Apple Vision Pro available for pre-order
apple.com
apple.com
This one just doesn’t feel as big. When the iPad was introduced, everyone was shocked by the very low price and the sleek form factor compared to previous Windows tablet devices.
Those are exactly the weak points of the Vision Pro: it’s very expensive and very heavy, according to reports.
The hands-on sessions that Apple gave to journalists earlier this week seemed a bit underwhelming. The reporter for the Verge wrote that it feels like the Quest, but with higher resolution.
That’s a worrying sign! Imagine if the first hands-on of the iPhone had been “it’s like a BlackBerry but with better DPI screen.”
Of course Apple is usually very good at consistently evolving their platforms. Maybe the non-Pro model will be something else.
I remember history a bit differently.
I recall lots of people dismissing the iPad as "just a big iPod Touch".
> Since the iPad's initial introduction back in January, many of us still wonder why we should drop hundreds of dollars for what is termed as a large iPod.
An episode of the hit sitcom Modern Family was centred entirely around a character's obssession with buying the iPad on Day 1.
"Game Changer, Season 1, Episode 19, aired March 31, 2010"
I bought one day 1 and pretty much everyone thought I was nuts and just an Apple zealot. However, as I took it places and used it, people saw it and became much more interested and took it more seriously as a product.
My dad on the other hand, who is one of the people who bought and iPad after seeing mine, uses it all the time. He actually has 2 of them, a 10” and a 12.9”, and he uses both of them regularly enough that he feels they are both justified for his use cases. He still does use his Mac as well, but his iPads get a ton of use for reading the news, email, photography related things, and maybe some other stuff. He’s retired now, so that might be part of it.
Maybe if didn’t work in IT and simply consumed whatever the apps allowed me to consume, I could get by with an iPad as my computer, but I want to do stuff an iPad can’t do. I also pretty much always want a keyboard and mouse, and when that’s always bolted on to an iPad, it might as well be a MacBook. I never found the appeal of touch screen laptops.
I'm not personally producing intricate illustrations, but I know a tiny number of people who do, and I don't think it's occures to them they'd need anything but that and their phone.
But lots of apps can just treat it as a big phone.
When I release my apps, I only do so as iOS, and that runs on iPadOS.
In the code, I check for the environment, in some cases, and do things differently, if it's an iPad.
The interesting point here is that Apple’s competitors at the time didn’t even have a product that could come close to the iPod touch, and yet Apple was already taking the product into a completely new direction.
The iPod touch doesn’t exist anymore. Turns out the paper-like size combined with the simple UI made all the difference. And nobody scaling down from $2k Windows tablets could have figured that out. That’s how Apple created a beautifully designed tablet for only $499 and everybody else was left scrambling.
With the Vision Pro, Apple doesn’t seem to have that kind of advantage. But I’d be very happy if it exceeds my expectations and is also successful in the market. I’ve been waiting for VR all my life. The Quest has come tantalizingly close but still misses the applications that would make it a part of my daily routine.
edit: so yeah, I agree with you
The iPad 2 teardown showed an SoC which seemed a lot more custom designed for the iPad, and the "big iPod" criticism died around that point.
It was more of a shock than the M1 was in recent times.
Not defending Apple here: I do believe the Vision Pro will be a resounding "meh".
What I remember is everyone making fun of it, including the name¹, for being “just a big iPod Touch”.
Similarly, the iPhone wasn’t taken all that seriously² on launch. The App Store wasn’t even an idea yet, let alone a reality.
That is to say this always happens: people discount a new thing and use as contrast something else which was also discounted at the time but framed as if it had always been perceived by the current lens.
I have no idea if the Vision Pro will “succeed” (however we define that), but we can be reasonably sure that the current version is the worse it will ever be. In other words, it will get better and it’s too soon to judge its impact.
The 2007 iPhone was a limited niche product. The 2008 iPhone was not.
Part of it was that the whole “tablet” idea hadn’t taken off and had been tried a number of times, so the general consensus was “it’s a good value for a nice version of a thing nobody seems to want.”
The problems with the vision pro seem more fundamental, primarily cost. Apple really needs to sell it with zero margin or as a loss leader to build marketshare because $3000 is absurd and will really damage its branding "weird face hugger for rich people"
But the Vision Pro will be eye- catching and hard to miss, with a large profile and unique design.
Time will tell if it works.
If they get a handful of celebrities walking around with these things it may become a status symbol. Or it may become a joke, especially if somebody crashes their Ferrari while wearing one.
A Vision Pro won't be seen in public. Nobody's going to be wearing this heavy thing in an airport or on transit.
[0] https://www.theverge.com/23920102/meta-quest-3-in-public-pri...
I suspect they already are.
The thing all these first-generation products have in common (including the Apple Vision Pro) is that they are eminently skippable and usually followed by more popular, better-spec'd lower-cost models within a year or two.
It's kind of hard to imagine that this was the reality, given where we are today.
If memory serves right, after first few versions of iPod Touch was out everyone was wondering why Apple is not cramming in the phone functionality as well.
iPhone maybe was criticized by the likes of Ballmer and Nokia/Blackberry execs from business strategy perspective, but I'm not sure that sentiment was universally shared by consumers.
EDIT:
OK my memory has failed tragically. Will leave this comment here nevertheless.
That was huge pocket savings. Apps didn’t come until significantly later.
With iPhone & iPad, you had products that people could very easily imagine using. The iPhone was the combination of three technologies people were already familiar with, the iPad was the iPhone, but bigger.
It is really difficult to imagine using a VR headset if you haven't used one before -- there simply isn't a frame of reference. And even if you have used an Oculus or a SteamVR headset, an interface built around eye & tracking is still completely novel.
I think a lack of mass-market appeal is something that is inherent to a product like this, which makes it a very different product from a marketing perspective than iPhone or iPad.
It makes sense to me that, rather than trying to copy-paste the iPhone or iPad launch, Apple would instead put out an exclusive halo product early, allow a few years for the public to build familiarity with it and settle on the core use-cases, all while they observe and iterate behind the scenes on a more accessible version for a wider audience.
That's my #1 issue with the Quest and productivity/work is what I most want out of a VR/AR device at this point in time. Gaming on the quest was fun but it wore off (really shined playing with friends online but people are busy). Being able to work in a virtual space is very exciting for me and I can't wait to try it out.
Giant, better than 4k monitor for my macbook pro while still being able to see and interact with people in the room, yes please.
Also, looking at the functionality it had when it first came out, it wouldn't have really been very useful for me (no app store, basically just an iPod + shitty browser + phone).
Anyway, does anyone actually think that VR isn't going to revolutionize computing over the next 10 years?
Well, well, even the iOS Safari that shipped with the first iPhone was miles ahead of anything else out there.
The distortion here is that capacitive touch took on with iPhone release. Which lead to a surge of websites supporting such (albeit usually optimized for iPhone/iOS + Safari).
We can conceive of other uses but turns out that you can either get most of the way there for far less money and effort and/or the market for "spare no expense" is tiny.
VR has always been about to revolutionize computing in the next n years. The technology has been available for decades, but so far nobody has been able to find good mainstream use cases for it.
But this is not yet that.
Well, Apple doesn't think so, since they're careful to call it a spatial computer and not a VR device.
They literally just built a VR headset... do you seriously not think the Apple Vision Pro is a VR headset?
I think it's an AR headset, which is different. If it was VR it would need better immersive sound, but instead it has a million cameras.
But it also has the entire computer in it; "headset" kind of feels like it means a peripheral.
Remember, the first iPhone shipped with no ability to copy and paste stuff, sort glued hardware inside the case, and no ability to add a microSD card like those of the Nokia phones of the time. If the first iPhone pre-order was posted on HN, it would have received a similar comment… :-)
It is a first gen device. It is not for everybody, and it is going to be severely lacking in feature set. The key is what they are trying to genuinely bring to the table rather than what is missing(or that it is heavier or needs a battery hanging on the side - these are fixable things in the next iterations).
I'd try it as well but if the addressable market is the gamers who hang on each NVIDIA GPU release I couldn't count on this being very interesting. Even console gaming generally is something of a niche market in the scheme of things.
Main problem could be too much weight for long sessions. But it's 600 grams, fairly close to the face with a very wide headband, and custom-fitted. Seems like it might be reasonably comfortable.
The iPad is closer to a "consumption device" than general computing, I'd say.
And I must say I rarely use mine around the house. I'm admittedly not a kid that writes papers on an iPhone and doesn't even want a laptop but it's just much easier to use a laptop for searching/writing/etc.
Doing much less travel than pre-COVID, I'm not even sure I'll replace my iPad when it goes out of support. A MacBook Air and Kindle combo does most things as well or better and weighs only marginally more.
And even going further back - the iPod - “no wireless, less space then the Nomad, Lame”
And for the youngsters who don’t get the reference
The iPhone didn’t win because it had the most features, it won because it made the features it had much easier to use… so people actually used them. Other phones could technically do stuff, but it was so annoying to do, no one did it. Not long before the iPhone launched I had a friend get a Moto Q. She was determined to get the most out of it and learn how to use everything. She was carrying a massive manual with her in her purse. The iPhone did those things without the need to study a manual for weeks or months.
This isn’t the iPad release, it’s the Apple Watch release. It’s a flag-planting, limited capability, system for early adopters that’s meant to be a ramp to a more practical v2.
I don’t think most people will have a use for the Vision Pro, but, for the people that do, it’s in a different league from what’s currently available.
The mass market iPad/iPod Touch version of the Vision will be out in a few years.
Now just how to figure out how to pay for it (and wait for the UK release)
The question is will it have enough appeal for the technology to trickle down to more affordable devices that the general population is willing to actually buy? And will it happen before we can implant chips directly into our brain? So far VR has occupied nothing less but a niche market.
Honestly no. It just looked like a giant iPhone
Historically, reviews of Apple products based on their specs have aged poorly.
https://512pixels.net/2009/01/early-macintosh-reviews-show-d...
John Dvorak
> Apple makes the arrogant assumption of thinking that it knows what you want and need. It, unfortunately, leaves the “why” out of the equation — as in “why would I want this?” The Macintosh uses an experimental pointing device called a ‘mouse’. There is no evidence that people want to use these things. I dont want one of these new fangled devices.
They are staking the claim (via price and otherwise) that this is a whole computer that you should use for Very Serious Productivity. Whereas the iPad (for example) was always kind of assumed to be a secondary/casual computing device, this is very much not. The price, the "Pro" moniker, and fact that it has specs more in line with Apple's line of laptops than its iOS devices all support this framing.
There are clearly people who will happily drop $4k on an Apple laptop if they think it'll be a good tool. That is who this is being marketed to, not people who might otherwise have bought a Oculus or whatever.
Whether the device lives up to the marketing is a different question and one we really can't answer until we spend some time with it. I'll let you know when mine arrives. So very much depends on the "feel" of the finger sensors and eye tracking.
But I do think it's priced correctly for what they're claiming it is.
Just the ability to have a larger screen without worrying about my physical Mac screen is a fairly large selling point, plus any other features. I assume there has not been anything about the ability to have multiple virtual Mac screens has there? That would likely make this an instant purchase for me.
But on the other hand, they took the feedback this time and created a different strap to address it (and early reviews seem to indicate it does help quite a bit).
So - lols aside - I don’t think it’s quite the same thing. I think they realize it’s a real issue for some people and they’re trying to address that earnestly.
If I can wear that while being physical I can probably handle the Vision Pro for extended periods.
The Quest 2 wasn’t that comfortable to use out of the box, but after adding a Vive Deluxe Audio Strap connected with 3D printed adapters (which distributes weight better) and a counterweight that’s attached the back of the strap it’s dramatically improved. Still not perfect, but I have no issues wearing it for an hour or longer playing Beat Saber.
But I just don't think weight alone will be a concern given my experience with the Index.
My only problems with the index is the weight distribution while moving around (particularly while playing beat saber and crouching) but I likely wouldn't be doing that with the Vision Pro. And heat while being physically active but that was easily solvable by adding a fan to the front.
I already use this thing almost every day. But maybe that's because I am used too it so the jump to something like this is not really that crazy.
The clarity is good enough for dev work, but my eyes feel a little strained after a few hours of use. I'm curious whether Apple's product will be more comfortable for longer use.
They're great for watching videos, movies, TV, etc. though!
I also am nearsighted, and once I got prescription lenses for my xreal air it was like a whole new set of glasses!
It's three 1080 P screens, one in front of me, and one to either side of me. And yes, they "stand still" when I move my head to between them
The glasses on their own just display a static "dumb" display that doesn't respond to one's movement.
The screen fills up the entire FOV, which is great. The problem is that there's a lag between head movements and the glasses adapting. That means unless you stay very still, there will pretty much always be a part of the screen that's not visible. Furthermore, the lag is (to me) really bothersome.
I sent the Beam back and kept the glasses.
You can probably work around this by adjusting the compositor into a “more space” mode in preferences which makes all the content smaller, but it’s not the same as having arbitrary resolution to match the arbitrary virtual size.
Personally, I don’t want a virtual screen at all, I want all the individual windows on my Mac to hover around me in virtual space (like they do for native visionOS apps), but that’s not supported. It’s a real shame IMO.
Well, yes, that would be the ultimate. Why even think in terms of "screens" which only exist for practical reasons in physical space?
Separate monitors allows for better organization of different app windows than a single monitor, especially with different spaces on different monitors. I can keep my main screen on whatever it is I am working on while switching to a different space on another monitor to check email or teams for example.
Or just being able to have multiple full screen apps which is what I often do.
I don't really want my workspace divided into equal parts, I have my primary monitor which is my largest monitor in the middle. A slightly smaller (and lower resolution) monitor to the left for research, teams, etc. And then I have a vertical monitor to the right for things that I need the extra space for.
I have more flexibility to setup my workspace exactly how I want, sure I can't change it later but I don't need too. It does what I need it to do since I set it up that way.
I tried driving an ultra wide screen monitor at one point and it was probably my biggest regret of a purchase, and I have made some stupid purchases. It sells you on a more flexible ideal that just isn't the reality.
If I want to switch context on one of my screens while keeping my main screen where it is (which I do most of the time) I just move my mouse over and swipe to another space. No fussing with widows being over each other or making sure that the OS somehow knows that I only want to move part of my screen.
They generally just resize windows, take over the entire monitor when you click "fullscreen", and display errors/prompts in the middle of the monitor, overlapping your other windows. Similarly, these subdivisions can't themselves host virtual desktop spaces.
Surely there's some Linux window manager that does all of this and more, but I'm never going to fuss with that when I can plug in a few cheap monitors and they work the same way immediately and consistently, out-of-the-box, on any OS.
The question will be can I easily copy something from Safari on the Vision Pro to my Mac for example? Or move the mouse from my Mac Display (which will likely just be the trackpad of my laptop on my lap) to that Safari and use it that way.
It would need to operate as an extension of my Mac for it to be useful in this scenario.
Like I know I can use my mouse on my computer to control the Mac screen on my iPad, but I didn't think I could move my mouse over to control iPad apps?
I honestly have not used that feature much so if it can do that... that makes me rethink the usefulness of this.
That might sway whether or not I get this thing. Being able to more optimally work while away from my desk is worth... a lot.
The whole Mac becomes essentially its own 1 app in the virtual space.
It's possible they will add the option to have multiple virtual displays for 1 computer but I haven't seen any indication of that.
I would have preferred if each Mac window floated in the virtual space as its own thing instead.
I am guessing there may be some wireless bandwidth issue with transmitting more than one screen but idk. Guess we will see if it just happens to not have been shown
I also thought the Apple Watch was a gimmick, but apparently they have been selling tons of those.
This Vision Pro thing is different from the watch but also might not be that different, just "up scale".
Compare it to the Playstation 1 dev kit. In 1994 dollars it cost $15,000 for a full devkit.
[1] https://www.retroreversing.com/official-playStation-devkit
And that's... a downside?
Different from a watch, some kind of mixed reality wearable will eventually replace phones and laptops, I am sure. It might still be several decades till the technology fits in a pairs of eyeglasses.
Consider this your 2050 preview, like the Apple Newton to your iPhone.
I will say though, as much as it doesn’t make financial sense, I have been a part of some really rewarding experiences that were only possible while having new Apple products day 1.
Looking forward to testing development on the Vision Pro, building some Vision Pro apps, and also playing Baldur’s Gate 3 in bed via screen mirroring.
Anyway, I got one for myself because I'm really excited about developing for it, and also seeing how productive one can be working with the headset on (I was already pretty impressed with using virtual screens for my MacBook with keyboard passthrough in the Quest).
It felt really futuristic to log into my office computer from a synthesized apartment via Virtual Desktop. The latency was fine for typing. Even YouTube video/audio was bearable. But the device itself is still too heavy. The fixed lens system can't be good for your eyes.
Apple Vision Pro is even heavier. Even as a hardcore VR fan I cannot imagine the current generation hardware to be useful in productivity tasks.
I wonder if those could moved to some package attached to e.g. your waist and connected via cable. If done right it shouldn't be too irritating.
I've done it with a Valve Index and an HTC Vive Pro. I configured a virtual room with huge screens on the walls.
It worked OK. I wished the DPI was higher, but huge screens farther away from my head worked well enough to use Visual Studio, etc.
The issue I had was eye strain and headaches. This was with snap-in vision correcting lenses for the Vive Pro.
I could do a full 8 hour day, but had a low-key headache and dry eyes the rest of the day.
Anecdotally and in my experience, there have been many complaints about fatigue for the Quest, and I wonder if Apple will be able to get away with more premium materials in the future versions. It seems like there will be a big tradeoff between adoption and the materials used.
Vision isn't out, but I am curious what V2 looks like and/or a version that optimizes to comfort.
The reports regarding fatigue are consistently related to users wearing only the band, when they add the additional strap that goes directly over the head it's fine. Typical Apple leading with form over function. It ships with the additional strap at least so that should alleviate it for most people. Quest 3 has a similar additional band which helps as well.
Things like active cooling, multiple camera arrays, motorized IPD adjustment.
I bet when iFixIt does a tear down, the front display will be shown to be negligible.
> Apple Vision Pro is only available for sale in the U.S and is designed for customers in the U.S. to use at home, at work, and while traveling. We look forward to bringing Apple Vision Pro to more countries later this year.
So, why aren't they answering their own question here? Feels like they are dodging the answer.
What happens when I do buy it and take it to another country? Will it stop working, or is it just that Apple stores aren't equipped (yet) to service these devices?
* Apple Vision Pro only supports English (U.S.) for language and typing and English for Siri and Dictation.
* App Store requires an Apple ID with region set to the U.S.
* Purchases on Apple Music and TV app require an Apple ID with region set to the U.S.
* For customers with vision correction needs, ZEISS will only accept vision prescriptions written by U.S. eye care professionals, and will only ship to U.S. locations.
* Customers may not be able to access certain apps, features, or content due to licensing or other restrictions in those countries or regions.
* Apple Support is only available in the U.S.
The reasonable explanation here is that this product is in a soft launch... similar to when a restaurant opens for the first time to friends and family. There is almost certainly an entire book worth of experience that apple needs to get with rolling this product out.
"Apple Vision Pro is great for travel and when U.S. customers travel abroad, the experience will remain consistent. That means all of their apps and content will remain accessible while traveling, so they can use apps and enjoy music, TV, and movies."
It's decent but I don't think I'd say "fine". Most games (if they support both) work a million times better with the controllers. I tried hand tracking in a number of games on the Q2 and found it very lackluster. We will see if the AVP is able to deliver on their promise but already from the demos they've done it seems way more responsible/reliable than what I experienced on the Q2.
Could it not still track your hands while holding the controller?
Could it not track the controller itself, even?
There's also the question of how precise the hand-tracking is under pressure, moving windows around is one thing but keeping up with expert Beat Saber maps is another thing entirely.
I'd be astonished if Apples hand-tracking is good enough to handle something like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJQSy3KG-oQ&t=33s
I was disappointed there were no controllers, even as an accessory since it means that most of the VR gaming catalog will never be ported to this awesome Vision hardware.
Once the initial fascination wears out, you are not going to use it as replacement for the big screen. VR/AR needs improve technically and find killer apps and must-have games.
I got a dystopian chuckle out of "Varjo XR-3 Headset with Perpetual Offline License" for $10990 (but free shipping!!1) https://www.adorama.com/vrjvr3d.html so maybe the $3990 XR-4 is just the hardware, and it's another $X for the license to use it
It could even be a glasses and a band you wear on wrist that accurately track finger motion even though fingers are not in view of the glasses.
You don’t want to look like a Glasshole - hence it needs to look normal and fashionable.
You definitely don’t want to be talking to it all the time. It’s not private and voice bandwidth is like 8 bytes / second. This is where rabbit and other devices get it wrong.
The reason iPhone took off was its touch sensitive and responsivess was above and beyond what anyone has. The homescreen app model is great UX.
I essentially want something like Meta Rayban with a screen and finger tracking. The fingers could be under a table while I am sitting and it should still work.
Essentially like the Apple Watch but for your eyes. Non-obtrusive, fashionable, highly responsive, full day operation.
Apple Vision Pro won't do much as a product - it'll struggle for even minimal adaption and will be eventually all but withdrawn within 24 months. The patents etc may eventually lead to a compelling product.
But I'd be very confident I could look back at this comment and be proven correct.
iPad commentary on launch always felt wide of the mark - use case was clear. iPhone was limited at launch but you could see the path forward. Vision Pro feels like it could never be 'evolved' into a mass market product - though maybe the patents could be taken and become something useful, albeit different.
I read their first paragraph and thought to myself that it was a reasonable stance, only to then be followed up with ridiculous stuff that straight up slides off the other end of the spectrum.
Gotta admire the confidence though, however misplaced it might be.
Still a lot of people will buy it so why 3499, 3699, 3899? Why not 3999, 4199, 4399? Surely if you have the money you would buy it either way.
Pricing is partly art. Pricing is about choosing a number that you think the market (and the market size you're after) will bear. Pricing can signal status; it can signal "this is for you" (e.g. when inexpensive). Pricing is psychological - that's why you see 9.95 instead of 10, that could be one of the reasons why the Vision Pro is not in the $4000 range because that is in a different level psychologically.
etc.
Profit = Volume * (Price - Cost)
For those with a FOMO, chill. This is a product that is going to iterate quickly, is going to go through the trough of disillusionment, and people are going to take a while to figure out how it works in their life. I felt zero interest in being an early adopter even though I'm sold that it will be how we eventually work. I'll be an iteration 3 or so buyer.
Ironically existing Apple users are the most likely to notice this limitation, since their computers have had very high DPI displays as standard for a long time.
This graphic claims 3400x3400 resolution, so we're not far off:
https://i.redd.it/apple-vision-pro-resolution-vs-other-heads...
Frustratingly, the spec sheet doesn't list FOV, but let's assume it's on the order of 110 degrees. That gives us about 31 pixels per degree.
Right now, I'm sitting about 30 inches from a 24" diagonal 1920x1200 monitor. That gives a vertex angle of about 45 degrees, and it's 2264 pixels corner-to-corner, so I've got 50.3 pixels per degree. That's not high DPI, but it's acceptable. I also have a 4k, which is lovely, but given the chance I'll take more real estate over a small, high-DPI display. And with Vision Pro you can put monitors anywhere.
I agree low DPI monitors are still acceptable, I'm using one now, but that's really contingent on subpixel fonts.
I’m a bit loathe to go in on a $3500 device without trying it out though, so I’m waiting do a few weeks at least for some more reviews to trickle in and whatever hype to die down before checking it out. I am particularly interested in how heavy it is after wearing the thing for 4+ hours, which is not something you can really get a vibe about at the Apple Store
But I agree, and the ability to do that really would make the price "reasonable". I mean I have 3 monitors on my main setup and one of those alone cost $1200 (I realize I didn't need to do that, but it still puts the price in prospective if I can have 3 virtual monitors on this thing.
This is why I preordered it and if I don't think it delivers on that experience I'll probably return it. Productivity is my #1 use case with things like content consumption being a distant second.
I use the Immersed app and I'm able to code for 3-4 hours a day with the headset.
I want it to just work. Put on the headset and immediately be connected.
256GB - $3499 | 512GB - $3699 | 1TB - $3899 AppleCare+ - $499 | Battery - $199 | Travel Case - 199
Put the damn battery on the back of the head to prevent neck problems you lunatics.