeiss to make corrective lenses available. So I'm sure you didn't see the long list of capabilities that make this anything but a nerd toy.
I still don't know yet whether Apple Vision is for me, but it's definitely a brilliant level of engineering.
It is. The amount of thought that went into it is obvious. But I also feel comfortable stating that Apple is not going into this expecting consumers to embrace this first version. It has its limitations for the price being demanded. it will be close to a year before even this one comes to the market, so look towards what 2025 brings.
Look at the original Mac cost, or the original MacBook Air cost. Look where those are now. How long has the Mac endured? Didn't one of the announcers (Craig?) just say that the 13" MBA was best selling laptop on the market?
Jobs only wanted to do 1% of the then the smartphone market and that was rife with limitations compared to other devices, which I can't say about Apple Vision Pro.
What I see what when I look at Apple Vision Pro is what the future holds for this product category. As of today, this is what all VR/AR is measured against... which is impressive since it's not even being released until the next calendar year.
That's what makes Apple special here. The hardest work has been done and I'm guessing that's been at least 5 years of direct work and possibly up to a decade, then you have all the vertical integration of technologies that will make it hard to compete with Apple price for true apples-to-apples comparisons on a given tech as well the SW integration that they've been perfecting and connecting across multiple categories in ways that no one else can because no one else can.
PS: Was this the first time Cook used the "One more thing..." line since Jobs' passing? I'm thinking it is. This is big.
I bought a Mac 128 with a dot matrix printer when it first came out. Probably about $3200 with tax. That was a whole lot of coin in 1984. It was limited, but groundbreaking at the same time.
So yeah, I'm with you and others impressed with Apple's supply chain on this. The amount, and quality, of the custom components throughout, and all of the technologies that Apple has had to master that are combined within the Vision Pro, are quite astonishing for a first iteration. We'll know soon enough of comparisons with competitor's equipment, but it appears that Apple has made a significant leap.
BTW, $3500 seems a bargain, given that this iteration isn't targeted at the consumer. I'll certainly give it a test when it arrives, just to answer the question of its utility for myself. That it is priced lower than a Nikon Z8 is notable, as that it a much desired mirrorless camera body, and those are selling very well.
Technically it looks very cool. Apple certainly can. The real question is if they should have. I don’t see this as solving a problem for many people. It’s more of a bragging right for Apple to show off their tech.
I have no interest (and I’m very pro-Apple and have been since 1984).
FFS!!!!!! It’s not magical. It’s scientific and engineering.
Every ground-breaking product commands an exorbitant price. When the first flat-panel telly came out it cost $29,990. The operating unit was separate from the telly itself and was tethered by a bunch of cables to the main display. But, if you wanted to have a telly that looked noticeably different from the furniture box that was the common product, had the money you went out and got one.
With time, the price of the componentry went down; the technology evolved and number of flat panel TVs on the market grew exponentially, so much so that even cheap motel rooms have clones of well-known brands on offer.
The only place you see the boxy telly is on the side of the street with the other garbage or if you have a grandparent that is an octogenarian and doesn’t stream anything other than urine.
Early dissension at Apple indicated that some insiders were not happy with the launch. Others felt that Apple needed a new product other than the iPhone of iPad or Mac or Watch. So they took a gamble on this. Risk, reward type of thing.
At $3799 I am not buying one. Even though I can easily afford two: one for me and one for my partner.
There is an simile theorem that goes like this: ‘The infinite monkey theorem states that a monkey hitting keys at random on a typewriter keyboard for an infinite amount of time will almost surely type any given text, including the complete works of William Shakespeare.
That’s what Apple has done here. They have oodles of cash; some of the best engineers on the planet and can cobble together known componentry: sensors, chips, screens, software etc. etc.
But in all of this cobbling together there is nothing revolutionary, just evolutionary bundling together of existing componentry by using their skill set and software nous.
The folks at Apple that dissented felt strongly that what the goggles need is another invention that is yet to be unleashed that will simplify the product and make it cheap enough to be affordable and successful.
In my view the early adopters of this product will be like the ones that bought into the $29,990 flat-panel telly. They helped pave the way with their wallets to products that can now be had for as little as $499 at a big box store.
So many haters hired by Meta, I guess. It looks actually fantastic. The price is little stiff though. I will probably wait for 3rd or 4th Gen. Do I have to say this? I would never buy the Meta.
Folks forget that this is a pro “labeled” device meaning it’s going to have that “pro” price. To be honest, it’s the best AR/VR device that I’ve seen. I like that it’s a potential monitor replacement. Instead of two studio displays you can strap the Vision Pro on and have multiple displays everywhere.
I think the best I have ever seen is 1 AR camera and a "Head Tracker" with PoS software! This thing is LOADED... worse than the biggest baddest baked potato you've never had!
I mean serious, this thing practically has two M2-class processors (speculation) and all these cameras looking inside and outside! NUTS...
My first Mac was a Mac Plus. I purchased it in late 1986 for $2,499, about $6,900 in today's dollars. For those complaining about the price of the Apple VisionPro, you need to understand that this device is not for you. This is a new paradigm. Looking at the specs, I suspect Apple barely makes money on the VisionPro. I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that Apple will be losing money on the initial release, which is why they are restricting its initial release to the US. It's also being released as a “Pro” product. Apps will be created; they will be amazing. Right now, it's a niche product. Five years from now, it could potentially supply all your computing, communication, gaming, and entertainment needs. This is truly a pivotal technology.
I'm watching the Platforms State of the Union video. I've never seen AR/VR broken down like this. Maybe this is the way that it's been handled by developers since its inception, but I've watched videos from other VR makers and I've never seen them break it down, yet I see Apple always do so. They think about the concept, they break it down into its core elements and then build a foundation up from there. I'd never say they are perfect (far from it),but if there's one company that truly embodies the Jobs old adage that Apple is the intersection of technology and liberal arts, it's Apple.
The iPhone replaced a phone/iPod The iPad replaced a cheap PC The Watch replaced, a watch AirPods replaced headphones Vision Pro replaces what? A ski mask?
The VisionPro pushes up against physical boundaries in areas such as optics, semiconductor architectures including those relevant to displays, processing and power management and laughs at them in ways only Apple (and to a similar extent, Tesla) can. This in a first generation device. Amazing.
Here though is my main concern:
I hope that Apple can become completely vertically integrated. Any conflict involving China, even if the US and allies don't become directly involved, is likely to destroy Apple's manufacturing model for some time at least. I'm interested in thoughts on whether Apple could manufacture on home soil right down to optics milling, chip fabbing and board and display fabrication.
It does not seem like a very Apple-y product, but that's not unexpected either. It's a first gen, and according to reports was intended for developers anyway. Three years out they may have something. At the moment it seems like it was pushed out to the retail market before it's fully hatched, and I'm not sure why altho I could guess there's some other nearly-finished products from potential competitors coming before the year is out.
No doubt some regular users here will rush to buy a Vision Pro anyway; after all, it's from Apple. By the time it's fully developed in gen 3 I would expect it to be half to a third of the current price. That's when it may capture my interest. Or not.
Not fully hatched?
It seems like they put a lot of love and energy into addressing all the shortcomings other AR headset suffer from. So I’m just curious as to what you need to see for it to be considered “fully hatched ”?
Dude, it's gatorguy, what did you expect? If he said he loved it, we'd all need to press him to get a brain MRI, stat, to find the tumor.
Right on. I’m not familiar with him or his brand of negativity.
You've confused realistic with negative. Apple may well have a hit on it's hands with future iterations, and if anyone can be successful with it, it's Apple. But it's not this version of it. In fact I don't expect this or even the next version to be useful for much outside of gaming and media consumption. Neither of those VR features are innovative, it's the traditional focus, but Apple is more likely than most to move this into compelling AR uses as 3rd party developers become more creative.
All that is simply opinion. Yours is too. It's a bit early to claim either, or neither of us is more accurate about how it plays out.
I don’t know why I said it that way, sorry. But I do agree that it will take a few models to gain mainstream success. As for the reasons you gave for it being not fully hatched…You can use that same logic with almost everything human beings have ever made. Evolution takes time. And money. But most importantly, patience.
The iPhone replaced a phone/iPod The iPad replaced a cheap PC The Watch replaced, a watch AirPods replaced headphones Vision Pro replaces what? A ski mask?
Should have kept Ive.
Richard Howarth was doing his best impression of Ive.
Comments
It's always the same. Everything Apple ever comes out with will fail, according to certain folks that frequent this site and many others. Just remember how much all these were going to 'fail'; iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, Apple silicon, and I probably missed a few. After all the times they have been made to look like total morons you'd think they'd learn, but no... I've made several million dollars with AAPL because I thought they were all winners; it's a shame some people didn't have more faith.
It's been hard enough to get people back into the office after working from home during the pandemic. This new product makes contemporary group meeting/collaboration apps like Zoom look like they were developed by the Flintstones. This will make getting people back in the office nearly impossible. Maybe that's a good thing for some folks.
Again, this reaction is based on what Apple has shown with a product at what is the lowest level of functionality and processing power that it will ever have. This is an iPhone 1 level and we know where it went to grow to what is now the iPhone 14 Pro. The Vision Pro may follow a similar pattern.
To all of the folks who are convulsing about the price, why are your reactions to this leading edge of what is a new product category any different than the pricing associated with the earliest incarnations of other high-end consumer tech products like 8K televisions that listed for $5000-$80,000, or even current high-end 11.2 AV receivers that sell in the $4000 range? We're living in an age where the average selling price of new cars is $50,000. I bet a lot of those new cars have vanity features and add-ons that cost more than the Vision Pro.
Will I buy a Vision Pro 1.0? Maybe. I will certainly test drive it to see whether it is even usable with my retinal/macular issues and post cataract surgery monovision. During the presentation they mentioned that the device uses foveated VR or something to that effect. I do not have a normal foveal contour in one of my eyes, which causes image distortion, specifically, straight lines appear curved exactly at my focal point. However, I'm more afraid that if my wife sees the commercials and it shows someone sitting alone immersed in an alternate universe with the thing strapped to their face she'll be much less than enthusiastic about the device and its potential negative impact on normal human interaction.
I'm fully expecting that the military and certain civilian agencies, like air traffic controllers, are going to go bonkers over the capabilities that this product demonstrates. I'm sure that other companies have shown working prototypes with similar capabilities, but Apple will be selling a commercial off the shelf product, not a prototype.
Jobs only wanted to do 1% of the then the smartphone market and that was rife with limitations compared to other devices, which I can't say about Apple Vision Pro.
What I see what when I look at Apple Vision Pro is what the future holds for this product category. As of today, this is what all VR/AR is measured against... which is impressive since it's not even being released until the next calendar year.
PS: Was this the first time Cook used the "One more thing..." line since Jobs' passing? I'm thinking it is. This is big.
It was limited, but groundbreaking at the same time.
So yeah, I'm with you and others impressed with Apple's supply chain on this. The amount, and quality, of the custom components throughout, and all of the technologies that Apple has had to master that are combined within the Vision Pro, are quite astonishing for a first iteration. We'll know soon enough of comparisons with competitor's equipment, but it appears that Apple has made a significant leap.
BTW, $3500 seems a bargain, given that this iteration isn't targeted at the consumer. I'll certainly give it a test when it arrives, just to answer the question of its utility for myself. That it is priced lower than a Nikon Z8 is notable, as that it a much desired mirrorless camera body, and those are selling very well.
Every ground-breaking product commands an exorbitant price. When the first flat-panel telly came out it cost $29,990. The operating unit was separate from the telly itself and was tethered by a bunch of cables to the main display. But, if you wanted to have a telly that looked noticeably different from the furniture box that was the common product, had the money you went out and got one.
With time, the price of the componentry went down; the technology evolved and number of flat panel TVs on the market grew exponentially, so much so that even cheap motel rooms have clones of well-known brands on offer.
The only place you see the boxy telly is on the side of the street with the other garbage or if you have a grandparent that is an octogenarian and doesn’t stream anything other than urine.
Early dissension at Apple indicated that some insiders were not happy with the launch. Others felt that Apple needed a new product other than the iPhone of iPad or Mac or Watch. So they took a gamble on this. Risk, reward type of thing.
At $3799 I am not buying one. Even though I can easily afford two: one for me and one for my partner.
There is an simile theorem that goes like this: ‘The infinite monkey theorem states that a monkey hitting keys at random on a typewriter keyboard for an infinite amount of time will almost surely type any given text, including the complete works of William Shakespeare.
That’s what Apple has done here. They have oodles of cash; some of the best engineers on the planet and can cobble together known componentry: sensors, chips, screens, software etc. etc.
But in all of this cobbling together there is nothing revolutionary, just evolutionary bundling together of existing componentry by using their skill set and software nous.
The folks at Apple that dissented felt strongly that what the goggles need is another invention that is yet to be unleashed that will simplify the product and make it cheap enough to be affordable and successful.
In my view the early adopters of this product will be like the ones that bought into the $29,990 flat-panel telly. They helped pave the way with their wallets to products that can now be had for as little as $499 at a big box store.
This thing is LOADED... worse than the biggest baddest baked potato you've never had!
I mean serious, this thing practically has two M2-class processors (speculation) and all these cameras looking inside and outside! NUTS...
The iPad replaced a cheap PC
The Watch replaced, a watch
AirPods replaced headphones
Vision Pro replaces what? A ski mask?
Should have kept Ive.
This is an outstanding device - well done Apple.
The VisionPro pushes up against physical boundaries in areas such as optics, semiconductor architectures including those relevant to displays, processing and power management and laughs at them in ways only Apple (and to a similar extent, Tesla) can. This in a first generation device. Amazing.
Here though is my main concern:
I hope that Apple can become completely vertically integrated. Any conflict involving China, even if the US and allies don't become directly involved, is likely to destroy Apple's manufacturing model for some time at least. I'm interested in thoughts on whether Apple could manufacture on home soil right down to optics milling, chip fabbing and board and display fabrication.
Thoughts?