But the products are not 10x different in quality and especially there is not 10x more content on the AVP than the Quest
Industrial and medical use, creative platforms etc, Literally the only other headsets I can use for the lines of work I’m involved with are 4x the price of the Vision Pro (the Varjo XRs), yet by your metric wouldn’t be worthwhile.
And this is the problem with people who don’t consider usecases beyond their own.
Excuse me for being very skeptical.
I don't see a whole lot of Apple marketing material talking about the Vision Pro as a professional device. They have a grand total of one press release that highlights different uses for business. There's no landing page that says "contact sales" or anything like that you'd see for an enterprisey specialized solution.
In my mind the more plausible explanation is that Apple misjudged the pricing strategy for the Vision Pro, a device that it considers to be primarily a consumer content device.
If the Vision Pro was a $1000 product they would have potentially had a hit. But I think what's going to happen is that Apple is going to have a product like that in 2026 and when it comes out the response is going to be quite muted.
But I could also see the value of a comparably priced or even higher priced version, with ultra versions of their M chips, going all in as a Mac or MacBook upgrade in terms of user interface.
I use mine as a MacBook Pro screen upgrade. I would love to dispense with the MacBook, while retaining Mac level (as apposition to limited iOS style) applications.
Also in terms of press releases, a quick google search shows these two
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2024/04/apple-vision-pro-brin...
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2024/03/apple-vision-pro-unlo...
Just because Apples consumer marketing pages don’t target enterprise, doesn’t mean they don’t target enterprise as a product. See the Mac Pro webpage that also doesn’t mention enterprise contacts https://www.apple.com/mac-pro/ but it’s clearly not targeted for just consumers either.
https://time.com/7093536/surgeons-apple-vision-pro/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39140319/
But yeah, if Apple can become a medical device company, it would unlock a huge revenue stream for them. Looks like these people are optimistic, I'll take them at their word for that.
I personally don't know if Apple is willing to put the investment into the devices to make them viable as medical devices. There is a reason medical devices have huge costs, and that's largely because of the human effort involved to go multiple rounds with the FDA and other regulatory bodies to get a device approved for use in medical facilities outside of trials and studies.
This is why you’ll often see a range of display devices in operating theatres. You’ll even see iPads or other tablets that aren’t necessarily certified for use.
But the AVP cannot be used for any of these use cases, and as far as I know is not in serious use for professionals in such industries at scale, so why are you acting as if I was blind to the real reason people buy it? None of those are reasons people would buy it today.
Also, you seem to not be aware that the Quest series actually have a professional / industrial business sales setup and do actually make large volumes of sales for business use cases, unlike AVP (https://forwork.meta.com/quest/business-subscription/)
The reason I think you’re not counting those is because you claim equivalency of capability despite cost difference, but there’s clear areas that I know of where a Quest would not cut it.
Your link to metas business use has no relation to my argument. I’m not saying the quest can’t be used for business cases, because I myself have set up professional environments around it. But that’s why I’m confident in saying the Vision Pro allows for a level of fidelity that the Quest cannot provide for today.