Apple hopes to convince people to buy its $3,500 Vision Pro headset using free 25-minute in-store demos::undefined
Oh. My. Goodness.
$3,500?!? HAHAHAHAHAHA
It is not meant for the end consumer at this stage, it is a tech demo and development kit.
The real consumer variant will probably be released in a year or two.
It should be marketed as a dev kit, but they’re marketing it for consumers
Did they say this or is this your pet theory? I don’t feel like that is necessarily the best strategy, since people won’t develop for it, when there’s no users and no users will appear when no one develops an ecosystem for this thing…
This isn’t really a “pet” theory — just economics. VR represents an entirely new product line, and with Apple’s expansion into services, a whole new way to value-add to those services and entire ecosystem; capturing more recurring revenue. This price point is based on new manufacturing costs at a much smaller scale than their other product lines.
It’s Apple, so it’ll never be “cheap”, but it can’t remain at this price point and stave off competition for long. Within 3 years they’ll either drop the price and introduce a pro version, or release an SE version, that’ll still probably be around $2000-2500 — but bringing it within reach of the people who’d normally buy “pro” devices.
So… I can’t buy it? If I can, you’re either lying, wrong, or have an agenda.
So… I can’t buy it?
If you can afford it you can buy it, the purpose of a product does not need to affect availablility.
you’re either lying
Why go straight into calling me a liar? This just shows that you don’t want to have a proper discussion.
wrong,
This is quite possible, I have been wrong before, and I will be wrong in the future, it happens, and is not the end of the world unless you realy fuck up.
or have an agenda.
I can’t figure out any agenda that I would push regarding the Vision Pro.
In the end, it is a theory, based on resonable data available to me.
I’d buy it if it was the kind of tool that earned me $5000… but it’s still really hard to justify the business use case for VR these days.
If I can lie on my couch while typing away on my custom virtual workspace it might be worth it but the resolution requirements make that unlikely any time soon
This thing is overpriced but there’s no way Apple ships it if they don’t have the pixel density to render text in a way that doesn’t make your eyes bleed. It’s being marketed as a work device, after all.
It also has basically no battery life and once that mostly useless battery becomes completely useless you are never unplugging that thing from the wall because you bet Apple made that battery impossible to replace!
Shit I’ve bought MacBooks for work that cost as much as that headset, and my current laptop costs about as much as this.
$3500 is nothing for a computer, let alone a prosumery AR/VR heatset with a computer built in.
They could have made it stream wirelessly from your MacBook
yeah, no. People really don’t understand how much bandwidth you actually need to stream even normal 4k 60hz video, let alone something like this. For reference, when I was figuring out how to dump my pc in the basement and have the monitor in my office, I had to run 12-strand fiber cables to do it.
take a deep breath and realize; if you cannot afford this, you are not rich enough to be part of apples target audience.
no matter how much you want to tell yourself that you are.
I didn’t know apple target audiance was a total of 400.000 people which is the total amount the’ll make of these.
Seriously this is a proof of concept for rich kids children to be test users. I doubt it will visible move the needle on their profits.
You have some strange ideas, do android users enjoy being the “target audience” of google?
I am loyal to no brand, own a mix of devices and boycot some. Love tech, fuck capitalism.
Second hand my dude
But the biggest issue is it wont run facebook oculus apps
iOS doesn’t run android apps. I don’t think many people will care. Most apps can be ported.
The apple vision pro doesn’t have motion controllers like the quest line of headsets, so apps would have to be redesigned for hand tracking instead.
Also, apple said recently that devs have to cannot describe their apps using the words VR, AR, or XR on any platform it is on, they have to be called spacial computing apps, so anything with VR in the title like VRChat can’t get ported without a full rebrand.
Is 25 minutes a long enough in-store demo test time to have a $3500 wank?
Half of the US can’t afford a $1000 emergency. $3500 for a toy seems steep in that context.
Half of the US is over a hundred million people. The rumours are Apple has supply constraints that will limit global sales to about a million devices for now.
This can’t possibly be a mass market device - it’s just not possible right now to manufacture that many. The tiny screens are 3,400 DPI and 5000 nits (that’s about 10x brighter than a typical TV or computer screen). It’s going to be a while before tech like that can be mass produced.
They named it Vision “Pro” which in Apple marketing speak basically means “the really expensive one”. Their “Pro” desktop PC tower has a baseline price of $7k and fully upgraded it comes in at almost $13k which is actually cheaper than they were when they used Intel Xeons a couple years ago (those could hit something like $80k).
There will probably be a non-pro equivalent one day, which will be far cheaper.
Oh hey, it’s that time again. Copy-pasting from the last time around…
—
Because the price is always the main topic, I’m gonna drop a link to an AR/VR expert contextualizing the Vision Pro price within the current (well, 7 months ago) market:
Apple Just Beat the “BEST VR Headset In the WORLD”… and did it cheaper.
Norm from Tested on yt had good things to say after his hands-on with the headset iirc a while back. This is just the price of a flagship VR device ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
For $3500 it better be good. But I doubt the value is added linearly since you get a pretty decent vr headset for under $800
Totally agree.
Relatedly, I think people would be surprised how little the Apple Tax really is when accounting for specs and performance. That said I’m sure the margin is quite a bit higher on this device than an mbp. It’s very clearly not positioned for consumers but for businesses and bleeding edge enthusiasts
OK, but that doesn’t make it affordable or relevant.
It’s like comparing a Ferrari and a Lamborghini. It doesn’t matter because the world runs on Toyota Corollas.
Additionally, VR lives and dies on software.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Apple Just Beat the “BEST VR Headset In the WORLD”… and did it cheaper.
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
It feels very much like most stuff that’s likely to be developed for it will have the feel of “museum exhibit at home” or AR-ified iOS app.
The inability to use any controller is going to lose them a lot of latency and precision sensitive usecases. It is very Apple to make it totally standalone, but it’s going to cost them a fair bit.
A lot of real time remote control usecases will be impossible for latency issues alone, it won’t be a good solution in most multiuser environments (both due to no relative tracking, but also cost and hygiene issues for shared devices), it won’t be great for bringing into public spaces (poor long range tracking, etc) or small spaces (limits gestures), hand tracking camera position means you have to hold your hands up and mostly open (accessibility issues), etc.
Even if the hardware can do more, Apple won’t give developers access to more.
All it has to do is impress people enough that they hear about the 500 dollar headsets that are almost as good. Or the 250 dollar headsets that are almost as good as those. As long as they don’t go as low as the 50 dollar headsets that are not as good relatively as being worth 50 dollars compared to the other headsets.
By getting it in the hands of a bunch of influencers, it’ll do what Apple devices always do, make stuff look like a good idea for normal people to use too, not just nerds. Just to show normal people, who have probably had limited or bad experiences with VR, that there is “a” price point that solves almost all their problems with it.
Most will balk at the price, but have their perspective changed anyway. And some of them will look into or passively hear about other cheaper options. And then practically priced headsets will gain more marketshare and software will be worth the financial investment to make. It’s unfortunately not a quick process, and it’s only one part of that same process. But it’s a pretty important part.
VR software has already been in a pretty good place for a few years, but it can always use “more and better”, as with any software ecosystem.
