Apple not struggling - THIS IS NOT A MASS_MARKET DEVICE (yet, maybe never).
The Vision Pro is a technology tour-de-force. It will appeal to people who can afford to play with it. But that's not the target. There are thousands of niche apps in training, maintenance, spatial data analysis et al that have been waiting decades for a device like this. That's going to constitute the initial market, and demand is big - IN THAT SMALLish MARKET.
To those who say "there's no market for a $3,500 gaming device of consumer" - you are absolutely right. But by then concluding that there is no market for VIsionPro is, um, short-sighted.
loumazz said: There are thousands of niche apps in training, maintenance, spatial data analysis et al that have been waiting decades for a device like this.
That's going to constitute the initial market, and demand is big - IN THAT SMALLish MARKET.
What Apple has consistently emphasized per AVP are the functions that are already considered consumer viable: general computing devices, large screen TVs/monitors and multiple computer monitor setups. If you try to match those functions with existing market products that can provide 4K OLED then you're going to be waaaay beyond the price of the AVP. It already makes sense as a consumer product. It isn't really that niche at all.
Apple not struggling - THIS IS NOT A MASS_MARKET DEVICE (yet, maybe never).
The Vision Pro is a technology tour-de-force. It will appeal to people who can afford to play with it. But that's not the target. There are thousands of niche apps in training, maintenance, spatial data analysis et al that have been waiting decades for a device like this. That's going to constitute the initial market, and demand is big - IN THAT SMALLish MARKET.
To those who say "there's no market for a $3,500 gaming device of consumer" - you are absolutely right. But by then concluding that there is no market for VIsionPro is, um, short-sighted.
Apple's innovation in this space is the entire OS designed and written around using a computer in VR, hence the name Spacial Computing. It is the first step into the future, those niche markets you mentioned are already being fulfilled by HoloLens. Apple has a greater vision that many are failing to see, the OS. Steve Jobs spoke about the desire to have headphones for the eyes. The tech looks dorky, but will improve over time.
The high cost is temporary and is due to creating a product in its best form for mass consumption. Custom fit products are the way of the future. 3D printing and individualized product development are on the horizon, I feel this is Apple's early entry of this untapped market.
In 2007, I was standing in line to get my first iPhone. It had a 3.5” screen and was primitive in comparison to what a smart phone is now but it looked like the future. It cost me $799 (over $1000 today as I write this in 2024). It lacked flexibility and the ability to download apps beyond what it had at the time of purchase (email, Safari, Google Maps, You Tube and iTunes per my memory).
I remember the guy two places in front of me was being interviewed by a reporter who asked him what he was must exited about the phone and he said,
“multitouch.”
That guy was so much smarter than me and had gotten to the crux of the matter. From my perspective, I was there simply because I was a devotee of Jobs and I thought the device was cool in some vague sense.
Now a mere 13 plus years later, I see people walking on the street staring at a 5” screen held 2’ in front of their face oblivious to their surroundings. I see young people on electronic skateboards staring at their phones, I see people driving in their cars staring at their phones, sometimes clipped to their sun visor so as to be ever present. When in airplanes, trains, airports, train stations everyone is staring at their phones, head bent down at an unnatural and uncomfortable angle. And those not looking at their phones, are staring at their iPads or computers. (I have seen “pillows” marked to generation z consumers on Instagram that are really head support devices so they can have their heads supported as they lean forward with a cut-out for easy care-free scrolling.)
I have seen inconsolable children only placated by their parents when handed a phone. Conversely, I see nothing but empty neighborhoods because children don’t play outside anymore because their leisure time has been taken over by their various personal screens.
I have seen videos of nonhuman primates, scrolling on an iPhone with ease and entranced. An egomaniacal tech titan is burning through billions of dollars in capital and reputation because of their addiction to their personal 5” screens. Authoritarians plot and send out messages to their followers using their personal multitouch screens.
Those little 5” screens have taken over our lives. I can’t get the attention of my wife because she is staring at her phone constantly. I know people who have substituted an iPad as their personal television. I know people who don’t even have televisions because they prefer the personal screen of their phone instead.
Humans have no problem substituting the simulacra of a screen for our larger perceived reality. In 2007, I was standing in line to get my first iPhone. It had a 3.5” screen and was primitive in comparison to what a smart phone is now but it looked like the future. It cost me $799 (over $1000 today as I write this in 2024). It lacked flexibility and the ability to download apps beyond what it had at the time of purchase (email, Safari, Google Maps, You Tube and iTunes per my memory).
As for me, I like to put my iPhone down every now and then to stare at the wonders of the natural world. Yesterday, I was entranced by watching hawks fly over my home and soaring on the wind coming in from the coast.
But I am the weirdo in this regard, the outlier. I have no misconception in my observation of others. I have seen the portrayal of AR/VR in movies (Ready Player One, Tron, the Matrix franchise, Strange Days, Minority Report, etc etc). Many people clearly want this alternative reality. I know of another bond villain type who has bet his trillion dollar technology company on this technology with a name change and untold resources to bring this new world to fruition.
But it was always going to be Apple’s to win because of what Apple brings to technology, namely hardware/software integration, computing efficiency to allow head mounted complexity and heat dissipation. As well as the ability to craft desirable consumer (not technology) products as DED pontificates about. And Apple knows you have to conquer the “cutting edge” first.
The criticism by tech pundits is so predicable— the AVP has a battery pack and Apple is hiding its existence (Wired), what is the killer application, where are the developers and their apps, who needs this? Etc etc.
But it will change, maybe slowly at first. We will hear stories of its use with robotic surgeons, the life changing use by neuromuscular patients, especially those afflicted by ALS. And the developers will do their things as they do.
And of course the content providers—traditional media, sports leagues and the adult industry (we don’t like to talk about them)—will jump on board. Then it will steamroll.
I am constantly perplexed by the human inability to extrapolate from observed reality into the near future.
Just I am always surprised by the willingness of people to wear bulky noise cancelling headphones while traveling to cover up their ears.
So I think “spatial computing” is going to close the 2’ gap for some of us. Hopefully in a time limited fashion for their sake.
I personally don’t see how it could be any other outcome. You have to have a form of “cognitive blindness” not to see how the last decade leads to the next for better or for worse.
It is what it is and I think the real target audience understands that quite well.
It's a visor with souped up VR/AR specs and it has a price to go with it.
It's a niche market and will be for a while.
It isn't bringing anything groundbreaking to market. At least anything that hasn't been projected before.
In that sense, and as of launch perspectives, the 'killer app' is still a way off and may even land on competing devices first. That doesn't matter though.
The question isn't really about the marketing at this point because there is not much to market and the initial run has already probably met its goals. For millions like me, no amount of marketing is going to convince me it's worth the current price.
It will take time for content to become compelling in terms of quantity and then quality.
Once the wrinkles in use cases, content, device fragility and wearability have been ironed out, then marketing will have something to get it's teeth into.
Until then, the focus should be on other aspects.
We absolutely know that the AR/VR/XR industry will overlap with phones and perhaps one day, replace them for many tasks.
Of course, a lot needs to happen before then. Bulk and weight need to come down. Battery life and charging need some evolution. Price is an obvious biggie.
'Content' is a massive point in terms of managing data.
Once out of the local environment, an AR device needs to feed off something and that data needs to be in a freely available format and delivered 'instantly'.
Anything from finding a toilet at an airport and knowing how busy it is to getting to your product at IKEA. Dealing with public transport systems , museums etc.
There is a problem with that though.
Although I have seen people wear Quest devices on the train you don't see people walking around in public with visors on their heads. That is something the industry needs to tackle.
How small do visors have to get for them to become accepted while out and about?
Half the size of the current VP? More? Less?
Or can people be convinced to use them as they are now (and with pass through)?
Is it possible to create a 'two in one' where the visor snaps off to leave something like a pair of big glasses with AR overlays and the ability to watch (and listen to) content on an expanded 2D screen?
I'm ignoring the non-consumer use cases here.
5.5G is going to be absolutely essential to guarantee QoS to high bandwidth devices in great numbers so then the cellular issue pops up, or will people be happy to be hooked up to Wi-Fi networks mostly in a home setting.
The current iteration is a limited use device. I can't see anyone using it for prolonged periods due to comfort, heat, weight, strain situations.
Taking all these points into consideration, I don't see marketing as a problem.
The most important thing for me is that it's here. The same applies to all the visors out there. Things can't improve unless they come to market.
If they don't abandon the project (that's unlikely) it will slowly get better. When it does, the marketing side can get going in earnest.
avon b7 said: It isn't bringing anything groundbreaking to market. At least anything that hasn't been projected before. In that sense, and as of launch perspectives, the 'killer app' is still a way off and may even land on competing devices first. That doesn't matter though.
The killer app is obviously the home theater aspect. $3500 is LESS EXPENSIVE than any comparable large screen 4K OLED solution for entertainment. The only way to get close to that price point would be to buy an 83" 4K OLED screen and that is a teeny tiny screen size relative to what AVP can give you.
Does it currently lack a killer app? Absolutely. Quick: tell me the killer app for iPad tabllet computing when it first debuted? Oh, that's right, there wasn't one, which led to it being derided as "just a big iPhone" upon launch. Kajillions of iPad sales later, the lack of a killer app upon launch seems to have worked out okay, no? In fact, I would argue that there's STILL no killer app for iPad, but developers found all kinds of ways to make it uniquely useful.
I think its killer feature is a 100 foot 3D 4K OLED virtual display that can show the display output from multiple devices.
Other headsets have virtual displays but you can't read text on them very well because of the resolution and stability, see comments on the following video:
"After watching countless videos of the Quest 3's passthrough before buying a headset and trying it for myself, I have to say it was a pretty big letdown. So many people made it seem I could just wear the headset around my house and have this great mixed reality experience, but the super low resolution and warping make it more of a gimmick that I'll probably never use than anything else. I have no doubt it'll only get better from here, I just can't see myself ever using it for anything other than quickly looking at something in my room while I'm playing a game."
The reviews of AVP have all said the visuals are like 1:1 compared to seeing the real environment, no pixels or warping.
Being able to watch a movie like this is a killer feature:
As well as being able to sit on a sofa and have a nearby Mac show up like that.
This makes it instantly useful for everything that is normally done on a smaller Mac display or TV.
Clickbait with nothing to back it up. There have been a few of these fantasy based stores recently and it appears AppleInsider is morphing into the National Enquirer with its recent columns. We don't need made up opinion pieces.
I think a lot of the speculation about killer apps and market potential for the AVP has missed the mark so far. While it's clearly very capable of being used for gaming or watching visual media, I doubt that many people will be willing to spend ~$3,500 for a new gadget to play games on. However, it seems to me that there's a HUGE market opportunity for AVP in the maintenance and manufacturing of complex equipment. I recall seeing a video clip (perhaps at the AVP launch?) of someone working on a helicopter engine and wearing an AVP so they could refer to the repair manual with the engine pieces right in their field of view while they still had both hands free to do the work. Just as the iPad eventually found its way into all sorts of business applications, from sales floors to airplane cockpits, I could see the AVP totally revolutionizing the way people diagnose, repair, and assemble complex machines. Just think of how many airplanes, trains, trucks, and busses need to be maintained on a regular basis, and how many factories rely on heavy equipment that has to be maintained -- not to mention the many factories that manufacture and assemble all of this equipment in the first place. It will take a while for companies to recognize how much more efficient their manufacturing and repair procedures could be if they ported their manuals to AVP, but that will come -- just as the airlines eventually ported their many-volume procedure manuals to the iPad. AVP will never be just another gadget for teenagers to play games on, but I can see it becoming an absolute workhorse in industry.
avon b7 said: It isn't bringing anything groundbreaking to market. At least anything that hasn't been projected before. In that sense, and as of launch perspectives, the 'killer app' is still a way off and may even land on competing devices first. That doesn't matter though.
The killer app is obviously the home theater aspect. $3500 is LESS EXPENSIVE than any comparable large screen 4K OLED solution for entertainment. The only way to get close to that price point would be to buy an 83" 4K OLED screen and that is a teeny tiny screen size relative to what AVP can give you.
I wouldn't call that a killer app.
My wife loves the film viewing on the Quest in spite of the obvious limitations in quality but of course only when she's alone at home.
That’s how appealing it is so the VP will be a far superior experience but that is simply souping things up (and it comes at a price).
Independently of device, other problems remain. Battery life, comfort and wear fatigue.
All that without mentioning the elephant in that theatre. It might be great if you're viewing alone for short periods but it isn't workable with a sofa full of people for a family experience.
It's amazing how the powers that be will do anything to make negative press about VP or any Apple product. There is no struggle at all with this product. Now if you're trying to reach Trump supporters good luck with that! I think they all use Windows and Android phones and drive muscle cars and lifted trucks. So basically anyone in the USA who can be identified with a W and a T if ya know what I mean. The stock is almost at an all-time high again. Going to $225 soon and forward...
Except for the price, I read many of the same marketing concerns for the 'iPad' as I read in this piece for Vision Pro. I am not sure what success will even be for this, as I think for Apple it remains important to be recognized for being innovative, perhaps more so than an immediate or large return on this investment.
The price point! Blah, blah, blah. Everyone complaining about the price seems to be mostly people who can't afford it. Millions CAN afford it, geez. People paid more for Taylor Swift and Beyonce tickets for one show. People pay more for one basketball or football game, every week. People pay more for sneakers, purses, and bottles of wine. If they want it, they won't think twice about the price. Get over it.
People with vision issues are looking at VR and AR for QoL enhancements.. I was definitely hoping. However, because of my disease I HAVE to wear hard contact lenses and I cannot buy this..
People with vision issues are looking at VR and AR for QoL enhancements.. I was definitely hoping. However, because of my disease I HAVE to wear hard contact lenses and I cannot buy this..
We will have some articles on accessibility once we get them in our hands. For some people it's just going to be rough, unfortunately 🙁
Typos and misspelling aside, the author’s level of ignorance about marketing and advertising strategy and tactics makes this article unworthy of publication. Embarrassing for both the author and AppleInsider…
LOL. Found the sensitive one.
The article was thoughtful, well written, and focused on reality instead of fanboyism. Props to the author for critical thinking and not caving to the fanboy mob.
I remember another recent Apple product that, according to AppleInsider and other sites, Apple was struggling to market since it didn’t have a clear use case or killer app, had no serious third-party apps at release, and was too expensive. It quickly became the market leader.
I remember another recent Apple product that, according to AppleInsider and other sites, Apple was struggling to market since it didn’t have a clear use case or killer app, had no serious third-party apps at release, and was too expensive. It quickly became the market leader.
I’m talking about the Apple Watch.
I see the same thing happening to the Vision Pro.
Watches have 'always on' capacity. They are physical and sensorial appendages and very inconspicuous. They tie in very well with phones. They are also very affordable, too. A lot of people won't even realise they are wearing a watch while it takes in the sensor data and syncs it to their phones.
That is the complete opposite of the VP which is a limited use device, designed for very short periods of use when compared to watches.
To the vast majority of users, the device is not affordable either, which in turn makes it difficult to sell in the same way as watches, for which many people are more than willing to take a chance on.
I’ve seen a few references to the iPad release being indicative of what may happen with the Vision Pro. I can only address my personal experiences, but so far I have not had a remotely similar reaction to the Vision Pro that I had to the iPad. I saw and read all of the pundit predictions about what Apple’s tablet device was going to be and how it would either be revolutionary or a massive fail. None of this flipped the switch in my head that made me inclined to buy it or reject it mainly because I didn’t fully understand it.
What flipped the switch for me with the iPad was Steve Jobs’ presentation of the iPad. He was sitting comfortably on a couch holding the iPad in his hand and demonstrating how this new device, basically a slab-o-glass, was really nothing more than a portal or glass cockpit into how individuals could consume all of these different sources of media, content, information, entertainment, etc., as well as doing casual and lightweight tasks/work. It was a personal computer in the truest sense of being personal. All of the claptrap like desks and chairs and cords and keyboards and pointing devices that computers imposed on computer users was gone. It was you and the computer, and the computer was conforming to your way of living and doing things rather than the other way around.
That wasn’t the end of it. At the time I was always surrounding myself with reading material including magazines, tech journals, reference books that compressed your vertebra to carry around, lots of music on various forms of media, post-it notes with snippets of things that I needed to follow up on, etc. All of that stuff was physical and took up space in my life. Some of that “stuff” required changes to my physical space to accommodate its presence, like bookshelves, magazine racks, and CD carousels. In addition to the physical imposition that all that “stuff” imposed on my life, it all was anchored to one physical place. I couldn’t bring my magazine racks or CD carousels with me when I was traveling around the world or even to the local office. It was essentially a huge boat anchor.
As soon as I saw Steve sitting there using the iPad I realized all of that claptrap and anchorage that I had surrounded myself with was collapsed into that amazing new slab-o-glass that could replace all of those physical things that were cluttering my life. It could travel with me. The switch flipped in my brain and everything clicked … I absolutely had to have an iPad. After more than a decade I am still as enthusiastic about the iPad as I ever have been.
It’s not all nirvana. Some of those magazines and newspapers that I craved tried to reformulate themselves to fit into the iPad world evaporated, partly because the benefits associated with their expensive physical institutions that maintained their superiority in the past physical world didn’t apply in the consumption changes brought on by the iPad and other computer platforms. Plus, the iPad itself has slowly started to accrete more of the baggage of less personal computers with things like physical keyboards and pointing devices and a push to make the device more like its MacBook cousins. Some folks believe, like Microsoft, that the iPad is simply a form factor while others like myself still see it as the ultimate truly-personal personal computer.
I love my iPad and I love my MacBook and have no desire to morph them into a single device, at least not yet. There may someday be another Apple visionary who presents a new device that flips a switch in my brain that steers me on a path away from the iPad and MacBook as separate devices by replacing both with a new device, just like the iPad replaced all of those physical encumbrances in my life. Maybe the Apple Vision Pro is that device? I don’t know. So far no one at Apple has successfully presented the Apple Vision Pro in a way that solidifies the establishment of an inflection point from where the human-computer relationship was before the arrival of the iPad to where it ended up after the arrival of the iPad.
I’m still waiting and I’m optimistic that we’ll ultimately transition into new territory when it comes to human-computer interaction. I’m not convinced yet that the Vision Pro is the inflection point. It may be the first step or it may be a misstep. I don’t know but I’m open to discovering the answer based on how the Vision Pro is received. There are obviously some folks who’ve already taken the first step and some who have even taken a giant leap of faith around the Vision Pro. The rest of us are holding back. Nobody really knows and this time around we don’t have someone like Steve Jobs who understands what it takes to nudge a large population of the unconvinced that we’re heading in the right direction. Marketing doesn’t replace vision.
Meta tried forcing their employees to use the Metaverse and it's not there. It's not time. Give it ten years and there might be a demand for this.
I honestly think Apple wanted to float this idea and they have enough money to let it bomb and not worry about backlash. It's only affordable to people who have disposable income and want to flaunt being an Apple fan. This serves no purpose at the moment.
Could be wrong because if anything the OG Apple Watch and the first two or three versions of WatchOS were bad enough that the watch wound up being pointless.
Not so. the AW S0 had the Workouts app and it was near identical to today’s. Also tracked activity and standing rings — immediately useful and what I bought it for. Slow? Yes. Apps? No thanks. But for fitness tracking it was immediately a hit.
Comments
There are thousands of niche apps in training, maintenance, spatial data analysis et al that have been waiting decades for a device like this.
That's going to constitute the initial market, and demand is big - IN THAT SMALLish MARKET.
To those who say "there's no market for a $3,500 gaming device of consumer" - you are absolutely right.
But by then concluding that there is no market for VIsionPro is, um, short-sighted.
The high cost is temporary and is due to creating a product in its best form for mass consumption. Custom fit products are the way of the future. 3D printing and individualized product development are on the horizon, I feel this is Apple's early entry of this untapped market.
In 2007, I was standing in line to get my first iPhone. It had a 3.5” screen and was primitive in comparison to what a smart phone is now but it looked like the future. It cost me $799 (over $1000 today as I write this in 2024). It lacked flexibility and the ability to download apps beyond what it had at the time of purchase (email, Safari, Google Maps, You Tube and iTunes per my memory).
I remember the guy two places in front of me was being interviewed by a reporter who asked him what he was must exited about the phone and he said,
“multitouch.”
That guy was so much smarter than me and had gotten to the crux of the matter. From my perspective, I was there simply because I was a devotee of Jobs and I thought the device was cool in some vague sense.
Now a mere 13 plus years later, I see people walking on the street staring at a 5” screen held 2’ in front of their face oblivious to their surroundings. I see young people on electronic skateboards staring at their phones, I see people driving in their cars staring at their phones, sometimes clipped to their sun visor so as to be ever present. When in airplanes, trains, airports, train stations everyone is staring at their phones, head bent down at an unnatural and uncomfortable angle. And those not looking at their phones, are staring at their iPads or computers. (I have seen “pillows” marked to generation z consumers on Instagram that are really head support devices so they can have their heads supported as they lean forward with a cut-out for easy care-free scrolling.)
I have seen inconsolable children only placated by their parents when handed a phone. Conversely, I see nothing but empty neighborhoods because children don’t play outside anymore because their leisure time has been taken over by their various personal screens.
I have seen videos of nonhuman primates, scrolling on an iPhone with ease and entranced. An egomaniacal tech titan is burning through billions of dollars in capital and reputation because of their addiction to their personal 5” screens. Authoritarians plot and send out messages to their followers using their personal multitouch screens.
Those little 5” screens have taken over our lives. I can’t get the attention of my wife because she is staring at her phone constantly. I know people who have substituted an iPad as their personal television. I know people who don’t even have televisions because they prefer the personal screen of their phone instead.
Humans have no problem substituting the simulacra of a screen for our larger perceived reality. In 2007, I was standing in line to get my first iPhone. It had a 3.5” screen and was primitive in comparison to what a smart phone is now but it looked like the future. It cost me $799 (over $1000 today as I write this in 2024). It lacked flexibility and the ability to download apps beyond what it had at the time of purchase (email, Safari, Google Maps, You Tube and iTunes per my memory).
As for me, I like to put my iPhone down every now and then to stare at the wonders of the natural world. Yesterday, I was entranced by watching hawks fly over my home and soaring on the wind coming in from the coast.
But I am the weirdo in this regard, the outlier. I have no misconception in my observation of others. I have seen the portrayal of AR/VR in movies (Ready Player One, Tron, the Matrix franchise, Strange Days, Minority Report, etc etc). Many people clearly want this alternative reality. I know of another bond villain type who has bet his trillion dollar technology company on this technology with a name change and untold resources to bring this new world to fruition.
But it was always going to be Apple’s to win because of what Apple brings to technology, namely hardware/software integration, computing efficiency to allow head mounted complexity and heat dissipation. As well as the ability to craft desirable consumer (not technology) products as DED pontificates about. And Apple knows you have to conquer the “cutting edge” first.
The criticism by tech pundits is so predicable— the AVP has a battery pack and Apple is hiding its existence (Wired), what is the killer application, where are the developers and their apps, who needs this? Etc etc.
But it will change, maybe slowly at first. We will hear stories of its use with robotic surgeons, the life changing use by neuromuscular patients, especially those afflicted by ALS. And the developers will do their things as they do.
And of course the content providers—traditional media, sports leagues and the adult industry (we don’t like to talk about them)—will jump on board. Then it will steamroll.
I am constantly perplexed by the human inability to extrapolate from observed reality into the near future.
Just I am always surprised by the willingness of people to wear bulky noise cancelling headphones while traveling to cover up their ears.
So I think “spatial computing” is going to close the 2’ gap for some of us. Hopefully in a time limited fashion for their sake.
I personally don’t see how it could be any other outcome. You have to have a form of “cognitive blindness” not to see how the last decade leads to the next for better or for worse.
It's a visor with souped up VR/AR specs and it has a price to go with it.
It's a niche market and will be for a while.
It isn't bringing anything groundbreaking to market. At least anything that hasn't been projected before.
In that sense, and as of launch perspectives, the 'killer app' is still a way off and may even land on competing devices first. That doesn't matter though.
The question isn't really about the marketing at this point because there is not much to market and the initial run has already probably met its goals. For millions like me, no amount of marketing is going to convince me it's worth the current price.
It will take time for content to become compelling in terms of quantity and then quality.
Once the wrinkles in use cases, content, device fragility and wearability have been ironed out, then marketing will have something to get it's teeth into.
Until then, the focus should be on other aspects.
We absolutely know that the AR/VR/XR industry will overlap with phones and perhaps one day, replace them for many tasks.
Of course, a lot needs to happen before then. Bulk and weight need to come down. Battery life and charging need some evolution. Price is an obvious biggie.
'Content' is a massive point in terms of managing data.
Once out of the local environment, an AR device needs to feed off something and that data needs to be in a freely available format and delivered 'instantly'.
Anything from finding a toilet at an airport and knowing how busy it is to getting to your product at IKEA. Dealing with public transport systems , museums etc.
There is a problem with that though.
Although I have seen people wear Quest devices on the train you don't see people walking around in public with visors on their heads. That is something the industry needs to tackle.
How small do visors have to get for them to become accepted while out and about?
Half the size of the current VP? More? Less?
Or can people be convinced to use them as they are now (and with pass through)?
Is it possible to create a 'two in one' where the visor snaps off to leave something like a pair of big glasses with AR overlays and the ability to watch (and listen to) content on an expanded 2D screen?
I'm ignoring the non-consumer use cases here.
5.5G is going to be absolutely essential to guarantee QoS to high bandwidth devices in great numbers so then the cellular issue pops up, or will people be happy to be hooked up to Wi-Fi networks mostly in a home setting.
The current iteration is a limited use device. I can't see anyone using it for prolonged periods due to comfort, heat, weight, strain situations.
Taking all these points into consideration, I don't see marketing as a problem.
The most important thing for me is that it's here. The same applies to all the visors out there. Things can't improve unless they come to market.
If they don't abandon the project (that's unlikely) it will slowly get better. When it does, the marketing side can get going in earnest.
Other headsets have virtual displays but you can't read text on them very well because of the resolution and stability, see comments on the following video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_YegFqKSKc
"After watching countless videos of the Quest 3's passthrough before buying a headset and trying it for myself, I have to say it was a pretty big letdown. So many people made it seem I could just wear the headset around my house and have this great mixed reality experience, but the super low resolution and warping make it more of a gimmick that I'll probably never use than anything else. I have no doubt it'll only get better from here, I just can't see myself ever using it for anything other than quickly looking at something in my room while I'm playing a game."
The reviews of AVP have all said the visuals are like 1:1 compared to seeing the real environment, no pixels or warping.
Being able to watch a movie like this is a killer feature:
As well as being able to sit on a sofa and have a nearby Mac show up like that.
This makes it instantly useful for everything that is normally done on a smaller Mac display or TV.
My wife loves the film viewing on the Quest in spite of the obvious limitations in quality but of course only when she's alone at home.
That’s how appealing it is so the VP will be a far superior experience but that is simply souping things up (and it comes at a price).
Independently of device, other problems remain. Battery life, comfort and wear fatigue.
All that without mentioning the elephant in that theatre. It might be great if you're viewing alone for short periods but it isn't workable with a sofa full of people for a family experience.
We will have some articles on accessibility once we get them in our hands. For some people it's just going to be rough, unfortunately 🙁
That is the complete opposite of the VP which is a limited use device, designed for very short periods of use when compared to watches.
To the vast majority of users, the device is not affordable either, which in turn makes it difficult to sell in the same way as watches, for which many people are more than willing to take a chance on.
What flipped the switch for me with the iPad was Steve Jobs’ presentation of the iPad. He was sitting comfortably on a couch holding the iPad in his hand and demonstrating how this new device, basically a slab-o-glass, was really nothing more than a portal or glass cockpit into how individuals could consume all of these different sources of media, content, information, entertainment, etc., as well as doing casual and lightweight tasks/work. It was a personal computer in the truest sense of being personal. All of the claptrap like desks and chairs and cords and keyboards and pointing devices that computers imposed on computer users was gone. It was you and the computer, and the computer was conforming to your way of living and doing things rather than the other way around.
That wasn’t the end of it. At the time I was always surrounding myself with reading material including magazines, tech journals, reference books that compressed your vertebra to carry around, lots of music on various forms of media, post-it notes with snippets of things that I needed to follow up on, etc. All of that stuff was physical and took up space in my life. Some of that “stuff” required changes to my physical space to accommodate its presence, like bookshelves, magazine racks, and CD carousels. In addition to the physical imposition that all that “stuff” imposed on my life, it all was anchored to one physical place. I couldn’t bring my magazine racks or CD carousels with me when I was traveling around the world or even to the local office. It was essentially a huge boat anchor.
As soon as I saw Steve sitting there using the iPad I realized all of that claptrap and anchorage that I had surrounded myself with was collapsed into that amazing new slab-o-glass that could replace all of those physical things that were cluttering my life. It could travel with me. The switch flipped in my brain and everything clicked … I absolutely had to have an iPad. After more than a decade I am still as enthusiastic about the iPad as I ever have been.
It’s not all nirvana. Some of those magazines and newspapers that I craved tried to reformulate themselves to fit into the iPad world evaporated, partly because the benefits associated with their expensive physical institutions that maintained their superiority in the past physical world didn’t apply in the consumption changes brought on by the iPad and other computer platforms. Plus, the iPad itself has slowly started to accrete more of the baggage of less personal computers with things like physical keyboards and pointing devices and a push to make the device more like its MacBook cousins. Some folks believe, like Microsoft, that the iPad is simply a form factor while others like myself still see it as the ultimate truly-personal personal computer.
I love my iPad and I love my MacBook and have no desire to morph them into a single device, at least not yet. There may someday be another Apple visionary who presents a new device that flips a switch in my brain that steers me on a path away from the iPad and MacBook as separate devices by replacing both with a new device, just like the iPad replaced all of those physical encumbrances in my life. Maybe the Apple Vision Pro is that device? I don’t know. So far no one at Apple has successfully presented the Apple Vision Pro in a way that solidifies the establishment of an inflection point from where the human-computer relationship was before the arrival of the iPad to where it ended up after the arrival of the iPad.
I’m still waiting and I’m optimistic that we’ll ultimately transition into new territory when it comes to human-computer interaction. I’m not convinced yet that the Vision Pro is the inflection point. It may be the first step or it may be a misstep. I don’t know but I’m open to discovering the answer based on how the Vision Pro is received. There are obviously some folks who’ve already taken the first step and some who have even taken a giant leap of faith around the Vision Pro. The rest of us are holding back. Nobody really knows and this time around we don’t have someone like Steve Jobs who understands what it takes to nudge a large population of the unconvinced that we’re heading in the right direction. Marketing doesn’t replace vision.