Apple Vision Pro will be available beginning Friday, February 2, at all U.S. Apple Store locations and the U.S. Apple Store online.

I honestly doubt this will take off, but it’ll be interesting as a tech demo for what AR/VR can be at the highest end.

  • Echo Dot@feddit.ukEnglish
    152·
    8 months ago

    It’s a really interesting product but unless you’re a trust fund kid you basically can’t afford it.

    The apple strategy usually is to make a stupidly expensive product that everyone laughs at (remember the wheels for the tower computer), and then the actual product they expect people to buy.

    They seem to have forgotten the second bit, but I’m wondering if something’s going to come out in 6 months called just the Apple Vision

    • Naz@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      62·
      8 months ago

      I have the equivalent of a trust fund and I’m not stupid enough to buy this for $3.5K.

      Go get yourself a BigScreen VR for $1K, and then a fuckin’ full top of the line prebuilt with the remaining $2.5K.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.ukEnglish
        1·
        8 months ago

        You can get VR working for a lot less than 2.5k which is my point really. Sure you can spend that much money if you want, but there’s no requirement to.

    • soggy_kitty@sopuli.xyzEnglish
      54·
      8 months ago

      Isn’t this like 2.5k? There’s plenty of adults who can afford this without a “trust fund”

      You’re making it sound like it’s 25k

  • ExLisper@linux.communityEnglish
    101·
    8 months ago

    I don’t really get the point of all this. Sci-Fi movies are trying go convince us for a very long time that interacting with a computer by standing and waving your hands around is the future but for me it just looks tiring. I prefer my keyboard and mouse. We’ll see how many people Apple can convince. Maybe they are right and you just have to use it to believe it…

    • paddirn@lemmy.worldEnglish
      82·
      8 months ago

      I think exercise apps might be a prime application for something like this, things like Beat Saber (or even SuperHot VR of all games). As a package designer, I’m kind of salivating at the prospect of being able to use something like this to see things in 3D as I’m working on it (should an app like that even become available), but it would still never completely replace a flat screen for serious work (plus the Apple headset just uses hand gestures for everything).

      Otherwise, yeah, I’m not too hopeful about this thing’s prospects, unless developers knock it out of the park with some killer apps for it. $3500 for a 1st-gen, Apple-only headset is just a bit too much for me. I paid ~$1000 for a Valve VR Headset and even that seemed astronomical at the time, but it works with nearly everything else, so it doesn’t even feel like I’m in a walled garden. With this Apple headset, you’re limited to Apple’s store and that’s it, I’m not sure that I would trust trying to jailbreak a $3500 piece of equipment and possibly brick it.

      • fidodo@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        8 months ago

        Problem with exercise apps is it’s really uncomfortable to sweat in a headset.

  • poopkins@lemmy.worldEnglish
    92·
    8 months ago

    With dwindling iPhone sales (it’s not for a lack of market share, but smartphone purchases are down as people aren’t refreshing their phones every year anymore), Apple needs to find the next accessory akin to Apple Watch that will further line their pockets. I mean, the stock price can’t just remain stagnant, right?

  • Tarquinn2049@lemmy.worldEnglish
    93·
    8 months ago

    They are lucky that no one decided to compete with them. They have some features that aren’t otherwise to market yet. So their price is less obviously bloated. If other headsets had been positioned to directly compete, they would have been able to do so at the 2000$ price range.

    Overall, any new company entering the market is good news. VR is finally ready for normal people. Quest 3 basically crossed the line to being worth recommending as a virtual monitor alone, not to mention all it’s other capability.

    So at this point, more exposure of what VR is now can only be a good thing. All it’s missing now is being considered a normal thing to do. The more “normal” companies making VR headsets, the better. As long as their headsets don’t suck. Cuz even if I wouldn’t want to use it anyway, it getting bad press still affects the rest of VR.

    I don’t care if it’s over priced, as long as it doesn’t end up having any glaring issues. People lamenting that it’s too expensive are at least still interested, and can be redirected to a more reasonable headset. And even if only influencers end up having the apple headset, as long as they like it, it’s a net positive for the whole community.

      • Blackmist@feddit.ukEnglish
        122·
        8 months ago

        Oh.

        So you can expect at least three revisions of this before they inevitably release one with optional controllers for when you need any amount of precision. And you’ll need a Apple Vision Pro 4 to be able to use them.

          • Blackmist@feddit.ukEnglish
            22·
            8 months ago

            That doesn’t sound like it would work, except for very basic PSVR1 style games, where again they were hobbled by poor controller setups, where you could pick between several options that were awful in different ways. The Oculus Touch controllers were so much better for literally everything, and at this point are over 7 years old.

            I mean, they can be fun too, Astrobot is pretty neat. You just can’t compare them to a full fat experience like Half Life: Alyx.

            4K per eye is great resolution, more than anyone really needs, but they’re going to be relying a lot on woolly hand gestures, and as such is going to struggle even for simple games like Beat Saber.

            There’s an argument they’re not going for gamers here, which is fair enough, but answering emails while having my glasses pressed into my nose isn’t something I’m particularly interested in.

              • Blackmist@feddit.ukEnglish
                3·
                8 months ago

                I had a look. I’m not immediately convinced it’s as revolutionary as the iPhone. It’s a fancier Quest but the battery is in your pocket rather than on the front of your face. Guessing the internals are similar spec to a regular high end iPhone or iPad.

                It will almost certainly feel a lot slicker than the Quest, which isn’t hard because the Quest feels like several layers of jank sellotaped together, but I don’t think it’s $3000 slicker.

                Saw an article that claimed there were issues in a demo, but they weren’t allowed to film and that Apple reckoned that would all be fixed before release. Smart money would be on those issues being present at launch.

  • whereisdani_r@lemmy.worldEnglish
    52·
    8 months ago

    I don’t see mass adoption at this price point. What’s the point?

    I really don’t see the productivity sell. I do see it as functional entertainment to get more use out of an 800 square foot apartment in NYC. If my partner and I disagree on something entertainment wise I can throw them on. That’s about it…

    • GreatRam@lemmy.worldEnglish
      6·
      8 months ago

      The point of this isn’t mass adoption. It’s to get developers to start developing for it. I’m sure within a couple of years they’ll release a non pro version for like a 1500 and people will be all over it

      • whereisdani_r@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        8 months ago

        Yes we are saying the same thing, mass adoption that was for this moment in time at that price point.

        Lower the price point and it will be more common, essentially when it’s no different than the price of a laptop.

    • WindowsEnjoyer@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      1·
      8 months ago

      I don’t see mass adoption at this price point.

      VR isn’t doing well already. With this price point it’s going to fail real fast.

    • mydude@lemmy.worldEnglish
      47·
      8 months ago

      They will perfect this tech over the next few years, then put in mind-treading tech too, and sell it to you for 5 bucks. Don’t mind the mind-reading tech, it’s only there to make the product better, I promise.

    • LanternEverywhere@kbin.social
      16·
      8 months ago

      And those people weren’t wrong at the time. The iPod wasn’t successful in its first few generations. It didn’t become successful until several generations later after they changed a bunch of the problems with it. One of the aspects that makes Apple so successful is that they’re willing to stick with a new product for many years while they keep working on figuring out what the device needs to become a good product.

      • MrSpArkle@lemmy.caEnglish
        73·
        8 months ago

        It was successful immediately because there literally wasn’t any other player in the world that had its capacity and physical size.

        Everything else lacked mass market appeal because it couldn’t hold enough songs or couldn’t fit in your pocket.

        Not to mention the vast majority of the population didn’t know how to pirate music, and most music stores were shit compare to iTunes(and that is not a great endorsement).

        The only huge barrier to adoption was the initial FireWire only model, but I’d be willing to bet even with that restriction they sold more units in the first year than any other model of music player.

        • LanternEverywhere@kbin.social
          2·
          8 months ago

          Whether or not it was successful initially isn’t a matter of opinion, it’s matter of fact. Compared to other personal music players on the market, the number of ipods was not high for the first several generations.

              • ShepherdPie@midwest.socialEnglish
                1·
                8 months ago

                Wow I had no idea (or didn’t remember) those even existed. I thought it came out around 2005 when the nano was released.

                • LanternEverywhere@kbin.social
                  2·
                  8 months ago

                  Yeah that’s it exactly. When it finally exploded, it EXPLODED, but for the first few years it had relatively very low sales. But Apple stuck with it and kept fixing the major flaws that it initially shipped with, and once enough flaws were fixed it went gangbusters seemingly overnight.

                  Same with the apple headset. It has some major flaws, as people have rightly pointed out, and as a result it’s not gonna be a huge seller at first. But Apple will likely stick with it and keep improving the flaws and eventually it might be another iPod level success. Or it might be another failure like the touchbar era laptops. Time will tell.

  • Wanderer@lemm.eeEnglish
    96·
    8 months ago

    I can’t wait for this to be released all the fan boys to spend a fortune on it and make apple even more billions in profit for a product that isn’t going to be worth it.

    But at least it will help with vr and ar. I really think this could be the last bit of momentum needed to get it moving and I’m excited for that future.

  • LanternEverywhere@kbin.social
    76·
    8 months ago

    Given Apple’s track record i wouldn’t bet against it succeeding, but… I don’t get it. My oculus that cost 350 does 95% of what the apple device does but costs literally 10 times more.