JohnDenver101

rob53 said:

maury markowitz said:

hypoluxa said:

I can't see them (yet) removing the MacPro from their roster. The PCI expansion slots are a niche market for some Pro users who use them, they still have a customer market for it albeit a shrinking one.

Could this not be addressed with a working external PCI expansion system?

I don't see why not. I don't see it using a "standard" PCI interface although the Mac Pro uses the (almost) newest PCIe Gen4 x16 and x8 slots. I could see a much faster PCIe interface or something like an extension of the unified memory architecture to an external box allowing the might speed possible to multiple PCIe cards. I know some people want everything in one box but splitting that box into two might be a better choice for those professionals who want to tune their system to their specific needs. An M3 Ultra CPU "box" (Mac Studio) might be enough to serve as a standalone device for semi-professionals (not going to start a rant on who is semi and who is a full professional) as well as the back engine for full professionals needing high-end PCIe boards for specific tasks (animation, video, sound, movies, scientific processes requiring a supercomputer). Everything is getting smaller and working in clusters so starting with a  7.7" x 7.7" x 3.7" tiny box instead of a 8.58" x 17.7" x 20.8 behemoth weighing 37.2 lbs without any PCIe cards installed makes a huge difference in a computer/server room. I would like to see Apple offer clustering software along with the addition of one of the fastest computer interfaces ( PCIe6 x16 968-Gbps, NVLink 2.0 1.2Tbps, or even a very expensive Infinity Fabric 4.096 Tbps) would provide an amazingly fast Mac cluster capable of competing with just about any specialized, much more expensive mainframe level cluster system. Something in between would be much nicer than keeping the Mac Pro form factor.

Not supporting a GPU or RAM expansion via PCI felt like a slap to animators and other professionals who require that. If you don't support those things what's the point of spending $3K more for a tower to plug your video card into? Just buy the Studio and use Thunderbolt. If Apple doesn't bring more PCI support in future chips there is literally no reason for the MacPro, not to say there is one now. 

one9deuce said:

Two really big (and many smaller) factors differentiate what Apple is doing vs. everyone else. The first is interacting with the internet with just your eyes and a pinch (they way Apple is implementing it is so amazing) the eye tracking is apparently something that other companies have done before, but until the Apple Vision keynote I had *never* even heard of that before. Which means that 99% of the population hasn’t. Which leads me to the next big factor, Apple has an install base of over a billion people! This is exactly that moment when a company is perfectly suited and situated to bring this to the mainstream. And bring it they will. 

Compare the original iPhone to an iPhone 15 Pro, it’s a huge, huge difference. Compare the original Apple Watch to the Series 9 Apple Watch, a tremendous improvement. Apple Vision will be an even bigger change because they already know what they want to do and they probably know exactly how they’re going to do it: a pair of glasses that look like a fashionable pair of Oakley’s that nobody will think twice about seeing people wear them. Nobody thinks twice about AirPods now and they’re everywhere, and I’d say that’s a stranger look than some glasses. 

Seriously, go buy some Apple stock, this is going to change the world. A company like Apple doesn’t spend 10’s of billions a year on R&D unless they think they’ve got something special to offer the world.  

They’ve got something special to offer the world. 

Eye tracking and hand interaction is great but is that a feature that is going to draw millions in that a joystick won't? It's a better interface but like I said before,  it's not a ground breaking feature that the average person will be like "I have to have that!" You need to give people a real reason to use it. No company, including Apple has done it yet. Hardware won't be the driving force to use this device. It will be software and Apple didn't show anything on that front. Meta spent billions creating a universe and no one cares.  

Your second argument is my favorite one I hear all the time. "Wait till this is like a pair of glasses!" The difficulty of shrinking the dozens of cameras, sensors and battery to something the size of a pair of glasses could easily take well over a decade to come. Hell Apple still can't create the purported "Slab of Glass" iPhone yet without ports or notches. If you are telling me the masses with only use this once it's a pair of glasses, they will be waiting a LONG time.

Two other major problems with this:

1) If you do make it a pair of glasses you will lose the immersive VR capabilities (the best feature in my opinion) unless everyone is wearing swimming goggles.
2) You still have to put the glasses on. If you don't wear glasses all day, this is a problem. The watch and phone are great bc they are always with you. People are inherently lazy. If my glasses are in the other room, I'm not going to get them when I can just check my phone in my pocket or the watch on my wrist.  

Lastly, a point I always repeat with the Vision Pro is that thing uses 14 IR LEDs shooting IR light into your eyes. There are multiple studies showing even minutes of close exposure to IR light can damage the eye and potentially cause diseases like cataracts. I even get the feeling Apple knows this. In the keynote, when they talked about the sensors they were very careful to say it uses 14 LEDs of "invisible light" to track your eye. I would be extremely hesitant to use this device until they can absolutely certify this is safe for your eyes. 

We will see, like I said before, still a lot of unknowns. 

There’s only two more frontiers possible with the internet, the internet as part of your world or the internet as a place you can go to an actually experience. And the Apple Vision platform does both. There will be a day where we think it’s quaint that we experienced the internet on a 20” monitor or a 4” phone screen. Why watch NBA highlights on a small phone screen when you can experience the highlights like you’re court side or actually on the court with the players? Why shop for things on a small phone screen when you can feel as though your actually in the store and looking at something in three dimensions as though it’s actually in front of you? 

I mean to be fair you could already do this with any other headset available today. The developers of the shopping experience or sporting events are the ones that need to make this possible, not Apple per se. I don't see why these experiences could only happen now that Apple made a headset. A headset not all that different than all the other headsets offered today. Yes it does a lot of things better than the others, but was there anything really ground breaking that we haven't already seen?

Why does no one mention how small this market is? Smartphones and smart watches were large markets with massive growth rates before Apple got it them. VR/AR is not. Apple didn't bring anything completely ground breaking to this industry so I don't understand what the strategy is to make this another "next big thing" moment. Maybe they aren't looking for that, but that wouldn't feel very Apple to me. 

Tech has followed a trend of becoming less cumbersome for the user for 50 years. From large room-sized computers, to personal computers, to the mouse and GUI, to the laptop, the smartphone, touch and now voice. This headset feels like a step backwards at least for a computing device. People are inherently lazy and having to put a device on your head when you could just check you phone, watch or ask Siri (yea I know that's still terrible) for basic tasks doesn't seem like something someone will pay money for.  

The other argument I hear is that "this will be amazing when it's the size of a pair of sunglasses". Handing waving away how difficult it would be to shrink this tech down to that size, you still run into the same problem mentioned above. You have to go find your glasses to use them. Unless you wear your glasses 24/7, it's still an inconvenience. Secondly, you lose the ability to have VR with sunglasses unless they make them like swimming goggles. 

LASTLY and something I still don't understand why no one is talking about is the health risks. Multiple studies have shown that using IR light close to the eye can damage the eye and potentially cause diseases like cataracts. The Vision Pro has like 14 IR sensors a centimeter from your eye. Sorry but I'm not going to be wearing something like that until you can definitely show me there is no risk to MY vision. 

If this is true, what is the selling point for the 15 Pro? The 15 Pro Max will have the new telephoto lens. The 15 and 15 Max will have the new stacked sensor, which may be smaller than the sensor being reused from the 14 Pro to the 15 Pro but its stacked properties will mean it could out perform the 15 Pro's sensor.

So what is the reason to buy the 15 Pro this year? The action button? Maybe the suspected glass/plastic hybrid lens might be a selling point but man this does not sound like the year to update to a Pro especially if you do it for the camera.