Apple severely cuts Vision Pro production, and may stop it completely very soon
Production of the Apple Vision Pro scaled back considerably over the summer, but a new report claims there's a chance Apple may stop it entirely by the end of the year.
Apple Vision Pro
The Apple Vision Pro isn't a mass-market device with massive sales versus the rest of the rest of Apple's range. The relatively lower sales figures gives Apple new supply chain challenges, which it is still working out.
According to sources of The Information involved in component production for the headset, Apple reduced orders for the Apple Vision Pro early in the summer. However, the cut in production may not end there, as it is believed Apple could end up stopping assembly of the headset by the end of 2024.
Part of the decision is due to having ample supplies of the headset and components to make more to meet demand for the foreseeable future. It is claimed suppliers have produced enough components to produce approximately 600,000 headsets.
As for the assembly of the Apple Vision Pro, Luxshare has halved production of the headset to about 1,000 units per day. Apple has reportedly told Luxshare that manufacturing may have to wind down by November.
Analysts believe Apple sold approximately 370,000 headsets in the first three quarters of 2024, and will only sell another 50,000 by the end of the year. Meanwhile, it is thought that Luxshare has assembled between 500,000 and 600,000 headsets, meaning there are about 200,000 headsets in storage.
One of the reasons Apple may be trimming production and letting existing supplies run for a while is because of its work on a new cheaper model for consumers. A $2,000 version is expected to go on sale in 2026, with changes including lower-resolution displays, the loss of Eyesight, and other cost-saving changes.
A second-gen model of Apple Vision Pro is also forecasted to arrive, with production anticipated for the second half of 2025. If accurate, Apple's existing stock of first-gen units may be enough to feed demand until the second-gen iteration launches.
These plans may still change, as the Apple Vision Products Group is still tryingto work out the best way forward for the hardware category. There's always the prospect of coming up with smart glasses similar to Meta's Ray-Ban collaboration, or to go down the route of the "Holy Grail" AR spectacles.
Read on AppleInsider
Comments
What demand?
The numbers sound great to me too, all things considered. Obviously a niche line but there is no substitute for real world feedback and performance metrics to build on.
It's not a consumer device and there are very few consumer usage cases for it. It simply isn't priced to compete with a $299 Meta Quest VR HMD which can play a bunch of games from the Meta Quest store as well as Steam.
Mobile computing that provides large screens/multiple screens isn't going to go away. It's really the only way to go forward. Apple's largest laptop screen is only 4 inches larger than the monitor that Commodore sold for the C64 back in the early 1980s. Mobile is held back by the small screens and AVP style computing is the way to change that.
To be fair it looks like a really cool product, I would love to have one to play with. It's just too expensive, too niche, and it's a form factor that just isn't catching on.
Someone will either create a better device, or better use case for it, or it will go the same way as the 3D TV.
Which "analysts?" Please name them. What's the confirmed data on which they're basing these estimates? What is their track record for prior estimates of Apple sales?
Meanwhile, it is thought that Luxshare has assembled between 500,000 and 600,000 headsets, meaning there are about 200,000 headsets in storage.
Really? It is thought? Please name WHO is doing that thinking and the confirmed data on which that thinking is based.
I'll wait...
The laziness, lack of sourcing and sheer irresponsibility of AppleInsider writing can sometimes be astonishing. This is one of those times. Are there no standards at all for what you're willing to publish as if it were fact? Here you publish what could only be called bombshell news by predicting the shutdown in production after just one year of what is arguably, in terms of R&D, one of the most consequential products Apple has ever launched and you publish this baseless drivel, with no sourcing for numbers quoted, but wrapped in clever writing to convey that it's the truth. Yeah, "Analysts" sure sounds authoritative until someone asks, "Who and what are their sources and are they any good at being analysts? Most "analysts" aren't. (If you doubt that, check out TipRanks which tracks the records of Wall Street analysts.)
Do better.