Unfortunately, this article is an example of the VP problem.
If you need miles and miles of text to evangelize the product and “explain” why all the stuff thrown at the wall is somehow collected into a killer app, then none exists. “Oh, the killer app is everything all together!” Nope. Sorry. Doesn’t work like that.
This has been the problem even in internal testing. Apple’s own staff had concerns. Now, outside of fanboys or developer evangelists, it’s a big question mark and rightly so.
Downplaying customer price concerns over a non essential product is also troublesome - especially during inflation.
The VP HAS POTENTIAL and can become something great - if Apple can figure out why they made it to begin with.
So far, they’ve simply just built a better headset. Will it be enough to actually become a viable “platform?” We will know in two years, after the initial early adopter phase is over.
Let's not confuse a pundit known for being overly wordy and who often misses the point even when it is historically recorded, with Apple, who do keep their cards close to their chest even internally. So staff being confused about what the end game isn't a sign that there aren't people in Apple very much with an end game in mind.
Look around. Those who are in the space of practical training are normally rabid self-promoters, yet for a few months now, I know a couple who have been oddly quiet and would make great demos at the launch event. I think Apple have a good idea where there are markets where the price point represents a saving and an improvement on traditional methods and where there is so much value in those systems that a cheaper system would increase the roll-out of them, soaking up all the units Apple can produce.
Add to that the massive improvements in scanning of 3D environments for all sorts of technical uses, and it is easy to see the 2 coming together in interesting ways to be the "killer app" that would take it mainstream once there is the production to allow that.
As far as we know from the articles wtitten by those who tried the VisionPro… there is a quite different opinion after using it… usually around… amazing!
For a $3,500- device it would be worthwhile —at least from my point of view— to have that experience.
So… basically… I suggest to ways:
1— Vision Arcade… for those of us old enough to remember the pin-ball machines' stores… the VisionArcade will allow people to… play games in the VisionPro…
2— Vision Cafe… maybe this could be an arrangement with Starbucks… where you can go to… says… see a bseballl/basketball/football/soccer game in 3D… or a movie…
This way… a lot of people will be able to have the experience… more that would be able to have it in the Apple Stores.
On the other hand… this will add to ‘services’ at Apple.
Too bad that those using it and then talking about it are mostly developers and apple media site reps.
I still remember Gayle king talking about it after her usage and struggling to say something nice with a straight face. It’s a better headset. The headset people will love it. The rest of humanity will likely pass.
Unfortunately, this article is an example of the VP problem.
If you need miles and miles of text to evangelize the product and “explain” why all the stuff thrown at the wall is somehow collected into a killer app, then none exists. “Oh, the killer app is everything all together!” Nope. Sorry. Doesn’t work like that.
This has been the problem even in internal testing. Apple’s own staff had concerns. Now, outside of fanboys or developer evangelists, it’s a big question mark and rightly so.
Downplaying customer price concerns over a non essential product is also troublesome - especially during inflation.
The VP HAS POTENTIAL and can become something great - if Apple can figure out why they made it to begin with.
So far, they’ve simply just built a better headset. Will it be enough to actually become a viable “platform?” We will know in two years, after the initial early adopter phase is over.
Let's not confuse a pundit known for being overly wordy and who often misses the point even when it is historically recorded, with Apple, who do keep their cards close to their chest even internally. So staff being confused about what the end game isn't a sign that there aren't people in Apple very much with an end game in mind.
Look around. Those who are in the space of practical training are normally rabid self-promoters, yet for a few months now, I know a couple who have been oddly quiet and would make great demos at the launch event. I think Apple have a good idea where there are markets where the price point represents a saving and an improvement on traditional methods and where there is so much value in those systems that a cheaper system would increase the roll-out of them, soaking up all the units Apple can produce.
Add to that the massive improvements in scanning of 3D environments for all sorts of technical uses, and it is easy to see the 2 coming together in interesting ways to be the "killer app" that would take it mainstream once there is the production to allow that.
While your points are valid about the article source, it’s an unfortunate convergence where it amplifies the reality that the vision Peo really has no killer app. Even someone known for lengthy deliberations is unable to get a bead on it.
There have been numerous products in history that have failed due to not really having a reason to be, no matter how good they were at the stuff they did.
In this case, apple has built a better headset. Nothing less, but also nothing more. Fine for the headset crowd, passable for everyone else.
In contrast, other products didn’t need any explanation. The Walkman, the Nintendo NES, the iPod, the iPad, the Apple Watch, though the store rollout was pretty idiotic), the Mac, the iPhone, the tv, the radio, etc. all nailed their arenas and needed no explanation. They just did what needed to be done and everyone’s lives were enhanced greatly.
Meanwhile, the headset phase came along and was predicted to be the next big thing… but wasn’t. Who’d have thought people weren’t crazy about strapping a computer/display to their faces. Now we are telling them to not only do that, but wear a wire and brick too? Ahem…
The VP is a better headset. It’s neat. I imagine it will be fun to use for an amount of time, and does what it does well, per reports. But what it does just isn’t all that. And that’s pretty much the story.
The iPod was a cultural phenomenon in the tradition of the Sony Walkman, but more so. The iPhone blew the doors off of anything and everything before or since. The watch is the ultimate wearable, allowing its users to take command of their time, communications, and health. Each of these things can be active or passive. They’re actively useful, yet out of the way when not needed.
The Vision Pro, just doesn’t fit any of that. And it can’t be passive. You actually need to remove it. And to use it, you have to gear up. It’s a bit of a chore. And that’s just not good no matter how you spin it.
Once apple gets with Oakley or something and makes this a pair of shades, it’s a different story. But we aren’t anywhere near there yet.
They really should have waited however long and done that. Then there would be no need for explanation. No need for evangelizing the product. It would sell itself.
The key to knowing there was a problem was apple feeling the need to announce the thing a year prior to launch and then do the PR rounds. That’s not ipod, iphone, etc. those were secrets (though the usual suspects hammered the rumor mill) until launch. Then they went on sale shortly after.
The only commercial the iPod needed was some dancing sillhouettes and before that, a simple tagline - “1,000 song bags in your pocket.” Miss that level of focus and genius.
The Vision Pro? Needs a year of constant evangelism, communications, and hype. Be interesting to see how this plays out
Unfortunately, this article is an example of the VP problem.
If you need miles and miles of text to evangelize the product and “explain” why all the stuff thrown at the wall is somehow collected into a killer app, then none exists. “Oh, the killer app is everything all together!” Nope. Sorry. Doesn’t work like that.
This has been the problem even in internal testing. Apple’s own staff had concerns. Now, outside of fanboys or developer evangelists, it’s a big question mark and rightly so.
Downplaying customer price concerns over a non essential product is also troublesome - especially during inflation.
The VP HAS POTENTIAL and can become something great - if Apple can figure out why they made it to begin with.
So far, they’ve simply just built a better headset. Will it be enough to actually become a viable “platform?” We will know in two years, after the initial early adopter phase is over.
Let's not confuse a pundit known for being overly wordy and who often misses the point even when it is historically recorded, with Apple, who do keep their cards close to their chest even internally. So staff being confused about what the end game isn't a sign that there aren't people in Apple very much with an end game in mind.
Look around. Those who are in the space of practical training are normally rabid self-promoters, yet for a few months now, I know a couple who have been oddly quiet and would make great demos at the launch event. I think Apple have a good idea where there are markets where the price point represents a saving and an improvement on traditional methods and where there is so much value in those systems that a cheaper system would increase the roll-out of them, soaking up all the units Apple can produce.
Add to that the massive improvements in scanning of 3D environments for all sorts of technical uses, and it is easy to see the 2 coming together in interesting ways to be the "killer app" that would take it mainstream once there is the production to allow that.
While your points are valid about the article source, it’s an unfortunate convergence where it amplifies the reality that the vision Peo really has no killer app. Even someone known for lengthy deliberations is unable to get a bead on it.
There have been numerous products in history that have failed due to not really having a reason to be, no matter how good they were at the stuff they did.
In this case, apple has built a better headset. Nothing less, but also nothing more. Fine for the headset crowd, passable for everyone else.
In contrast, other products didn’t need any explanation. The Walkman, the Nintendo NES, the iPod, the iPad, the Apple Watch, though the store rollout was pretty idiotic), the Mac, the iPhone, the tv, the radio, etc. all nailed their arenas and needed no explanation. They just did what needed to be done and everyone’s lives were enhanced greatly.
Meanwhile, the headset phase came along and was predicted to be the next big thing… but wasn’t. Who’d have thought people weren’t crazy about strapping a computer/display to their faces. Now we are telling them to not only do that, but wear a wire and brick too? Ahem…
The VP is a better headset. It’s neat. I imagine it will be fun to use for an amount of time, and does what it does well, per reports. But what it does just isn’t all that. And that’s pretty much the story.
The iPod was a cultural phenomenon in the tradition of the Sony Walkman, but more so. The iPhone blew the doors off of anything and everything before or since. The watch is the ultimate wearable, allowing its users to take command of their time, communications, and health. Each of these things can be active or passive. They’re actively useful, yet out of the way when not needed.
The Vision Pro, just doesn’t fit any of that. And it can’t be passive. You actually need to remove it. And to use it, you have to gear up. It’s a bit of a chore. And that’s just not good no matter how you spin it.
Once apple gets with Oakley or something and makes this a pair of shades, it’s a different story. But we aren’t anywhere near there yet.
They really should have waited however long and done that. Then there would be no need for explanation. No need for evangelizing the product. It would sell itself.
The key to knowing there was a problem was apple feeling the need to announce the thing a year prior to launch and then do the PR rounds. That’s not ipod, iphone, etc. those were secrets (though the usual suspects hammered the rumor mill) until launch. Then they went on sale shortly after.
The only commercial the iPod needed was some dancing sillhouettes and before that, a simple tagline - “1,000 song bags in your pocket.” Miss that level of focus and genius.
The Vision Pro? Needs a year of constant evangelism, communications, and hype. Be interesting to see how this plays out
It isn't hard to distil the Vision Pro offer down to two words. "Experience Timeshifted"*
The killer apps will be capturing experience in a way that "digital window computing" hasn't been able to date, or at least hasn't been well serviced by similar offers.
Apple use the word Experience 31 times on the page describing the product. It is both a highly emotive and productive word it is bound to be in the tagline somehow.
Maybe the next killer app will be an obvious and simple idea: FRONT ROW SEAT, done in conjunction with the NBA or NFL, whereby you can watch live sports from close-up, intimate viewpoints, not the nosebleed seats far away from the action.
Or maybe, advances in artificial intelligence might spawn a whole a new era of virtual companions: SEXY SUZY, ROVER THE DOG, TONY TEACHES TYPING. Maybe Apple’s Siri will be fleshed out to be a virtual companion. So, as R2D2 is to Luke Skywalker, Siri can be to you. Maybe someone will license Marilyn Monroe’s voice and likeness from her estate and they’ll be the MY MARILYN app. Marilyn sitting on the couch beside you! Whatever. Virtual companions is fertile ground.
I look at the Vision Pro as providing a superpower to our visual sense.
As Mattinoz stated in the comment above:
It isn't hard to distill the Vision Pro offer down to two words. "Experience Timeshifted"
That’s certainly a powerful capability, but Vision Pro, and other fully-immersive headsets could also offer another visual superpower:
X-ray vision
I can imagine flying in a commercial airliner over the Alps or the Rockies, or along America’s East coast. In a window seat I can look out to see a view, possibly occluded by a wing, to see clouds or down to the ground view below the plane. Or, in an isle or middle seat getting only an occasional narrow glimpse of some scene below, night lights over Washington DC or Boston, etc.
But in a future I can conjure, the plane has cameras mounted on its exterior. I can strap on my Vision Pro and make the shell of the plane and all my fellow passengers fade to invisible. I’m sitting in my seat in the middle of the air, looking forward, down, left and right to see the view from outside the plane.
Same on a train or on a bus. A real time view without the vehicle I’m riding within blocking my vision.
Maybe not a killer app, that by itself creates widespread demand for the Vision Pro, but there’s not one killer app for the iPhone. It’s the combination of expressed capabilities that creates a compelling whole. And that’s what I think DED was expressing in this article.
I have and love every Apple device. I love them. I also have a Quest 2 and 3, so I’m already doing the mixed reality thing and enjoying it. I’ve used the Quests to watch TV, exercise, wander through places I’ll never experience in real life and to enjoy performances.
But if my Quest 3 suddenly got a super high def screen like the VP, I wouldn’t use it much more. I don’t believe VR or MX are the future in anything like their present form (goggles on your face). In the past Microsoft jumped the gun on tablets and smartphones, releasing products before the technology existed to make them truly great. It feels like Apple has done this here. So far Apple has been marketing the VP as an expensive replacement for big screens. That’s not going to fly. And I don’t know if the market or Apple will have the patience to stick with this until a real killer app emerges.
... I think Apple jumped the shark with this AR "wannabe" VR headset. I'm not sure why developers - especially small ones - would write software, i.e. potential killer apps, for it when Apple has given no timeline for a device (the vaunted AR glasses) that will have mass market appeal and thus provide a return on their investment.
In 25 plus years of following Apple closely in the pundit space, I think they have "jumped the shark" at least 4 times. The Pod, the Phone, the Pad, the Watch, and yet here they are still. Unexplainedly alive and keeping and the most successful tech company in the universe. Here comes Vision Pro now and darn it, they're water skiing over it again.
The Vision Pro isn't for everyone. It is a niche product, Apple knows it's a niche product. But they need to release one to start exploring the headset product space and what it needs to offer if it is to be successful. For sure they know it needs to be lighter and less bulky. Few people enjoy having a barnacle stuck on their face. Obviously the tech isn't there yet but offering a timeline on that is a fool's game for two reasons: First, technological advancements are not that easy to predict --fusion power has been 'just around the corner' for at least 30 years now. Second, and this problem weighs more on Apple's decision making, even if they have a firm grasp on when the lightweight headset will be realized, announcing a timeline amounts to telling your potential customers "Don't buy this one, wait a couple of years." How stupid is that?
There is no guarantee that Apple will get Vision Pro right but it wasn't until around iPod 4 when sales started to reach mass market levels, likewise around iPhone 4 or 5 for iPhone. It will take a few more years for Vision Pro to catch on, if it ever catches on. But if I'm laying a wager on who is going to succeed in making a headset computer a mass market product, I'd say the best bet would be Apple.
again, 3500 ≠ 400 (pod), or 500 (pad), or 350 (watch), or 500 (phone and subvencioned) for a starting price sir,
Hey DED - another thought provoking article! There are two great parts of all your article. The first part is I feel like we are sitting down together at lunch with a bunch of friends and discussing in length your thoughts on the subject. The second part is laughing at all the comments you attract! Keep at it, and I hope you are recovering nicely.
Now to your question:
“how long can Apple deliver an unassailable lead in immersive experience headgear before the low price hardware makers and surveillance advertising firms rush in to try to compete on price with cheaper, less functional hardware and bundled spyware and ads designed to subsidize their discount?”
I think the hardware and software for the cheapers already exist. Just like Atari and Commodore from the mid eighties, they will slap in some copy cat look and apps from the VP within a year so they can capture the VP hype, particularly during the limited availability and high price. But I’m looking forward to your take!
I think it’s quite likely that Vision Pro early adopters will include a significant proportion of expert systems developers. The price is trivial compared with the benefits of deeply interactive communication of complicated concepts in areas like science, tech, engineering and healthcare. So perhaps these will be the leaders that will give Apple a big boost in organisational computing and lead the way for consumers as the hardware cost falls.
'Killer App' People still think this is 1990 and the arrival of computer for the home. That was fine then but now, sorry there won't be a killer app. The iPhone itself was a killer app. The AirPods were the killer app and web browsers & the internet changed the way we use computers. All Vision Pros do is take excisiting vertical market goggles and make them pretty. Same apps as on your Mac, iPhone and iPad just presented in a 3D format. All the tech industry does today is try to get people to buy newer hardware, because there is a lot of money to be made in selling hardware. The VP use the same apps as we have been using for years. Was the iPad a radical idea, nope just a big screen iPhone without the phone. Vision Pro is just an another computer without an external display. As for the vertical market yes there will be interesting Apps but for the rest of us not so much. It will be niche market that when the price comes down Apple will dominate.
It's great to have you back! If nothing else you make us think about things at a deeper level than what we've come to expect on many of these types of forums. As a long time follower of your writing I know that you approach your work with a lot of precision and support all of your salient points with pillars of supporting evidence that's indisputably backed by how things have actually played out over time. I think some of the grumbling about the length of your writings is due to you rebuilding all of your pillars of evidence in each new paper so all readers, new and old, can see the whole picture regardless of whether this is their first DED paper or their 25th DED paper. I'm okay with your approach because I can skim over the parts that I'm more familiar with and dive into the new material in more detail. This is a better approach than omitting the supporting material on the assumption that all readers are at the same level of understanding.
As far as "killer apps" for the Apple Vision Pro are concerned, I believe that outside the domains of entertainment and virtual meetings we are still not sure what problems the Apple Vision Pro will really help us solve. This is not an unusual place to be considering the relative immaturity and novelty of the system that Apple has created. I can easily envision several utilitarian, industrial, military, and human-machine interaction use cases that may be excellent candidates for the capabilities the Apple Vision Pro may bring to the table, but most of these are contingent on what the Apple Vision Pro can ultimately deliver.
Importantly, I'm not assuming that everything we see in Apple Vision Pro release 1.0 will be the full extent of what the system is capable of delivering. My hope is that the initial couple or few releases of Apple Vision Pro will tweak the imagination of those who devote their lives to helping solve real world problems, from small to large. When lasers and fiber optics were first developed they were a solution in search of a problem. Ornamental lamps that used these technologies were kind of interesting, but both of these technologies have since evolved to becoming indispensable to supporting industry, quality of life, and human health care as we know it today.
When a breathtakingly new technology arrives there is often a rush to jump ahead to the consumer/customer applications where the new capability can be expressed in a product or service. These tend to be somewhat incremental at first because we don't really know the full extent of what we are dealing with and are trying to extrapolate from here to there. The next round of iteration should really ask the question "What real problem can this capability help us solve?" Your examples that envision Apple Vision Pro providing a way for people who lack physical mobility to attain virtual mobility are exactly the kinds of problem-oriented ideas that can lead to the kinds of "killer apps" that we seek.
From a pragmatic viewpoint I see humans being increasingly burdened by information and data overload to the point of being hard pressed to come up with reasonable decisions, answers, and solutions in real time. This affects everyone from air traffic controllers, stock traders, power grid operators, emergency responders, military combat system operators, etc. In order to make more accurate and informed decisions people in these positions commonly rely on data fusion to aggregate data in a way that allows them to arrive at a clearer picture of what they are actually dealing with so they can decide how to react. When there's a human in the loop, whether they're supported by AI or algorithms, presenting the right information to the human in a consumable form is always a challenge. There's a reason why people who do some of these jobs have a 2D matrix of monitors in their face all of the time with multiple streams of real time data, historical data, and trends filling those screens. Some of the information is relevant to the problem and some is not. But the person making the decisions has a limited ability to show only what's important to them in the moment, what can be suppressed, what can be handed off to AI, or what can be handed off to another person involved in the same scenario.
Having a voice and gesture driven visualization and decision support system that's attuned to the human operator's intentions and most immediate concerns may be a problem that a system like Apple Vision Pro can help with. Maybe or maybe not. It's definitely not be as sexy and cool as a first person shooter game, personal concert, or interactive dating site, but why not? The point is that if you start with a problem that needs to be solved, one that leverages the technology in the right way, the killer applications will absolutely come.
Thus I think the killer app for Vision Pro will be a combination of its features: enabling virtual, facial appearance based communications rather than the cartoon avatars dreamed up in most VR, immersive enjoyment of recorded entertainment including virtually putting the user in an event, meeting or concert audience where they can actually participate in the experience both through AR inputs, and appearing to outsiders as an actual person, and an immersive desktop of familiar apps.
This (engaging entertainment experiences) is the 2nd feature on Apple's PR list about the VP's new features. The 1st one is "an infinite canvas for apps at work and at home". The 3rd is "immersive environments".
I remain convinced that the killer feature of the VP is the display that you always have with you, and agree with Apple's list of spatial computing being at the top. Or, the computer display wherever you want it. So, "spatial computing". It's success is going to hinge on people being able to be more productive with it than a PC (Mac et al). Not only can the user have 3, 4, 5 40" class monitors at their desk, they can have a 40" monitor on their breakfast table, a 20" display by the pot of food, a 30" display on your refrigerator, so on and so forth.
The entertainment experiences are going to be great, but $3500+ for it is asking a lot for it. I don't think it is enough to carry the device. It will need to have spatial computing work well, and all these other entertainment, comms types of features will be force multipliers to that.
The big issues may be that the microOLEDs may not be dense enough, the hand+eye control scheme not thought out enough, virtual objects not fixed in space enough, and the plain old biology ones. Wearing a 1.5 lbs of goggles is not that comfortable. Motion sickness will likely be thing for some fraction of users. Putting it on and off may be too cumbersome. They will be fighting to get the weight of the succeeding models down, all the time. The number one goal for the hardware team. I think success for the VP means people will be wearing it for 8 hours a time or blocks of 2 to 4 hrs a time, for a total of 8 or more during a day.
It isn't hard to distil the Vision Pro offer down to two words.
"Experience Timeshifted"*
“The killer apps will be…”capturing experience in a way that "digital window computing" hasn't been able to date, or at least hasn't been well serviced by similar offers.
Apple use the word Experience 31 times on the page describing the product. It is both a highly emotive and productive word it is bound to be in the tagline somehow.
The killer app “WILL BE?”
Seriously. That’s a guess. Conjecture. You have no idea. Hopes and dreams don’t magically coalesce into a killer app “hopefully, at some point in the future.”
If a killer app isn’t identifiable now, it doesn’t and won’t exist. And again, “oh, everything is the killer app!” “It’s the experience as a whole” doesn’t cut it. It doesn’t work that way.
People are already familiar with the headset experience. It isn’t new. Better hardware and nicer software doesn’t alter the basic experience. It’s still a windowed phenomena, just closer to your eyes,
But we are talking killer apps. Does the Vision Pro have one? No. It doesn’t. That’s not a cynical view. It’s fact.
“But, but someday over the rainbow there going to be…”
look, we all WANT the VP to be the next big thing. We WANT Apple to be the one that does it. But it’s just not. They simply haven’t. At this stage, Apple has done most everything there is to do. They revolutionized computing. They revolutionized music. They revolutionized communications. They revolutionized the watch of all things, The revolutionized the processor industry. Apple kicks butt and takes names. They’re awesome and will continue to be so and will continue to change the game far from now. They have a solid, hungry, yet stable core of progressive success.
But the VP just isn’t in that category. It’s a nicer headset. Ok. That’s fine. That’s good even. But it’s not the next iPod, iPhone, etc. it’s a better spec’d headset with nicer looking software.
That should be enough to allow it to be the leader in a somewhat niche market. And that should be enough to be a success.
Trying to pretend that it’s more than that is just wishful thinking plus hopes and dreams.
Let’s face reality (no pun intended - apple, feel free to use that line). The Vision Pro may be the best at what it does. But what it does isn’t anything crazy.
When Apple is able to get this tech distilled into a pair of sunglasses ( or a contact lens, powered by your body eye electricity or from the blinking of an eyelid (you want full immersion, just close your eyes - ok, ok, maybe a little too far out there for now, so let’s stick with shades) then it will be something that fits with your natural way of life and gets out of the way while being readily available right when needed. At that point, it can actually begin replacing quite a few things.
But for now, it’s a thing that you must encumber yourself with just to get iMax right next to your eye. Cool, but not necessary and not the next big thing.
A lot of the positive spin on the VP right now relates to the idea of home theater (as I said, IMAX right next to your eye). But when you think about it, the VP costs more than a gigantic TV, and is an experience that can’t be shared with friends and family. If you have a family of four, you’re spending $14,000 to share the experience together (assuming you can synchronize viewing, ala watch party). What a downer. The ROI just isn’t there. If crazy money is being spent, I’d rather buy a ginormous LED wall from planar, Samsung, or lg.
in the end, the Vision Pro is a really cool, neat headset that offers up a more crisp vr/ar experience than the competition thus far. Is that the next big thing? No. Does it have a killer app that sets it apart? No. But it’s higher quality and will be really nice to have. Would likely be THE Christmas gift of 2024 as well. Will it still be such in 2026? We will see. It doesn’t have to be the next big thing in order to have a place in the world. it just needs to be the best in its category. And in many ways, it looks to be just that. No need to throw our brains out the window and pretend it’s more than it is. What it is is enough.
It isn't hard to distil the Vision Pro offer down to two words.
"Experience Timeshifted"*
“The killer apps will be…”capturing experience in a way that "digital window computing" hasn't been able to date, or at least hasn't been well serviced by similar offers.
Apple use the word Experience 31 times on the page describing the product. It is both a highly emotive and productive word it is bound to be in the tagline somehow.
The killer app “WILL BE?”
Seriously. That’s a guess. Conjecture. You have no idea. Hopes and dreams don’t magically coalesce into a killer app “hopefully, at some point in the future.”
If a killer app isn’t identifiable now, it doesn’t and won’t exist. And again, “oh, everything is the killer app!” “It’s the experience as a whole” doesn’t cut it. It doesn’t work that way.
People are already familiar with the headset experience. It isn’t new. Better hardware and nicer software doesn’t alter the basic experience. It’s still a windowed phenomena, just closer to your eyes,
But we are talking killer apps. Does the Vision Pro have one? No. It doesn’t. That’s not a cynical view. It’s fact.
“But, but someday over the rainbow there going to be…”
look, we all WANT the VP to be the next big thing. We WANT Apple to be the one that does it. But it’s just not. They simply haven’t. At this stage, Apple has done most everything there is to do. They revolutionized computing. They revolutionized music. They revolutionized communications. They revolutionized the watch of all things, The revolutionized the processor industry. Apple kicks butt and takes names. They’re awesome and will continue to be so and will continue to change the game far from now. They have a solid, hungry, yet stable core of progressive success.
But the VP just isn’t in that category. It’s a nicer headset. Ok. That’s fine. That’s good even. But it’s not the next iPod, iPhone, etc. it’s a better spec’d headset with nicer looking software.
That should be enough to allow it to be the leader in a somewhat niche market. And that should be enough to be a success.
Trying to pretend that it’s more than that is just wishful thinking plus hopes and dreams.
Let’s face reality (no pun intended - apple, feel free to use that line). The Vision Pro may be the best at what it does. But what it does isn’t anything crazy.
When Apple is able to get this tech distilled into a pair of sunglasses ( or a contact lens, powered by your body eye electricity or from the blinking of an eyelid (you want full immersion, just close your eyes - ok, ok, maybe a little too far out there for now, so let’s stick with shades) then it will be something that fits with your natural way of life and gets out of the way while being readily available right when needed. At that point, it can actually begin replacing quite a few things.
But for now, it’s a thing that you must encumber yourself with just to get iMax right next to your eye. Cool, but not necessary and not the next big thing.
A lot of the positive spin on the VP right now relates to the idea of home theater (as I said, IMAX right next to your eye). But when you think about it, the VP costs more than a gigantic TV, and is an experience that can’t be shared with friends and family. If you have a family of four, you’re spending $14,000 to share the experience together (assuming you can synchronize viewing, ala watch party). What a downer. The ROI just isn’t there. If crazy money is being spent, I’d rather buy a ginormous LED wall from planar, Samsung, or lg.
in the end, the Vision Pro is a really cool, neat headset that offers up a more crisp vr/ar experience than the competition thus far. Is that the next big thing? No. Does it have a killer app that sets it apart? No. But it’s higher quality and will be really nice to have. Would likely be THE Christmas gift of 2024 as well. Will it still be such in 2026? We will see. It doesn’t have to be the next big thing in order to have a place in the world. it just needs to be the best in its category. And in many ways, it looks to be just that. No need to throw our brains out the window and pretend it’s more than it is. What it is is enough.
"look, we all WANT the VP to be the next big thing. We WANT Apple to be the one that does it. But it’s just not. They simply haven’t. At this stage, Apple has done most everything there is to do. They revolutionized computing. They revolutionized music. They revolutionized communications. They revolutionized the watch of all things, The revolutionized the processor industry. Apple kicks butt and takes names. They’re awesome and will continue to be so and will continue to change the game far from now. They have a solid, hungry, yet stable core of progressive success. "
There's a lot to revolutionize in health (which is one of the major focus areas for Apple Watch), home automation and transportation. With respect to the latter, I would rather see Apple focus on making their own car / car service as opposed to a headset.
Maybe the next killer app will be an obvious and simple idea: FRONT ROW SEAT, done in conjunction with the NBA or NFL, whereby you can watch live sports from close-up, intimate viewpoints, not the nosebleed seats far away from the action.
Or maybe, advances in artificial intelligence might spawn a whole a new era of virtual companions: SEXY SUZY, ROVER THE DOG, TONY TEACHES TYPING. Maybe Apple’s Siri will be fleshed out to be a virtual companion. So, as R2D2 is to Luke Skywalker, Siri can be to you. Maybe someone will license Marilyn Monroe’s voice and likeness from her estate and they’ll be the MY MARILYN app. Marilyn sitting on the couch beside you! Whatever. Virtual companions is fertile ground.
Messi isn't playing in North America for nothing, Apple is probably recording him using their more advanced spacial video process and the same goes for a concert here and there. More luddites means more Apple shares available just like 2007 and 2010.
... I think Apple jumped the shark with this AR "wannabe" VR headset. I'm not sure why developers - especially small ones - would write software, i.e. potential killer apps, for it when Apple has given no timeline for a device (the vaunted AR glasses) that will have mass market appeal and thus provide a return on their investment.
In 25 plus years of following Apple closely in the pundit space, I think they have "jumped the shark" at least 4 times. The Pod, the Phone, the Pad, the Watch, and yet here they are still. Unexplainedly alive and keeping and the most successful tech company in the universe. Here comes Vision Pro now and darn it, they're water skiing over it again.
The Vision Pro isn't for everyone. It is a niche product, Apple knows it's a niche product. But they need to release one to start exploring the headset product space and what it needs to offer if it is to be successful. For sure they know it needs to be lighter and less bulky. Few people enjoy having a barnacle stuck on their face. Obviously the tech isn't there yet but offering a timeline on that is a fool's game for two reasons: First, technological advancements are not that easy to predict --fusion power has been 'just around the corner' for at least 30 years now. Second, and this problem weighs more on Apple's decision making, even if they have a firm grasp on when the lightweight headset will be realized, announcing a timeline amounts to telling your potential customers "Don't buy this one, wait a couple of years." How stupid is that?
There is no guarantee that Apple will get Vision Pro right but it wasn't until around iPod 4 when sales started to reach mass market levels, likewise around iPhone 4 or 5 for iPhone. It will take a few more years for Vision Pro to catch on, if it ever catches on. But if I'm laying a wager on who is going to succeed in making a headset computer a mass market product, I'd say the best bet would be Apple.
again, 3500 ≠ 400 (pod), or 500 (pad), or 350 (watch), or 500 (phone and subvencioned) for a starting price sir,
People are already familiar with the headset experience. It isn’t new. Better hardware and nicer software doesn’t alter the basic experience. It’s still a windowed phenomena, just closer to your eyes,
But we are talking killer apps. Does the Vision Pro have one? No. It doesn’t. That’s not a cynical view. It’s fact.
It’s a nicer headset. Ok. That’s fine. That’s good even. But it’s not the next iPod, iPhone, etc. it’s a better spec’d headset with nicer looking software.
The Vision Pro may be the best at what it does. But what it does isn’t anything crazy.
People are familiar with VR but not so much with AR/MR. Only the Meta Quest Pro 3, which just launched in October offers a suitably immersive AR/MR experience that people would use it and the visuals are still low quality like watching a TV. Reviewers said that the view with/without the AVP headset looks the same, no distortion/warping/pixels. That gives an immediate familiarity when the headset is put on that you just see the same environment and dial in the digital content.
It's underselling it to say it's just nicer software. VR headsets have a terrible user experience with pointing at things using a controller with a line coming out of it compared to eye tracking with hand gestures. It's like comparing Minority Report with a powerpoint clicker or Wiimote.
Being able to dial in a virtual environment that is completely stable is going to feel like being in the Matrix or the Holodeck and it won't be like in VR:
Mixed reality means the environment can adapt to your space.
The most popular use cases for the product will evolve. When the iPhone launched its strength was usable mobile internet, maps/GPS, proper messaging, it didn't have many games. Over time, gaming and social media became the most popular use cases.
When Apple Vision Pro launches, its strength will be what's available like existing apps and the movie library.
The more accessible that 3D scanning gets with the newer iPhones, the more immersive content can be produced. OnlyFans has around 200 million users. Creators can make 3D avatars of themselves that can exist in your house, they can control it live or they can have it controlled by AI. The following video is rendered:
This is in VR so the background is blacked out. Apple Vision Pro has accurate enough tracking that a butterfly can land on your hand. Digital humans will be able to sit on the sofa beside you. You can have an AI version of Einstein and talk with an AI that mimics his voice and words.
I think these are killer features for the device: personal cinema, digital humans, minority report controls for all apps with an infinite display canvas. These features aren't as universally appealing as mobile devices because most people can live without them but they are compelling enough features for people to use the product.
Comments
Look around. Those who are in the space of practical training are normally rabid self-promoters, yet for a few months now, I know a couple who have been oddly quiet and would make great demos at the launch event. I think Apple have a good idea where there are markets where the price point represents a saving and an improvement on traditional methods and where there is so much value in those systems that a cheaper system would increase the roll-out of them, soaking up all the units Apple can produce.
Add to that the massive improvements in scanning of 3D environments for all sorts of technical uses, and it is easy to see the 2 coming together in interesting ways to be the "killer app" that would take it mainstream once there is the production to allow that.
The VP is a better headset. It’s neat. I imagine it will be fun to use for an amount of time, and does what it does well, per reports. But what it does just isn’t all that. And that’s pretty much the story.
Once apple gets with Oakley or something and makes this a pair of shades, it’s a different story. But we aren’t anywhere near there yet.
"Experience Timeshifted"*
The killer apps will be capturing experience in a way that "digital window computing" hasn't been able to date, or at least hasn't been well serviced by similar offers.
Apple use the word Experience 31 times on the page describing the product. It is both a highly emotive and productive word it is bound to be in the tagline somehow.
Maybe the next killer app will be an obvious and simple idea: FRONT ROW SEAT, done in conjunction with the NBA or NFL, whereby you can watch live sports from close-up, intimate viewpoints, not the nosebleed seats far away from the action.
Or maybe, advances in artificial intelligence might spawn a whole a new era of virtual companions: SEXY SUZY, ROVER THE DOG, TONY TEACHES TYPING. Maybe Apple’s Siri will be fleshed out to be a virtual companion. So, as R2D2 is to Luke Skywalker, Siri can be to you. Maybe someone will license Marilyn Monroe’s voice and likeness from her estate and they’ll be the MY MARILYN app. Marilyn sitting on the couch beside you! Whatever. Virtual companions is fertile ground.
It isn't hard to distill the Vision Pro offer down to two words.
"Experience Timeshifted"
I can imagine flying in a commercial airliner over the Alps or the Rockies, or along America’s East coast. In a window seat I can look out to see a view, possibly occluded by a wing, to see clouds or down to the ground view below the plane. Or, in an isle or middle seat getting only an occasional narrow glimpse of some scene below, night lights over Washington DC or Boston, etc.
But in a future I can conjure, the plane has cameras mounted on its exterior. I can strap on my Vision Pro and make the shell of the plane and all my fellow passengers fade to invisible. I’m sitting in my seat in the middle of the air, looking forward, down, left and right to see the view from outside the plane.
Live. Virtual. Presence.
I think the hardware and software for the cheapers already exist. Just like Atari and Commodore from the mid eighties, they will slap in some copy cat look and apps from the VP within a year so they can capture the VP hype, particularly during the limited availability and high price. But I’m looking forward to your take!
As far as "killer apps" for the Apple Vision Pro are concerned, I believe that outside the domains of entertainment and virtual meetings we are still not sure what problems the Apple Vision Pro will really help us solve. This is not an unusual place to be considering the relative immaturity and novelty of the system that Apple has created. I can easily envision several utilitarian, industrial, military, and human-machine interaction use cases that may be excellent candidates for the capabilities the Apple Vision Pro may bring to the table, but most of these are contingent on what the Apple Vision Pro can ultimately deliver.
Importantly, I'm not assuming that everything we see in Apple Vision Pro release 1.0 will be the full extent of what the system is capable of delivering. My hope is that the initial couple or few releases of Apple Vision Pro will tweak the imagination of those who devote their lives to helping solve real world problems, from small to large. When lasers and fiber optics were first developed they were a solution in search of a problem. Ornamental lamps that used these technologies were kind of interesting, but both of these technologies have since evolved to becoming indispensable to supporting industry, quality of life, and human health care as we know it today.
When a breathtakingly new technology arrives there is often a rush to jump ahead to the consumer/customer applications where the new capability can be expressed in a product or service. These tend to be somewhat incremental at first because we don't really know the full extent of what we are dealing with and are trying to extrapolate from here to there. The next round of iteration should really ask the question "What real problem can this capability help us solve?" Your examples that envision Apple Vision Pro providing a way for people who lack physical mobility to attain virtual mobility are exactly the kinds of problem-oriented ideas that can lead to the kinds of "killer apps" that we seek.
From a pragmatic viewpoint I see humans being increasingly burdened by information and data overload to the point of being hard pressed to come up with reasonable decisions, answers, and solutions in real time. This affects everyone from air traffic controllers, stock traders, power grid operators, emergency responders, military combat system operators, etc. In order to make more accurate and informed decisions people in these positions commonly rely on data fusion to aggregate data in a way that allows them to arrive at a clearer picture of what they are actually dealing with so they can decide how to react. When there's a human in the loop, whether they're supported by AI or algorithms, presenting the right information to the human in a consumable form is always a challenge. There's a reason why people who do some of these jobs have a 2D matrix of monitors in their face all of the time with multiple streams of real time data, historical data, and trends filling those screens. Some of the information is relevant to the problem and some is not. But the person making the decisions has a limited ability to show only what's important to them in the moment, what can be suppressed, what can be handed off to AI, or what can be handed off to another person involved in the same scenario.
Having a voice and gesture driven visualization and decision support system that's attuned to the human operator's intentions and most immediate concerns may be a problem that a system like Apple Vision Pro can help with. Maybe or maybe not. It's definitely not be as sexy and cool as a first person shooter game, personal concert, or interactive dating site, but why not? The point is that if you start with a problem that needs to be solved, one that leverages the technology in the right way, the killer applications will absolutely come.
I remain convinced that the killer feature of the VP is the display that you always have with you, and agree with Apple's list of spatial computing being at the top. Or, the computer display wherever you want it. So, "spatial computing". It's success is going to hinge on people being able to be more productive with it than a PC (Mac et al). Not only can the user have 3, 4, 5 40" class monitors at their desk, they can have a 40" monitor on their breakfast table, a 20" display by the pot of food, a 30" display on your refrigerator, so on and so forth.
The entertainment experiences are going to be great, but $3500+ for it is asking a lot for it. I don't think it is enough to carry the device. It will need to have spatial computing work well, and all these other entertainment, comms types of features will be force multipliers to that.
The big issues may be that the microOLEDs may not be dense enough, the hand+eye control scheme not thought out enough, virtual objects not fixed in space enough, and the plain old biology ones. Wearing a 1.5 lbs of goggles is not that comfortable. Motion sickness will likely be thing for some fraction of users. Putting it on and off may be too cumbersome. They will be fighting to get the weight of the succeeding models down, all the time. The number one goal for the hardware team. I think success for the VP means people will be wearing it for 8 hours a time or blocks of 2 to 4 hrs a time, for a total of 8 or more during a day.
look, we all WANT the VP to be the next big thing. We WANT Apple to be the one that does it. But it’s just not. They simply haven’t. At this stage, Apple has done most everything there is to do. They revolutionized computing. They revolutionized music. They revolutionized communications. They revolutionized the watch of all things, The revolutionized the processor industry. Apple kicks butt and takes names. They’re awesome and will continue to be so and will continue to change the game far from now. They have a solid, hungry, yet stable core of progressive success.
in the end, the Vision Pro is a really cool, neat headset that offers up a more crisp vr/ar experience than the competition thus far. Is that the next big thing? No. Does it have a killer app that sets it apart? No. But it’s higher quality and will be really nice to have. Would likely be THE Christmas gift of 2024 as well. Will it still be such in 2026? We will see. It doesn’t have to be the next big thing in order to have a place in the world. it just needs to be the best in its category. And in many ways, it looks to be just that. No need to throw our brains out the window and pretend it’s more than it is. What it is is enough.
There's a lot to revolutionize in health (which is one of the major focus areas for Apple Watch), home automation and transportation. With respect to the latter, I would rather see Apple focus on making their own car / car service as opposed to a headset.
It's underselling it to say it's just nicer software. VR headsets have a terrible user experience with pointing at things using a controller with a line coming out of it compared to eye tracking with hand gestures. It's like comparing Minority Report with a powerpoint clicker or Wiimote.
Being able to dial in a virtual environment that is completely stable is going to feel like being in the Matrix or the Holodeck and it won't be like in VR:
Mixed reality means the environment can adapt to your space.
The most popular use cases for the product will evolve. When the iPhone launched its strength was usable mobile internet, maps/GPS, proper messaging, it didn't have many games. Over time, gaming and social media became the most popular use cases.
When Apple Vision Pro launches, its strength will be what's available like existing apps and the movie library.
The more accessible that 3D scanning gets with the newer iPhones, the more immersive content can be produced. OnlyFans has around 200 million users. Creators can make 3D avatars of themselves that can exist in your house, they can control it live or they can have it controlled by AI. The following video is rendered:
This is in VR so the background is blacked out. Apple Vision Pro has accurate enough tracking that a butterfly can land on your hand. Digital humans will be able to sit on the sofa beside you. You can have an AI version of Einstein and talk with an AI that mimics his voice and words.
I think these are killer features for the device: personal cinema, digital humans, minority report controls for all apps with an infinite display canvas. These features aren't as universally appealing as mobile devices because most people can live without them but they are compelling enough features for people to use the product.