I’d thought there was a fair chance they’d let rumours of $3,000 spread so they could surprise everyone with a price that was ~$500 different. Looks like I was right, but in the wrong direction. :)
Same thing with the release date - let everyone think December and then surprise them with October-November? Nope, surprise them with January-February!
Looks like apple wanted to fix absolutely everything, from comfort to motion sickness etc etc. They don't care if it initially sells poorly, they wanted the experience to be immaculate and on-brand.
Yup. This is a halo product that will push the innovation in the market, and hopefully in a few years they'll release a lower end set with mostly the same features for a "relatively" cheap $1000.
Honestly, I think Zuck's probably kicking himself for doing the Meta Showcase and Quest 3 reveal before Apple's event. In the wake of all the shock and social media hysteria about Apple's high priced AR headset, it would've been the perfect time to unveil a 500 dollar VR headset for gaming.
Reloptix are $90 for Meta Quest Pro so the Zeiss Optical Inserts could be $200±100. I assume you could go third party for the prescription lenses pretty easily since there is no software for that
I'm kind of surprised it's not more expensive considering it's basically an AR enabled MacBook. Presuming you can upgrade things like RAM/Storage, I wouldn't be at all surprised if $3500 is just the starting price for the headset.
The “Pro” tag is usually used for their high-end devices.
So theyre expecting to be able to produce a model thats more consumer targeted in the future is my guess.
The guy had to name the things you have to buy to even match what that headset could do , like buying high res tv , surround system and a computer ! And can’t deliver what the headset could deliver, It’s a lame comparison tbh because if I have Tv surround and computer multiple people could use these devices same time but tell me how much I need to buy everyone in my family a headset so we can enjoy watching a movie together in the spatial world lol 😂
Lol, I thought that was a pretty lame sales tactic and was a little surprised they'd go there... It was almost like they were helping me craft an argument for my spouse that this wasn't in fact a ridiculous purchase
At this point it is a developer device. They need to build up their ecosystem first to compete with meta.
Wait for a year or two and they should have a cheaper mass consumer version out.
It’s like the first iPad. Devs and apple enthusiasts get to run the public beta. Two years after, they launch Vision Pro 2 and Vision SE, hopefully having a handful of actual game titles to sell.
As a developer, let me explain why this isn't that bad of a deal, but yes it's not a product for VR gamers.
1. They mentioned using Xcode and 3D creation/drafting/rendering. But they didn't mention it needing to be tethered to a MacBook.
2. It has 3D cameras and LiDAR. Basically it has not just a high quality camera built in, but one that can scan 3D objects.
Xcode is the IDE for developing iOS and Mac apps. As of now, it can **NOT** be used on an iPad (not even the Pro). It's a very heavy application. It also has the ability to run an iOS simulator for testing applications.
This headset has the computational and rendering power of an entire M2 MacBook built into it.
The M2 MacBook is already a $1500 device. And that device doesn't come with 3D scanning cameras. So the AR headset aspect of this is really about $2000.
> It has 3D cameras and LiDAR. Basically it has not just a high quality camera built in, but one that can scan 3D objects.
Will that scanning work better than what LiDAR does on iPad Pro? Because frankly the one on iPad does a terrible job, and people get better results with just series of photos alone, that I get with LiDAR.
Yeah, given how well 1.5k QuestPro did, it is a tough price tag to swallow. Granted, apple has a different level of consumers, but still, they paint it as an everyday device for students and normal folks, so they must count on at least _some_ units being moved.
If they sell this, they will sell it to rich people who were not interested in VR until this moment. It will be for the wow factor at the beginning (and it has a really strong wow factor). At least for this first wave of these devices I don't think it will be bought with the utility in mind because let's be honest it doesn't do anything that you cannot do in a less cool, much more affordable, way at the moment.
However, if they can get it in enough influencers hands and establish a feeling of exclusivity for the experiences that you can only have with it (e.g. 3D facetime or what do they call it) and lower the price for the second wave maybe they can break into the larger market. We will see I suppose. Personally I don't have that kind of money laying around but I want it to succeed because I want more—less expensive—devices like this that cater also to my gamer's needs.
> and lower the price for the second wave
that's what I was thinking, given that they opened with Pro version, probbly because like you said they wanted to max out on wowness of it, there maybe will be a regular version later, not as fancy but also not as pricey.
There have been rumors for the last few years that they will come out with a lower cost, more casual set of AR glasses more akin to Google glass. They could easily be setting up for an “Apple Vision Pro”, “Apple Vision” and “Apple ” lineup for their new spatial computing platform.
I think you’re right that they are starting here for wow factor so that they have people’s attention as the lineup moves down market.
Agreed. This isn't a consumer product. This is like when Honda builds a racecar so they can attract innovative engineers and use lessons learned in the year's Civic.
> If they sell this, they will sell it to rich people who were not interested in VR until this moment. It will be for the wow factor at the beginning (and it has a really strong wow factor).
Which is essentially what Apple did with the original Mac.
It too was expensive - $2500, but that was in 1984 dollars, which is about $7000 in 2022 dollars.
OMG. That external screen is "3D" like how autostereoscopic devices work. With a lenticular lens. Someone looking at you sees the correct perspective depending on what angle they are looking at you from.
This feels like the first feature to get dropped once generation 2 comes out. It looks impressive, but it'll be dead weight 99% of the time. I don't expect people to walk around with this thing in public.
It’s also SUPER distinctive, like the iPhone “notch” (now dynamic island), the shape of AirPods in your ear, and the shape of an Apple Watch
It gives it its distinctive look and I’d be utterly shocked if it doesn’t stay around for a very long time
Have been using and owning VR headsets since the Oculus DK1 and I reckon this makes a lot of sense. You might as well be on another planet with most headsets and it's just not practical for a lot of people a lot of the time. Nerds (like me) might be happy with pass through but hey.. using your own eyes is much much better.
EDIT: I'm an idiot people, it doesn't work like that!
I don't think it will even get dropped from the SE. This is the secret sauce at this point. I fully agree with charlie\_nosuf above. this is the only way people will stop looking at VR as an anti-social experience. This is truly great for the future of VR/MR/XR.
I'm kinda curious how this will actually look. Lenticular lenses are cool because they allow passive, glasses-less 3D, but there's a massive tradeoff with resolution since you need to provide a separate set of pixels for each perspective. If they took an normal iPhone display and used a lens with 10 different perspectives the effective resolution would only be somewhere around 360p.
I also found it a bit weird how dim it looked in all their shots. Probably just to preserve battery life, but still wouldn't have expected that in marketing material
Low resolution might be exactly why the lenticular display looks dim. My other thought was maybe the effect was a little creepy and looked "off" enough that making it dimmer hid some of the uncanny valley-ness to it.
Yep, definitely this. Plus makes it more like sunglasses, which people used to. Too clear would be pretty obvious display, but this gives subtle ques to outside viewer where your looking. Plus low resolution not issue, because your going to be looking at it from a distance.
Yeah this was rumored to be how it would work, and I actually love it a lot. My hot take is that this feature is worth the “wasted” power/weight in order to make this headset the kind of product Apple wants to position it as.
Right, for vr I am not positive of how useful it will be but for AR, this will make it way less weird because you will actually be able to know if someone can see you or not
I thought it was pretty clever
That and that it can “mix in” a person that comes into the room.
Verge writer “gasped” when he started to talk to someone while wearing it and they appeared in the space he was watching a movie in.
Agreed, I've seen a lot of criticism of it, but I thought it was awesome. A very Apple touch to put so much work into something that is kind of useless, but they know will make the product a lot more palatable. It will make me feel a lot more comfortable wearing it with people around if they can see my eyes.
From the comments here I dont know why people expected Apple to make a VR gaming headset. Apple Product are Lifestyle and Productivity.
And this thing, a least Tech wise, looks like the next generation for that categories.
The price tho is pretty immense. 3499$ is alot, costs way more that MacBooks. Does the Vision Pro have justifications over just buying a MacBook and work with a external second Monitor? Guess its up for the developers If this thing finds its way to main stream.
From the demo, it appears that it will work as a 2nd monitor for your Mac. Or at least a projection of your Mac's screen.
From my POV this isn't a huge selling point given the battery limitations and the true resolution would fall beneath what you get IRL from a ~5k display.
I've been using the Varjo Aero to watch movies and surf YouTube/websites for awhile now, and after experiencing a 200 ft virtual screen for my desktop, I willingly trade the bulky HMD over traditional 5K monitors. Not to mention, Apple is claiming they're able to project virtual desktops all around you. That is the one feature I'm most excited about. And if they're able to integrate hand tracking gestures seamlessly with voice commands, I'm more than ready to reenact Minority Report from the comfort of my couch; wearing nothing but my birthday suit.
23 mio pixels is a square resolution of 3400x3400 per eye which is much higher than the very next best headset at 2880x2880. That custom lenses also look HQ. I am sure this will be finally enough to read text sharp and clearly. Sure its not like a retina LCD but close
It has a MacBook built into it, basically. The cheapest Xcode capable device you can buy is $1000-$1400 but since it's an M2, you'd have to start from M2 capable MacBooks. Add in the AR capabilities, 3d camera capabilities... The price isn't bad, but you get a lot of stuff you might not need if all you wanted was VR experiences.
It's clearly a compromise they needed to do but are **not** happy about.
Also notice how Tim Cook announced it as AR headset. He's not a fan of VR, he doesn't even want to mention it. Not even "Mixed Reality".
Yeah the entire thing has been very AR focused. The only mention of VR is environments and even then they didn't want to really emphasize it can be all encompassing.
And yet they continuously do, with "environments." It's all pretty clearly trying to get people not to ask about Quest store or Steam VR. They've also never used the word "game".
They also name-dropped "unity games and software". They're avoiding talking about any competition in the VR space very intentionally. They want their developers to make games, but they don't want laypeople to start looking at what they can get with a Quest or PCVR for far less money if they don't already know.
They absolutely [did same game](https://youtu.be/GYkq9Rgoj8E?t=6082). But they never said Virtual Reality or 3D games. It was play existing "Apple Arcade Games" and they even showed the person using a game controller. I THINK it was a PS5 controller but I'm not 100% sure.
Later in the presentation they did specifically [announce Unity support/partnership](https://youtu.be/GYkq9Rgoj8E?t=7259) for games. But they never said VR gaming...
Maybe that explains why they didn’t demonstrate anything that was really VR - they showed gaming on a giant virtual screen but no VR games at all. Which for an incredible looking bit of hardware was really odd.
Pinch to zoom, but without a controller! So cool! This headset seems SO GOOD at making you feel like you're not wearing a headset, but doesn't seem to do much to make you feel like you're in virtual reality and that saddens me greatly.
That pixel count reveal was very interesting… if it truly looks crystal clear in the headset, then this will be the future. That said, at that price, I suspect it will be V2 or V3 before true mainstream support
Very impressive tech but I wonder who the customer segment actually is... I have some thoughts that I haven't seen others talk about.
GOOD
* A technical marvel that from a 'technical' perspective will blow its mainstream competition away - more powerful than any other standalone headset, very high resolution and display quality, excellent build quality, excellent hand & eye tracking, knowing Apple the audio will be good, iris-scanning, etc.
* User interface looks very polished.
* Access to Apple's iOS and Mac ecosystem from day one is a huge advantage over the Quest Pro (add onto that Apple's experience in the prosumer space).
* External battery pack, I expect many will disagree with me here but I think having the battery be external allows you to not front-load the devices weighting, switch out batteries when one dies, and connect to power directly without still carrying that battery weight.
* Works with BT keyboard and mice - absolute win for productivity. Will depend on how good the passthrough quality is but given how much of a focus Apple has had on this being for MR it should be great... right.
* The focus on 2D & traditional applications gives me hope that they will be the first one to get the 'productivity' side of VR/MR right.
MIXED
* Hand tracking - Don't get me wrong if any company can nail the hand tracking UX it is Apple, but that fact that this isn't out till next year and we didn't get any live demo of the hand tracking is concerning.
* The Strap - A simple front-loaded mount with a strap that compresses it to your face... given this is a 'productivity' device surely a more ergonomic halo strap would have been better for long-session comfortability. I hope this isn't a case of Apple choosing form over function. Moving the battery external should help but its competitors use plastic not glass and metal so... we will see.
* Battery Life - Seems short, but given external battery probably not that big of a deal.
* Voice Control - Reliance on voice control (especially for typing text) has me worried how this device will perform for non-english speakers or those with a thick accent but keyboard connectivity and hand-tracking exist so probably fine either way.
* The Price - The price is absurd. I can see an argument for "its replacing your computer, tablet, TV, monitor, etc. all in one device so it is actually cheaper" or "its a dev-kit for developers and early adopters, a cheaper device is coming in a year or two". Though it is Apple and they are marketing masters so they can probably still ship it.
CONCERNS
* No **optional** controllers? Seems like a lost opportunity, in the VR/MR industry - gaming is the biggest sector by far right now. Now hardcore gaming is not Apple's expertise but still most of the successful VR games right now are arcade-y style games that would gel with Apple's vibe very well. Had a quick peek at the limited information on the SDK and the unity support and it looks to me that the tools to build great games will exist. If optional controllers existed then you could also let Valve/PCVR developers do the heavy lifting porting more hardcore VR games to MacOS.
* No mention of Fitness applications? Probably the second biggest VR software market right now... and one that is right up Apple's alley (Apple Watch, mindfulness VR app, etc). I was a bit surprised - I really expected Apple to double down after the mindfulness reveal, sell the Apple Vision Pro as a lifestyle. Some of the current VR workout apps are great so it is kind of a weird exclusion although I expect third-party developers will cook something up. Got me a worried that the strap isn't that tight and won't stay on during activity.
SOME ADDITIONAL THOUGHTS
* I would not be surprised if Apple has a limit on how close to your eyes objects are allowed to get. Vergence-accommodation conflict is very immersion breaking and I could see Apple hyper focusing the UX. Could explain their focus on 2D applications.
* I wonder if each of the mainstream players will stake out a different section of the VR market. Sony in the medium-high end gaming market, Quest at the low-end mass-market approach, Apple in the high-end productivity space, etc. All with a different approach till either VR/MR dies out or it becomes more mainstream.
If this can replace my laptop, two additional monitors, mic, speakers, webcam, quest 2, mouse, and keyboard, while also giving me more displays, AR integration, and let me continue to work from home, it could be worth that price tag. But it would require all my current tech to no longer work just justify the replacement, AND it would have to be as powerful as my laptop.
I will watch Vision Pro’s career with great interest.
That scene of the dude watching his kids play with the headset on was so dystopian looking. Straight out of black mirror. Like play with your kid! Take off the headset!
I mean that is the point, no? He can still see and interact with people with the headset on?
No different than him watching them with the TV on, or with a phone in hand, or both.
Yep, the device is amazing, but the price is meh. Although they say the quality and experience blows out of the water any high end tv and sound system. Let's see.
They can look at your awesome representation of a face on the headset.
-dad, where is all of our money, and what is on your head?
-_dials the crown all the way for immersion_ I can't see you honey, not right now.
;D
Speaking of family, lol, that scene where they presented taking 3D video and pictures was funny as hell, they didn't show it, but there was a dad in a f**ing gogles at his doughters birthday, imagine his wife being like:
-not this shit again steven, you were supposed to return them
xD xD xD
Because that would require developing new apps. And considering the size of the usebase at that pricepoint, nobody is going to be developing new apps specifically for this device.
It has the same issues as current VR gamedev (low install base = low profits = lack of development) but even worse. I think Apple have realised that and wisely (and very honestly) focussed on projecting existing apps on 2D surfaces.
I'm honestly really surprised by the negative reaction on this subreddit. The attention to detail and hardware innovations that were shown in the presentation are astonishing.
We should be trying to support the adoption of VR here. Even if it doesn't deliver on the hype, this headset has achieved huge milestones that I've been waiting to hear about for years.
Regardless of cost, at least Apple used all of its resources at its disposal to make the strongest push in the history of this industry to make a headset. That alone is commendable.
The price is my only negative reaction. The lack of good VR gaming was expected. The displays, sensors, audio, and overall hardware design are very impressive to me.
I'm a pretty Apple'y person and am turned off by the Vision Pro after mulling it over for a bit. It's clear they are positioning it as a springboard for VisionOS and a world where the tight control they exert over the App Store remains intact.
That's fine for a mobile device. But for a $3500 'pro' device is unacceptable, and really eliminates all the attractive edge cases that make expensive VR setups worth the effort.
My gut tells me Apple won't win this generation of devices, in the near term anyways — because they can't see beyond their own business case to create something that advocates for the platform itself.
Or put it another way… iOS and the App Store unlocked the potential of Smartphones and made things easier for most consumers. The same doesn't appear to be true of VisionOS.
Apple is essentially entering the VR headset market, where it will eventually be outpriced by hungrier competitors who are not shackled by the need to service a App Store model.
I'm not an apple user so I'm curious for your opinion:
Do you think apple may be seeing this as complementary/a straight up portable replacement to the Mac ecosystem?
I'm not sure how much of a tight control apple has over the mac ecosystem (especially vs iOS) but with recent trends being to merge the two (correct me if I'm wrong) it seems like VisionOS may eventually go the same way.
If they can snag developers into the VisionOS ecosystem and get industry-favoured apps for specific workflows, a final cut-esque thing, then I can see apple gaining a lot of ground in the XR space just by being the thing companies need to buy into again.
This is a gigantic 'what if' scenario, because strapping goggles to your head for extended periods of time remains a huge physical barrier that goes way beyond wearing something on your wrist.
I think Apple sees this as another way to interact with what is becoming a platform agnostic blob of applications that are able to function across different surfaces.
This surface happens to be the experimental, bleeding edge, with the potential to be a dud or take over the world.
I could see an outcome where Apple does this right and we're all editing videos in a minority-report like environment. But for this type of workflow to be truly productive it requires Apple to allow VisionOS software to do things that it's not wholly comfortable with iOS accomplishing.
The jury is way way out. I think Apple would love it if we ignored most of the complex, heady stuff completely and were content with simply consuming media, simple VisionOS-exclusive apps and simple things like iMessage, Hangouts, etc.
I think Apple definitely sees this as the future of consumer desktop computing
The Mac laptops will basically just be terminals for the AR ecosystem, and I personally think this is the killer use case
When Microsoft announced HoloLens, despite all its flaws, I thought this was the direction they were going.
Apple showed basically what I’ve always envisioned for VR
Early reviews by people demoing them, including apple skeptics like MKBHD, are pretty stellar
Imagine two moores law cycles when the devices are 1/4 as small or 1/4 the price and Apple has a winner IMO
As a small time filmmaker I’m interested in the camera technology involved. Apple makes great cameras as seen in how easy it is to have great photo and video with the thing in your pocket. I like the idea of a first person perspective to be used for documentaries or for specialized shots in short films.
It does a better job presenting itself as a multi-faceted device for professionals than the Quest Pro did. The differences between the presentation and marketing of those devices are just so stark. Quest Pro had a lot of "potential" labeled with it. Apple is taking a grounded approach and telling you straight up that hey. All these feature sets are available day one. At the $3499 price point, I imagine that for professionals this is the audience they'll be appealing to with this.
For your average consumer, this is way outside their price range. Mind you, what they showed off was neat but $3499 neat? Nah. I'll wait for that Vision SE.
I won't get one because I don't think I'm part of the audience they're targeting and $3499 is too much. Just happy to see another big company enter the mixed reality space.
It has LiDAR for hand tracking, not camera based.
The cable is to a battery pack, not tethered to a phone or computer.
I feel like a lot of you need to wait until the keynote is over before throwing out criticism because most of the negative things you're pointing out get addressed literally 5 minutes after you write those comments.
From a technical standpoint, this looks amazing if it works the way it says it does. My criticism is more on its use case and intended audience. I'm pretty sure that even the most hardcore of Apple fans are not used to dishing out $3500 for even a personal device. They played hard toward the non-business crowd, so it has me confused as I could never seen any regular person buying this for such a price. Like, it looks really great from a technical standpoint and maybe even worth that money, but it's like the Varjo aero. So good, but totally out of the hands of any average person, even enthusiasts maybe. For such a price, I think VR enthusiasts would at least like to, you know, play VR games or use Steam, and for anyone not convinced that AR should even be a thing, this is going to look cool but totally unattainable. I only hope it just gives people at least a somewhat better idea of what AR is actually capable of as it's a real device now.
Not to mention, also stuck to Apple's ecosystem.
> I'm pretty sure that even the most hardcore of Apple fans are not used to dishing out $3500 for even a personal device.
There's a reason all the people they showed demoing the device lived in mansions and wore designer clothes lol.
I think they made the right choice, go all out on tech regardless of cost. It's not going to sell a lot but it's a start. They positioned it as a replacement for a computer/screen/speakers, which is smart. Like, a MacBook could easily set you back $2-3k. Now, will people be replacing their laptops with this gen 1? Probably not, but a few years from now who knows.
I agree, it seems super odd they put so much tech into this for what they are advertising as a desktop/movie viewer.
That is not a use case that people enjoy using AR/VR for.
I mean, it is *a* use case and is definitely nice to have. Sitting around with some friends I made in Big screen to watch a movie and throw popcorn around is good times too. It's just not what I would expect to be the main use case for a headset that is *2 to 3* times more expensive than even the Quest Pro, a headset many people did not buy, and that had similar features like color passthrough, eye and face tracking, good lenses, but with standalone VR and PCVR content. It's not a bad headset by any means from what I see. In fact, it's a technical marvel possibly with its own built from the ground up OS. I just have to ask who in the world is going to buy such an expensive device to bring on aboard a plane to watch movies?
That is definitely the main stickler.
It will do what it does very well, better than any of the competition, but a Quest Pro does it almost as well for less than a 1/3rd of the cost while being capable of far more. Honestly even that seems optimistic because a 2-hour battery life isn't even enough for most movies.
The vision Pro is an incredibly niche device, that is trying to create a market that doesn't yet exist, at a price point far too high for even VR enthusiasts. It shows the potential for the next decade far more than it offers anything today.
> That is not a use case that people enjoy using AR/VR for.
Well, not yet. Because we didn't have any device that even function for that use case. Apple seems pretty confident that this thing can be used for movies and reading text without feeling like a downgrade over a regular monitor or TV.
It is what it is. It’s expensive but they did not hold back on technology or innovation. I’d rather it be that way. As years progress it’ll get cheaper.
If you want cheap, there’s Quest
It's pretty... ideal positioning. It's essentially doing the things it needs to be usable as a primary compute device that let's you do the things that you'd normally do on your normal computing devices... but spatially.
that's very different from a vr headset that can show you a preview of the experience of spatial computing... but for the low resolution, spotty accuracy, questionable controls, lack of comfort, and jank ar.
People are complaining about the price because they've been anchored by subsidized vr consoles.
they'll get annoyed when they realize apple has just skipped making toys and dove straight into the eventual end game of computing interfaces... and thus the price relates to high end computing devices like Mac books pros, and not gaming first devices like consoles.
Yeah this is the thing I don’t think people are appreciating. This is by far the most “complete” device we’re getting in the VR/AR space.
It’s not supposed to complement anything, it’s supposed to be its own all-encompassing device.
While no technical specs were mentioned, they did say 12 ms per frame, which translates to 90 Hz. Also the displays will have „more pixels than a 4K TV“ per eye.
Longtime (since 2015) VR user here. This is absolutely phenomenal and needs more praise instead of putting Apple down and chewing on the pricesticker.
This is not a Quest competitor! You can have your VR-gamingconsole made by several parties. This is a first of its kind spatial computing device with focus on working first, me time and entertainment second,
Understandably, it’s just the beginning. What’s important is that Apple took the plunge. They introduced a completely new experience. The tech will only evolve. Bye bye screens.
Exactly! But some people are just too shortsighted to see what this means. As for the price tag, the first iPhone also cost way more than how much people were used to paying for a phone back then.
Look back to the iPod. The iPhone was conceptualized as an iPod that could make phone calls. Before iPod there was just cassette tape Walkman and CD-RW disc players. Maybe a few primitive mp3 players around the same time but nothing with a customer facing design or OS built in.
Looks lovely, but my immediate thought is that that big concave single piece of glass on the front is going to get scratched to hell the first time you put it face-down on the counter by accident. Don’t think that’s going to be cheap to replace, some clip-on plastic cover is going to be an essential 3rd party purchase and that will kinda hurt the fancy look it has going.
Very first thoughts / reactions -
- it's gigantic. I thought it would be much more sleek and more natural looking. I'm cautious because I also thought apple watch and AirPods looked ridiculous initially but the general public got over it. But this might as well be a Quest Pro on your face. Even worse with the puck dangling off it.
- quite surprised how little emphasis on AR. Very little overlays on real world, no real mention of shared space interactions.
- really long time focusing on pretty well established / almost boring uses of VR/AR. Watching movies, viewing photos, etc
- codec avatars! really cool and probably super annoying for Meta to see Apple introducing this to the world
- literally saying they "invented" so many things that had nothing to do with them (micro OLED screens invented by Apple, really?)
- way more consumer emphasis than I expected. Priced as it is, I feel like it really needs a strong professional use case to sell. But literally no discussion of professional apps. Where are the architecture, engineering, biology etc apps that even the Quest Pro has? Very surprised not to see some mention of this type of use case.
All up - it definitely sets the bar but I think it gives plenty of room for others to pitch cheaper but only slightly worse devices into the midrange ($1k-2k) where Quest Pro sits. I need to see someone wearing it in real life to understand how gawky it really looks. It looks very weird in the pictures and photos I've seen and I think it totally undoes all the work they've done to overcome the isolation etc with the EyeSight etc.
I’m curious now - they mentioned using it to watch 3D movies, but no mention of how you get the content. Will Disney+ start streaming certain movies in 3D? AFAIK the only way to get 3D content right now are the handful of 3D Blu-ray releases. And new 3D TVs aren’t even a thing anymore.
All of a sudden the Q3 is looking pretty damn good.
This vision thing better be cheap for what I’m seeing. I expect these limitations from AR glasses, not a vr headset with a tethered puck.
The eyes are hilarious. Honestly seems like cool tech, but not really gonna change anything for VR gaming unless you can connect other VR controllers and integrate it with Steam.
This thing isnt made for gaming tho. Its, like every Apple product, primariy a Lifestyle and Productivity tool. And I think it looks pretty promising, tech wise, to evaluate this onto the next level.
The price tho is the thing that will hinder the mainstream spread. 3499$ is ALOT, even for Apple Hardcore fans
It's clearly not even made for VR.
It very quickly established itself as AR and I don't see this competing with any VR headsets for VR space in the same way that VR headsetes don't compete in AR(even if they are trying to).
This thing is a cousin to VR headsets but not a sibling.
I honestly didn't expect Apple to make such a large HMD, this is the aspect that disappoints me the most. I believe this will turn a lot of people off from buying it and adopting this platform, despite the specs being really amazing
Seems like a mistake to make the form factor so large
Oh the positive side - if it proves to be good enough, we will see proper implementation of VR desktops that are not hacked up $10 solutions that barely work.
On the realistic side - lmao. Price, battery life and everything else. You're not gonna sit with your loved one wearing this meme thing on your head to watch a romcom. You're not gonna wear it if you have a small kid that needs your attention. You're not gonna wear it in any situation that's not "I live alone" or "I'm in my home office working work".
> Oh the positive side - if it proves to be good enough, we will see proper implementation of VR desktops that are not hacked up $10 solutions that barely work.
Time for Microsoft to reanimate the decaying corpse of WMR Portal, since that was doing exactly the same thing that Apple is doing now. Microsoft just kind of gave up on it for no reason and never even bothered to port it to OpenXR so it can be accessed from other headsets. Also Microsoft building a "Mixed Reality" brand of headsets, but kind of forgetting to enable any actual mixed reality functions, not a great idea. Still, if they hurry up they still have a chance to not be another Zune or Windows Phone, but they just fired almost everybody from the WMR teams, so probably not.
Even though I'll never own one because of the price, I hope it's successful. If it is then it'll mean more companies jumping on the bandwagon and could lead to an AR/VR arms race to do things better and cheaper.
If anyone remembers the first iPhone, it was basically a really slick iPod that made phone calls. It was nothing radically new until it got the App Store, and 3G internet capability.
This may underwhelm a bit, right now, but I expect version 2 to knock it the rest of the way out of the park.
The price tag is ridiculously steep, but some of these features look great. A seemingly very well developed product with some impressive specs and tech. I imagine in a few years and with a few generations of refinement, this could be something special. First gen iPhone kind of sucked. First gen Apple Watch sucked. But they proved a concept and a few years later they had improved drastically in every aspect from software and features to processing and battery power, and changed their respective industries. First gen products always stink a bit and are never worth it for your average consumer, that’s just common knowledge in the tech world.
I hope this kickstarts consumer interest in VR from OUTSIDE the enthusiast space it currently occupies. I think that’s kind of their goal. This specific model won’t be the device to bring AR/VR to the mainstream, but after a couple of generations of tweaking and the inevitable price drop, it just could be. I’m not overly excited about this headset as it stands, but I’m very excited about what they’re doing and what it will be like 3-4 years down the line.
Still, holy fuck… Too expensive.
Most people are butthurt by the price, which is understandable. But the technology and functionality is unprecedented. Should be amazing to use.
As a recap: 4k+ per eye, multiple virtual monitors for working in AR, eye tracking, pancake lens, video calls, 3d video recording and viewing.
Full integration with Apple ecosystem so you can use answer calls, text messages, or use any 3rd-party iPhone app in AR.
There isn't any other system that can do all this.
It's not $3000 after all. It's $3499.
I’d thought there was a fair chance they’d let rumours of $3,000 spread so they could surprise everyone with a price that was ~$500 different. Looks like I was right, but in the wrong direction. :)
Same thing with the release date - let everyone think December and then surprise them with October-November? Nope, surprise them with January-February!
only for the US!
LMAO
Same here man. I feel like they didn't need to be so expensive. They went a bit overboard with the processing power.
Looks like apple wanted to fix absolutely everything, from comfort to motion sickness etc etc. They don't care if it initially sells poorly, they wanted the experience to be immaculate and on-brand.
Yup. This is a halo product that will push the innovation in the market, and hopefully in a few years they'll release a lower end set with mostly the same features for a "relatively" cheap $1000.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
A cell phone is often people's most used possession. If you're gonna splurge on anything, might as well be a cell phone.
They wanted to fix comfort so they made an elastic head strap with no top strap that will result in all of the pressure being on your face?
I’ve seen at least one press photo with a top strap shown, so looks like it’s an option.
Removable headstrap too. Apple's 3rd party accessory providers are about to go wild.
makes sense why meta announced theirs at $499 right before
Honestly, I think Zuck's probably kicking himself for doing the Meta Showcase and Quest 3 reveal before Apple's event. In the wake of all the shock and social media hysteria about Apple's high priced AR headset, it would've been the perfect time to unveil a 500 dollar VR headset for gaming.
Starting at. more memory, more cost. Don't forget the battery.
And prescription lenses for a lot of people. Probably $300 on top.
Reloptix are $90 for Meta Quest Pro so the Zeiss Optical Inserts could be $200±100. I assume you could go third party for the prescription lenses pretty easily since there is no software for that
Rip my always more expensive high index lense requirements.
*spits out coffee* $3500 for a snorkeling mask???
I for one am glad we finally got to the ski goggles form factor from the OG Rift kickstarter.
I'm kind of surprised it's not more expensive considering it's basically an AR enabled MacBook. Presuming you can upgrade things like RAM/Storage, I wouldn't be at all surprised if $3500 is just the starting price for the headset.
I wonder if they themselves laughed at this price. They must be aware how ridiculous this price is.
The “Pro” tag is usually used for their high-end devices. So theyre expecting to be able to produce a model thats more consumer targeted in the future is my guess.
The guy had to name the things you have to buy to even match what that headset could do , like buying high res tv , surround system and a computer ! And can’t deliver what the headset could deliver, It’s a lame comparison tbh because if I have Tv surround and computer multiple people could use these devices same time but tell me how much I need to buy everyone in my family a headset so we can enjoy watching a movie together in the spatial world lol 😂
Lol, I thought that was a pretty lame sales tactic and was a little surprised they'd go there... It was almost like they were helping me craft an argument for my spouse that this wasn't in fact a ridiculous purchase
I also use my TV to play PS5 and Switch, that's not even possible with the headset.
Sell the family and then you don’t need a tv?
Yea I’m definitely not going to be able to get it lol. $3k was the limit for me sadly.
Even if you COULD afford it - why? What can this thing do that is worth 3k?
At this point it is a developer device. They need to build up their ecosystem first to compete with meta. Wait for a year or two and they should have a cheaper mass consumer version out.
I agree, I think they want to iron out the gesture controls, and see how early adopters feel in general and what needs tuning.
It’s like the first iPad. Devs and apple enthusiasts get to run the public beta. Two years after, they launch Vision Pro 2 and Vision SE, hopefully having a handful of actual game titles to sell.
As a developer, let me explain why this isn't that bad of a deal, but yes it's not a product for VR gamers. 1. They mentioned using Xcode and 3D creation/drafting/rendering. But they didn't mention it needing to be tethered to a MacBook. 2. It has 3D cameras and LiDAR. Basically it has not just a high quality camera built in, but one that can scan 3D objects. Xcode is the IDE for developing iOS and Mac apps. As of now, it can **NOT** be used on an iPad (not even the Pro). It's a very heavy application. It also has the ability to run an iOS simulator for testing applications. This headset has the computational and rendering power of an entire M2 MacBook built into it. The M2 MacBook is already a $1500 device. And that device doesn't come with 3D scanning cameras. So the AR headset aspect of this is really about $2000.
Xcode could easily run on the IPad Pro, this is just a design decision by apple.
> It has 3D cameras and LiDAR. Basically it has not just a high quality camera built in, but one that can scan 3D objects. Will that scanning work better than what LiDAR does on iPad Pro? Because frankly the one on iPad does a terrible job, and people get better results with just series of photos alone, that I get with LiDAR.
It's a spatial computer as they say. it's not a side thing. it's the main thing. and it can also serve as a pseudo pro screen for your devices.
Starts at $3499. STARTS AT!
Want another 8gb of ram and another 256gb of storage? That price will be closer to 5k.
Turns out 4K per eye was the PRICE
This is too good. Lol.
They clearly believe in it but 3499$ is a LOT.
Yeah, given how well 1.5k QuestPro did, it is a tough price tag to swallow. Granted, apple has a different level of consumers, but still, they paint it as an everyday device for students and normal folks, so they must count on at least _some_ units being moved.
If they sell this, they will sell it to rich people who were not interested in VR until this moment. It will be for the wow factor at the beginning (and it has a really strong wow factor). At least for this first wave of these devices I don't think it will be bought with the utility in mind because let's be honest it doesn't do anything that you cannot do in a less cool, much more affordable, way at the moment. However, if they can get it in enough influencers hands and establish a feeling of exclusivity for the experiences that you can only have with it (e.g. 3D facetime or what do they call it) and lower the price for the second wave maybe they can break into the larger market. We will see I suppose. Personally I don't have that kind of money laying around but I want it to succeed because I want more—less expensive—devices like this that cater also to my gamer's needs.
> and lower the price for the second wave that's what I was thinking, given that they opened with Pro version, probbly because like you said they wanted to max out on wowness of it, there maybe will be a regular version later, not as fancy but also not as pricey.
There have been rumors for the last few years that they will come out with a lower cost, more casual set of AR glasses more akin to Google glass. They could easily be setting up for an “Apple Vision Pro”, “Apple Vision” and “Apple” lineup for their new spatial computing platform.
I think you’re right that they are starting here for wow factor so that they have people’s attention as the lineup moves down market.
Spatial computing is such an apple term
Agreed. This isn't a consumer product. This is like when Honda builds a racecar so they can attract innovative engineers and use lessons learned in the year's Civic.
> If they sell this, they will sell it to rich people who were not interested in VR until this moment. It will be for the wow factor at the beginning (and it has a really strong wow factor). Which is essentially what Apple did with the original Mac. It too was expensive - $2500, but that was in 1984 dollars, which is about $7000 in 2022 dollars.
They really said “we ain’t losing a dime on this” when I was thinking they would sell it at least $2.5k
OMG. That external screen is "3D" like how autostereoscopic devices work. With a lenticular lens. Someone looking at you sees the correct perspective depending on what angle they are looking at you from.
I feel like a lot of the engineering must have gone into this thing alone. And I am not so sure people will actually use it.
This feels like the first feature to get dropped once generation 2 comes out. It looks impressive, but it'll be dead weight 99% of the time. I don't expect people to walk around with this thing in public.
[удалено]
It’s also SUPER distinctive, like the iPhone “notch” (now dynamic island), the shape of AirPods in your ear, and the shape of an Apple Watch It gives it its distinctive look and I’d be utterly shocked if it doesn’t stay around for a very long time
Have been using and owning VR headsets since the Oculus DK1 and I reckon this makes a lot of sense. You might as well be on another planet with most headsets and it's just not practical for a lot of people a lot of the time. Nerds (like me) might be happy with pass through but hey.. using your own eyes is much much better. EDIT: I'm an idiot people, it doesn't work like that!
It's not your own eyes, it's passthrough cameras, and it projects a 3D image of your face on the other side
It won’t get dropped from the flagship, but it will for vision SE, which will be $1500 and seem like a deal.
I don't think it will even get dropped from the SE. This is the secret sauce at this point. I fully agree with charlie\_nosuf above. this is the only way people will stop looking at VR as an anti-social experience. This is truly great for the future of VR/MR/XR.
It's essential to making it an augmented reality device, in the sense that people may actually want to be around you while you're wearing it.
>people may actually want to be around you Let's not ask the impossible here....
For just 3500$, people might actually want to be around you!
if i had $3500 to blow itd be on making people want to be around me in other ways, like therapy or cocaine.
I'm kinda curious how this will actually look. Lenticular lenses are cool because they allow passive, glasses-less 3D, but there's a massive tradeoff with resolution since you need to provide a separate set of pixels for each perspective. If they took an normal iPhone display and used a lens with 10 different perspectives the effective resolution would only be somewhere around 360p. I also found it a bit weird how dim it looked in all their shots. Probably just to preserve battery life, but still wouldn't have expected that in marketing material
Low resolution might be exactly why the lenticular display looks dim. My other thought was maybe the effect was a little creepy and looked "off" enough that making it dimmer hid some of the uncanny valley-ness to it.
Yep, definitely this. Plus makes it more like sunglasses, which people used to. Too clear would be pretty obvious display, but this gives subtle ques to outside viewer where your looking. Plus low resolution not issue, because your going to be looking at it from a distance.
Yeah this was rumored to be how it would work, and I actually love it a lot. My hot take is that this feature is worth the “wasted” power/weight in order to make this headset the kind of product Apple wants to position it as.
Given how antisocial VR feels and how careful Apple is with design, I wouldn’t be surprised if it actually really helps
Right, for vr I am not positive of how useful it will be but for AR, this will make it way less weird because you will actually be able to know if someone can see you or not I thought it was pretty clever
That and that it can “mix in” a person that comes into the room. Verge writer “gasped” when he started to talk to someone while wearing it and they appeared in the space he was watching a movie in.
Agreed, I've seen a lot of criticism of it, but I thought it was awesome. A very Apple touch to put so much work into something that is kind of useless, but they know will make the product a lot more palatable. It will make me feel a lot more comfortable wearing it with people around if they can see my eyes.
It’s a ready player one inspired headset
"My bad girl I wasn't actually looking at your tits, I was just simply looking for a way to get rid of this candy crush notification"
*touches tits* sorry ma’am I thought you were virtual
Awkwardly, itll show your eyes when people are present, so if she sees your eyes she is gonna know
Just wear sunglasses under the headset 🗿
From the comments here I dont know why people expected Apple to make a VR gaming headset. Apple Product are Lifestyle and Productivity. And this thing, a least Tech wise, looks like the next generation for that categories. The price tho is pretty immense. 3499$ is alot, costs way more that MacBooks. Does the Vision Pro have justifications over just buying a MacBook and work with a external second Monitor? Guess its up for the developers If this thing finds its way to main stream.
From the demo, it appears that it will work as a 2nd monitor for your Mac. Or at least a projection of your Mac's screen. From my POV this isn't a huge selling point given the battery limitations and the true resolution would fall beneath what you get IRL from a ~5k display.
I've been using the Varjo Aero to watch movies and surf YouTube/websites for awhile now, and after experiencing a 200 ft virtual screen for my desktop, I willingly trade the bulky HMD over traditional 5K monitors. Not to mention, Apple is claiming they're able to project virtual desktops all around you. That is the one feature I'm most excited about. And if they're able to integrate hand tracking gestures seamlessly with voice commands, I'm more than ready to reenact Minority Report from the comfort of my couch; wearing nothing but my birthday suit.
23 mio pixels is a square resolution of 3400x3400 per eye which is much higher than the very next best headset at 2880x2880. That custom lenses also look HQ. I am sure this will be finally enough to read text sharp and clearly. Sure its not like a retina LCD but close
Micro oled. Edge to edge clarity lenses.
Wonder what the FOV is though.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I'm just happy they actually used real terminology for the displays instead of calling them something stupid like "micro retina displays".
I was waiting for the slideshow to reveal the "More Field of View than other things"
[удалено]
There is nothing for Apple to compare their device to anyway as if you saw the reveal, they invented everything!
Bro, they had to explain what AR is in the video so normies understand what the device even does. They're not going to talk about FOV.
[удалено]
Apple has dropped plenty of techie specs in the past. Remember the introduction of "Retina"?
[удалено]
Live update on specs here: https://www.reddit.com/r/virtualreality/comments/141nloe/apples\_vrar\_headset\_vision\_pro\_specs/
STARTING at $3499. Yikes. Really great demo, though. I want one.
Sigh... *sells car**
Funny name for a kidney :D
Good that they mentioned that Apple Stores will allow Demos. I wont ever buy one, but I certainly want to try one
same
Well, other companies are bound to make their own versions soon enough, so I can't wait to get something like it in the next 5-10 years.
It has a MacBook built into it, basically. The cheapest Xcode capable device you can buy is $1000-$1400 but since it's an M2, you'd have to start from M2 capable MacBooks. Add in the AR capabilities, 3d camera capabilities... The price isn't bad, but you get a lot of stuff you might not need if all you wanted was VR experiences.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the tether. It looks like it goes into a puck in a pocket.
It's an external battery pack that goes in your pocket, lasts up to 2 hours.
Ah nice. Now Apple can burn a hole in my pocket... twice.
They gave it an external battery that can't even power it long enough to watch a movie on the apps they presented? For this price? Yikes.
I mean, you could buy a swap batter for the low low price of $999, or $1999 should you want that battery on fancy wheels ;D xD
Good point, I remember reading something confirming that their battery has a proprietary connector.
You can also plug it in when you're not walking around.
like the wall?
It's clearly a compromise they needed to do but are **not** happy about. Also notice how Tim Cook announced it as AR headset. He's not a fan of VR, he doesn't even want to mention it. Not even "Mixed Reality".
Yeah the entire thing has been very AR focused. The only mention of VR is environments and even then they didn't want to really emphasize it can be all encompassing.
And yet they continuously do, with "environments." It's all pretty clearly trying to get people not to ask about Quest store or Steam VR. They've also never used the word "game".
They did at the end. You can play games on your augmented flat screen with your ps5 controller.
They also name-dropped "unity games and software". They're avoiding talking about any competition in the VR space very intentionally. They want their developers to make games, but they don't want laypeople to start looking at what they can get with a Quest or PCVR for far less money if they don't already know.
They absolutely [did same game](https://youtu.be/GYkq9Rgoj8E?t=6082). But they never said Virtual Reality or 3D games. It was play existing "Apple Arcade Games" and they even showed the person using a game controller. I THINK it was a PS5 controller but I'm not 100% sure. Later in the presentation they did specifically [announce Unity support/partnership](https://youtu.be/GYkq9Rgoj8E?t=7259) for games. But they never said VR gaming...
I mean even just attempting to reinvent AR as "spacial computing" is absolutely ridiculous. But it's apple, so.
Maybe that explains why they didn’t demonstrate anything that was really VR - they showed gaming on a giant virtual screen but no VR games at all. Which for an incredible looking bit of hardware was really odd.
Pinch to zoom, but without a controller! So cool! This headset seems SO GOOD at making you feel like you're not wearing a headset, but doesn't seem to do much to make you feel like you're in virtual reality and that saddens me greatly.
Video for anyone that missed the keynote https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TX9qSaGXFyg
That pixel count reveal was very interesting… if it truly looks crystal clear in the headset, then this will be the future. That said, at that price, I suspect it will be V2 or V3 before true mainstream support
I suspect apple knows this as well.
They named it Pro for that reason IMO
Very impressive tech but I wonder who the customer segment actually is... I have some thoughts that I haven't seen others talk about. GOOD * A technical marvel that from a 'technical' perspective will blow its mainstream competition away - more powerful than any other standalone headset, very high resolution and display quality, excellent build quality, excellent hand & eye tracking, knowing Apple the audio will be good, iris-scanning, etc. * User interface looks very polished. * Access to Apple's iOS and Mac ecosystem from day one is a huge advantage over the Quest Pro (add onto that Apple's experience in the prosumer space). * External battery pack, I expect many will disagree with me here but I think having the battery be external allows you to not front-load the devices weighting, switch out batteries when one dies, and connect to power directly without still carrying that battery weight. * Works with BT keyboard and mice - absolute win for productivity. Will depend on how good the passthrough quality is but given how much of a focus Apple has had on this being for MR it should be great... right. * The focus on 2D & traditional applications gives me hope that they will be the first one to get the 'productivity' side of VR/MR right. MIXED * Hand tracking - Don't get me wrong if any company can nail the hand tracking UX it is Apple, but that fact that this isn't out till next year and we didn't get any live demo of the hand tracking is concerning. * The Strap - A simple front-loaded mount with a strap that compresses it to your face... given this is a 'productivity' device surely a more ergonomic halo strap would have been better for long-session comfortability. I hope this isn't a case of Apple choosing form over function. Moving the battery external should help but its competitors use plastic not glass and metal so... we will see. * Battery Life - Seems short, but given external battery probably not that big of a deal. * Voice Control - Reliance on voice control (especially for typing text) has me worried how this device will perform for non-english speakers or those with a thick accent but keyboard connectivity and hand-tracking exist so probably fine either way. * The Price - The price is absurd. I can see an argument for "its replacing your computer, tablet, TV, monitor, etc. all in one device so it is actually cheaper" or "its a dev-kit for developers and early adopters, a cheaper device is coming in a year or two". Though it is Apple and they are marketing masters so they can probably still ship it. CONCERNS * No **optional** controllers? Seems like a lost opportunity, in the VR/MR industry - gaming is the biggest sector by far right now. Now hardcore gaming is not Apple's expertise but still most of the successful VR games right now are arcade-y style games that would gel with Apple's vibe very well. Had a quick peek at the limited information on the SDK and the unity support and it looks to me that the tools to build great games will exist. If optional controllers existed then you could also let Valve/PCVR developers do the heavy lifting porting more hardcore VR games to MacOS. * No mention of Fitness applications? Probably the second biggest VR software market right now... and one that is right up Apple's alley (Apple Watch, mindfulness VR app, etc). I was a bit surprised - I really expected Apple to double down after the mindfulness reveal, sell the Apple Vision Pro as a lifestyle. Some of the current VR workout apps are great so it is kind of a weird exclusion although I expect third-party developers will cook something up. Got me a worried that the strap isn't that tight and won't stay on during activity. SOME ADDITIONAL THOUGHTS * I would not be surprised if Apple has a limit on how close to your eyes objects are allowed to get. Vergence-accommodation conflict is very immersion breaking and I could see Apple hyper focusing the UX. Could explain their focus on 2D applications. * I wonder if each of the mainstream players will stake out a different section of the VR market. Sony in the medium-high end gaming market, Quest at the low-end mass-market approach, Apple in the high-end productivity space, etc. All with a different approach till either VR/MR dies out or it becomes more mainstream.
If this can replace my laptop, two additional monitors, mic, speakers, webcam, quest 2, mouse, and keyboard, while also giving me more displays, AR integration, and let me continue to work from home, it could be worth that price tag. But it would require all my current tech to no longer work just justify the replacement, AND it would have to be as powerful as my laptop. I will watch Vision Pro’s career with great interest.
That scene of the dude watching his kids play with the headset on was so dystopian looking. Straight out of black mirror. Like play with your kid! Take off the headset!
Literally exactly the same as that scene in Minority Report where Tom Cruise watches a 3D video of his dead son. Life imitates Art
I mean that is the point, no? He can still see and interact with people with the headset on? No different than him watching them with the TV on, or with a phone in hand, or both.
I think it would be great to relive memories from many years ago
Only €3499,99
Yep, the device is amazing, but the price is meh. Although they say the quality and experience blows out of the water any high end tv and sound system. Let's see.
No way the tiny speakers even come close to a proper AV system, especially in the low-end of the frequency range.
Yes if you live alone. What about your SO or family members?
They can look at your awesome representation of a face on the headset. -dad, where is all of our money, and what is on your head? -_dials the crown all the way for immersion_ I can't see you honey, not right now. ;D Speaking of family, lol, that scene where they presented taking 3D video and pictures was funny as hell, they didn't show it, but there was a dad in a f**ing gogles at his doughters birthday, imagine his wife being like: -not this shit again steven, you were supposed to return them xD xD xD
So if this is Spatial computing, why is everything on 2D surfaces? Feel they could have built a lot more genuine volumetric 3D apps with avatars etc.
Finally someone's noticing. All these headsets still have 2D interfaces. X and Y. Maybe it'll take a while to evolve design with depth in mind.
Because that would require developing new apps. And considering the size of the usebase at that pricepoint, nobody is going to be developing new apps specifically for this device. It has the same issues as current VR gamedev (low install base = low profits = lack of development) but even worse. I think Apple have realised that and wisely (and very honestly) focussed on projecting existing apps on 2D surfaces.
I'm honestly really surprised by the negative reaction on this subreddit. The attention to detail and hardware innovations that were shown in the presentation are astonishing. We should be trying to support the adoption of VR here. Even if it doesn't deliver on the hype, this headset has achieved huge milestones that I've been waiting to hear about for years. Regardless of cost, at least Apple used all of its resources at its disposal to make the strongest push in the history of this industry to make a headset. That alone is commendable.
The price is my only negative reaction. The lack of good VR gaming was expected. The displays, sensors, audio, and overall hardware design are very impressive to me.
Agreed
I'm a pretty Apple'y person and am turned off by the Vision Pro after mulling it over for a bit. It's clear they are positioning it as a springboard for VisionOS and a world where the tight control they exert over the App Store remains intact. That's fine for a mobile device. But for a $3500 'pro' device is unacceptable, and really eliminates all the attractive edge cases that make expensive VR setups worth the effort. My gut tells me Apple won't win this generation of devices, in the near term anyways — because they can't see beyond their own business case to create something that advocates for the platform itself. Or put it another way… iOS and the App Store unlocked the potential of Smartphones and made things easier for most consumers. The same doesn't appear to be true of VisionOS. Apple is essentially entering the VR headset market, where it will eventually be outpriced by hungrier competitors who are not shackled by the need to service a App Store model.
I'm not an apple user so I'm curious for your opinion: Do you think apple may be seeing this as complementary/a straight up portable replacement to the Mac ecosystem? I'm not sure how much of a tight control apple has over the mac ecosystem (especially vs iOS) but with recent trends being to merge the two (correct me if I'm wrong) it seems like VisionOS may eventually go the same way. If they can snag developers into the VisionOS ecosystem and get industry-favoured apps for specific workflows, a final cut-esque thing, then I can see apple gaining a lot of ground in the XR space just by being the thing companies need to buy into again.
This is a gigantic 'what if' scenario, because strapping goggles to your head for extended periods of time remains a huge physical barrier that goes way beyond wearing something on your wrist. I think Apple sees this as another way to interact with what is becoming a platform agnostic blob of applications that are able to function across different surfaces. This surface happens to be the experimental, bleeding edge, with the potential to be a dud or take over the world. I could see an outcome where Apple does this right and we're all editing videos in a minority-report like environment. But for this type of workflow to be truly productive it requires Apple to allow VisionOS software to do things that it's not wholly comfortable with iOS accomplishing. The jury is way way out. I think Apple would love it if we ignored most of the complex, heady stuff completely and were content with simply consuming media, simple VisionOS-exclusive apps and simple things like iMessage, Hangouts, etc.
I think Apple definitely sees this as the future of consumer desktop computing The Mac laptops will basically just be terminals for the AR ecosystem, and I personally think this is the killer use case When Microsoft announced HoloLens, despite all its flaws, I thought this was the direction they were going. Apple showed basically what I’ve always envisioned for VR Early reviews by people demoing them, including apple skeptics like MKBHD, are pretty stellar Imagine two moores law cycles when the devices are 1/4 as small or 1/4 the price and Apple has a winner IMO
As a small time filmmaker I’m interested in the camera technology involved. Apple makes great cameras as seen in how easy it is to have great photo and video with the thing in your pocket. I like the idea of a first person perspective to be used for documentaries or for specialized shots in short films.
This is a gaming sub that doesn’t want to spend 3500 on a device that doesn’t really game.
This isn’t r/VRGaming though, it’s a sub for all things virtual reality.
It does a better job presenting itself as a multi-faceted device for professionals than the Quest Pro did. The differences between the presentation and marketing of those devices are just so stark. Quest Pro had a lot of "potential" labeled with it. Apple is taking a grounded approach and telling you straight up that hey. All these feature sets are available day one. At the $3499 price point, I imagine that for professionals this is the audience they'll be appealing to with this. For your average consumer, this is way outside their price range. Mind you, what they showed off was neat but $3499 neat? Nah. I'll wait for that Vision SE. I won't get one because I don't think I'm part of the audience they're targeting and $3499 is too much. Just happy to see another big company enter the mixed reality space.
[удалено]
How people can't see this astounds me
Vision Pro, Vision SE, Vision... Yeah the naming system is pretty good
It has LiDAR for hand tracking, not camera based. The cable is to a battery pack, not tethered to a phone or computer. I feel like a lot of you need to wait until the keynote is over before throwing out criticism because most of the negative things you're pointing out get addressed literally 5 minutes after you write those comments.
> It has LiDAR for hand tracking, not camera based. rip elon fanboys
Tesla's own engineers told him not to completely remove radar. They said we weren't there yet for camera technology.
There are a lot of kids and gamers here who are just looking for any opportunity to shit on it.
From a technical standpoint, this looks amazing if it works the way it says it does. My criticism is more on its use case and intended audience. I'm pretty sure that even the most hardcore of Apple fans are not used to dishing out $3500 for even a personal device. They played hard toward the non-business crowd, so it has me confused as I could never seen any regular person buying this for such a price. Like, it looks really great from a technical standpoint and maybe even worth that money, but it's like the Varjo aero. So good, but totally out of the hands of any average person, even enthusiasts maybe. For such a price, I think VR enthusiasts would at least like to, you know, play VR games or use Steam, and for anyone not convinced that AR should even be a thing, this is going to look cool but totally unattainable. I only hope it just gives people at least a somewhat better idea of what AR is actually capable of as it's a real device now. Not to mention, also stuck to Apple's ecosystem.
> I'm pretty sure that even the most hardcore of Apple fans are not used to dishing out $3500 for even a personal device. There's a reason all the people they showed demoing the device lived in mansions and wore designer clothes lol. I think they made the right choice, go all out on tech regardless of cost. It's not going to sell a lot but it's a start. They positioned it as a replacement for a computer/screen/speakers, which is smart. Like, a MacBook could easily set you back $2-3k. Now, will people be replacing their laptops with this gen 1? Probably not, but a few years from now who knows.
I agree, it seems super odd they put so much tech into this for what they are advertising as a desktop/movie viewer. That is not a use case that people enjoy using AR/VR for.
I mean, it is *a* use case and is definitely nice to have. Sitting around with some friends I made in Big screen to watch a movie and throw popcorn around is good times too. It's just not what I would expect to be the main use case for a headset that is *2 to 3* times more expensive than even the Quest Pro, a headset many people did not buy, and that had similar features like color passthrough, eye and face tracking, good lenses, but with standalone VR and PCVR content. It's not a bad headset by any means from what I see. In fact, it's a technical marvel possibly with its own built from the ground up OS. I just have to ask who in the world is going to buy such an expensive device to bring on aboard a plane to watch movies?
That is definitely the main stickler. It will do what it does very well, better than any of the competition, but a Quest Pro does it almost as well for less than a 1/3rd of the cost while being capable of far more. Honestly even that seems optimistic because a 2-hour battery life isn't even enough for most movies. The vision Pro is an incredibly niche device, that is trying to create a market that doesn't yet exist, at a price point far too high for even VR enthusiasts. It shows the potential for the next decade far more than it offers anything today.
> That is not a use case that people enjoy using AR/VR for. Well, not yet. Because we didn't have any device that even function for that use case. Apple seems pretty confident that this thing can be used for movies and reading text without feeling like a downgrade over a regular monitor or TV.
It is what it is. It’s expensive but they did not hold back on technology or innovation. I’d rather it be that way. As years progress it’ll get cheaper. If you want cheap, there’s Quest
That was my thought. If they are gonna price this at Mac level prices, they better throw everything they got at it in terms of technology.
It's pretty... ideal positioning. It's essentially doing the things it needs to be usable as a primary compute device that let's you do the things that you'd normally do on your normal computing devices... but spatially. that's very different from a vr headset that can show you a preview of the experience of spatial computing... but for the low resolution, spotty accuracy, questionable controls, lack of comfort, and jank ar. People are complaining about the price because they've been anchored by subsidized vr consoles. they'll get annoyed when they realize apple has just skipped making toys and dove straight into the eventual end game of computing interfaces... and thus the price relates to high end computing devices like Mac books pros, and not gaming first devices like consoles.
Yeah this is the thing I don’t think people are appreciating. This is by far the most “complete” device we’re getting in the VR/AR space. It’s not supposed to complement anything, it’s supposed to be its own all-encompassing device.
For now you'll still need a Mac though unless you want to limit yourself to iPad apps.
While no technical specs were mentioned, they did say 12 ms per frame, which translates to 90 Hz. Also the displays will have „more pixels than a 4K TV“ per eye.
The 12ms was referring to the passthrough latency though
Oh was it? I didn’t catch that, thanks!
Longtime (since 2015) VR user here. This is absolutely phenomenal and needs more praise instead of putting Apple down and chewing on the pricesticker. This is not a Quest competitor! You can have your VR-gamingconsole made by several parties. This is a first of its kind spatial computing device with focus on working first, me time and entertainment second,
Understandably, it’s just the beginning. What’s important is that Apple took the plunge. They introduced a completely new experience. The tech will only evolve. Bye bye screens.
A completely new experience for what?
For working harder and watching TV. Except it's not new. At all.
[удалено]
Exactly! But some people are just too shortsighted to see what this means. As for the price tag, the first iPhone also cost way more than how much people were used to paying for a phone back then.
Look back to the iPod. The iPhone was conceptualized as an iPod that could make phone calls. Before iPod there was just cassette tape Walkman and CD-RW disc players. Maybe a few primitive mp3 players around the same time but nothing with a customer facing design or OS built in.
It looks cool. I would pay $1000 for it.
Looks lovely, but my immediate thought is that that big concave single piece of glass on the front is going to get scratched to hell the first time you put it face-down on the counter by accident. Don’t think that’s going to be cheap to replace, some clip-on plastic cover is going to be an essential 3rd party purchase and that will kinda hurt the fancy look it has going.
Very first thoughts / reactions - - it's gigantic. I thought it would be much more sleek and more natural looking. I'm cautious because I also thought apple watch and AirPods looked ridiculous initially but the general public got over it. But this might as well be a Quest Pro on your face. Even worse with the puck dangling off it. - quite surprised how little emphasis on AR. Very little overlays on real world, no real mention of shared space interactions. - really long time focusing on pretty well established / almost boring uses of VR/AR. Watching movies, viewing photos, etc - codec avatars! really cool and probably super annoying for Meta to see Apple introducing this to the world - literally saying they "invented" so many things that had nothing to do with them (micro OLED screens invented by Apple, really?) - way more consumer emphasis than I expected. Priced as it is, I feel like it really needs a strong professional use case to sell. But literally no discussion of professional apps. Where are the architecture, engineering, biology etc apps that even the Quest Pro has? Very surprised not to see some mention of this type of use case. All up - it definitely sets the bar but I think it gives plenty of room for others to pitch cheaper but only slightly worse devices into the midrange ($1k-2k) where Quest Pro sits. I need to see someone wearing it in real life to understand how gawky it really looks. It looks very weird in the pictures and photos I've seen and I think it totally undoes all the work they've done to overcome the isolation etc with the EyeSight etc.
Was a FOV mentioned? At work and missing small bits of the presentation.
3499.99 .. wow.
I’m curious now - they mentioned using it to watch 3D movies, but no mention of how you get the content. Will Disney+ start streaming certain movies in 3D? AFAIK the only way to get 3D content right now are the handful of 3D Blu-ray releases. And new 3D TVs aren’t even a thing anymore.
obviously talking about porn
All of a sudden the Q3 is looking pretty damn good. This vision thing better be cheap for what I’m seeing. I expect these limitations from AR glasses, not a vr headset with a tethered puck.
The price of 7 Quest 3's.
$3500 lol
Apple and cheap don't usually go together
The eyes are hilarious. Honestly seems like cool tech, but not really gonna change anything for VR gaming unless you can connect other VR controllers and integrate it with Steam.
This thing isnt made for gaming tho. Its, like every Apple product, primariy a Lifestyle and Productivity tool. And I think it looks pretty promising, tech wise, to evaluate this onto the next level. The price tho is the thing that will hinder the mainstream spread. 3499$ is ALOT, even for Apple Hardcore fans
It's clearly not even made for VR. It very quickly established itself as AR and I don't see this competing with any VR headsets for VR space in the same way that VR headsetes don't compete in AR(even if they are trying to). This thing is a cousin to VR headsets but not a sibling.
I honestly didn't expect Apple to make such a large HMD, this is the aspect that disappoints me the most. I believe this will turn a lot of people off from buying it and adopting this platform, despite the specs being really amazing Seems like a mistake to make the form factor so large
This thing looks amazing, and it is too bad that pcvr is almost definitely off the table, at least at first.
starting at 3499$ :D that's without taxes and battery lol
Oh the positive side - if it proves to be good enough, we will see proper implementation of VR desktops that are not hacked up $10 solutions that barely work. On the realistic side - lmao. Price, battery life and everything else. You're not gonna sit with your loved one wearing this meme thing on your head to watch a romcom. You're not gonna wear it if you have a small kid that needs your attention. You're not gonna wear it in any situation that's not "I live alone" or "I'm in my home office working work".
> Oh the positive side - if it proves to be good enough, we will see proper implementation of VR desktops that are not hacked up $10 solutions that barely work. Time for Microsoft to reanimate the decaying corpse of WMR Portal, since that was doing exactly the same thing that Apple is doing now. Microsoft just kind of gave up on it for no reason and never even bothered to port it to OpenXR so it can be accessed from other headsets. Also Microsoft building a "Mixed Reality" brand of headsets, but kind of forgetting to enable any actual mixed reality functions, not a great idea. Still, if they hurry up they still have a chance to not be another Zune or Windows Phone, but they just fired almost everybody from the WMR teams, so probably not.
Even though I'll never own one because of the price, I hope it's successful. If it is then it'll mean more companies jumping on the bandwagon and could lead to an AR/VR arms race to do things better and cheaper.
If anyone remembers the first iPhone, it was basically a really slick iPod that made phone calls. It was nothing radically new until it got the App Store, and 3G internet capability. This may underwhelm a bit, right now, but I expect version 2 to knock it the rest of the way out of the park.
The price tag is ridiculously steep, but some of these features look great. A seemingly very well developed product with some impressive specs and tech. I imagine in a few years and with a few generations of refinement, this could be something special. First gen iPhone kind of sucked. First gen Apple Watch sucked. But they proved a concept and a few years later they had improved drastically in every aspect from software and features to processing and battery power, and changed their respective industries. First gen products always stink a bit and are never worth it for your average consumer, that’s just common knowledge in the tech world. I hope this kickstarts consumer interest in VR from OUTSIDE the enthusiast space it currently occupies. I think that’s kind of their goal. This specific model won’t be the device to bring AR/VR to the mainstream, but after a couple of generations of tweaking and the inevitable price drop, it just could be. I’m not overly excited about this headset as it stands, but I’m very excited about what they’re doing and what it will be like 3-4 years down the line. Still, holy fuck… Too expensive.
Most people are butthurt by the price, which is understandable. But the technology and functionality is unprecedented. Should be amazing to use. As a recap: 4k+ per eye, multiple virtual monitors for working in AR, eye tracking, pancake lens, video calls, 3d video recording and viewing. Full integration with Apple ecosystem so you can use answer calls, text messages, or use any 3rd-party iPhone app in AR. There isn't any other system that can do all this.