from the words-are-but-wind dept
I went and did the Apple demo. I was there for something else at the time, and they had an opening, so I jumped on it. I highly recommend doing the demo, it’s honestly really freaking impressive. I’m not positive what the killer app is for it yet, or if this is just a step in long term AR/MR, but what they’ve done is really impressive. Yes, it’s expensive as hell, and my suspicion is that long term the displays will be replaced with a waveguide (Stanford’s looks pretty good at this point), so it won’t need the external-facing display, but they’ve got the head and hand-tracking in a good spot, as well as the gestures needed for it.
Maybe, the killer app will be the overlay itself, where it uses a camera/location/audio to see what’s going on and present more context. Looking at a menu? Okay, I’ve had this and this and liked it, but their X I’m not a fan of. I need Y from the grocery store, where is it on the shelves… more than anything, I think that they saw what Google glass could become capable of, and thought that the phone as it is now (screen, etc) was going to become obsolete at some point, and they were terrified of losing that race.
For the specs of what it is and what else is out there, it’s actually a really good price.
People like to compare it to the cheapest headsets out there, but it has specs that beat the highest end headsets out there and it’s cheaper than those.
When the Apple Vision pro came out, the closest device sporting similar specs would be the Varjo XR-3 which was only available to Enterprise users. It cost $7k plus a $1500 yearly subscription, plus you needed a powerful computer to run it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REo1ugX5GSI
Basically, hardware wise, it’s good, but for it’s actual uses it’s not worth the $3500.
It’s got good hardware, but there’s nothing being done with that hardware. The pricepoint kept there from being any broad dev support, so its basically a gimmicky paperweight that costs $3500. At least Microsoft will directly work with industry partners for Hololens development, but there’s nothing like that with Apple to help pave over the notoriously rough super-early adoption era.
Yeah, I’ve seen where doctors are using it for surgery and I see all sorts of parallels to the portable computing movement of the 90s, which were about having tablets instead of a ton of manuals, and some of the AR/MR where it shows them where everything goes while looking at the part in question.
I’ve seen where doctors are using it for surgery
The article I’ve seen is one instance in Brazil (article in Brazilian Portuguese) for laparoscopic surgery, which makes a lot of sense. I don’t know how it compare to other displays, however, or if using a VR set rather than a monitor offers advantages, or if the Vision Pro did anything new or better. The same article mentions that doctors had done the same thing with a HoloLens VR headset some years before.
Several others, though a couple seem to be about a POC.
- https://www.adventhealth.com/business/adventhealth-central-florida-media-resources/news/surgical-team-adventhealth-performs-worlds-first-its-kind-procedure-using-apple-vision-pro-mixed
- https://time.com/7093536/surgeons-apple-vision-pro/
- https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39140319/
- https://appleinsider.com/articles/24/05/09/more-doctors-are-embracing-apple-vision-pro-for-precision-keyhole-surgeries/amp/
What’s a waveguide?
Here’s a good article about this specific waveguide: https://www.theverge.com/2024/5/9/24153092/stanford-ai-holographic-ar-glasses-3d-imaging-research
TLDR - they need special materials to allow small/thin glasses for XR goggles. This looks like it could be huge.
They were mostly concerned with preventing you from escaping their walled garden so they crippled it. Great job Apple
It’s an ugly dud just like every VR headset because the technology for displays, processing, and batteries make them look like gigantic, heavy ski goggles.
Plus there’s no applications. Games are cool, socializing is cool (I guess), and porn is porn, but what can I do with it? It’s like releasing the first Macintosh without MacWrite or MacPaint.
wheres the first party stuff at LEAST? like garage band couldve been amazing… or logic or reason, or maps… wheres the tilt brush and 3d modelers? rollercoaster tycoon would shred in this.
Yeah it feels like even Apple is half-heartedly invested in it. Lots of the first-party Apple apps are basically just iPad apps, a year after launch. And there’s no real video content, just a bunch of short 7-minute teasers.
Apple should be subsidizing the shit out of developers to get some killer apps on there to prove what it can do. They seem to have assumed if they built it, they would come. But nobody showed up to the party. Developers who DID build apps, that even got featured by Apple, say their sales basically paid for the developer adapter, not even the headset itself.
It’s fine if you don’t want one, but my VR headset get used daily and was a great investment. Once you get used to good VR games, the rest of the video games in 2D just begin to pale in comparison. One example is Assetto Corsa (racing sim) which I could not win any races in in 2D standard mode, but when I played in VR my 3D sense of distance allowed me to actually race competitively enough to win for a change. Also it’s just pretty rad to drive racecars in full 3D view, getting the full experience of moving at high speed.
And it’s absolutely not true that there’s “no applications” for VR. You just don’t know about them because you’re against it. In my household the primary applications are gaming and exercise. There are a number of VR games that require the player to physically move a lot, enough to break a sweat on every session.
IMO the only thing wrong with Apple’s Vision Pro is the high price. I spent $1000 on my VR system and that was a lot. So when you get into the triple-thousand dollar ballpark, your market is just too tiny to grow into anything soon.
There’s the butthurt VR bro who shows up every time I point out the tech for VR isn’t ready yet. There’s always one of you.
And it’s obvious you didn’t read my whole comment because I said that it’s got games. But that just means it’s a game console. What I want is an application that does something useful and productive.
For example, these VR devices have the software and hardware to map 3D spaces. How about an app that lets me map my house and then see what it would be like to knock out a wall or add a window or something? Heck, realtors could use it to do virtual walk throughs of homes.
There’s the douchebag who shows up every time to shit on good technology because it’s not catering to their whims perfectly.
If you want that software, get to fucking work on it then. Make some kind of contribution beyond shitting on things.
If you think “The technology isn’t ready yet” is shitting on it then you need a thicker skin
And saying “Just go back to college, get a masters in software engineering, and build the useful app yourself” is a perfect example of why it’s not ready yet.
It’s really weird how you keep making this discussion about me as if I am the VR. It doesn’t matter to ME that you are choosing to miss out on something great, so my skin is not part of the equation at all. I’m just here to let people know that you’re wrong and that people can have a cool experience with that technology.
I’m not disputing that VR is cool. I’ve tried it and it’s fun to walk with dinosaurs and visit the space station and sculpt in 3D. I’m saying it’s not useful. For a game console it’s great but it’s not a computing platform.
Honestly, the killer application is really simple, but this headset wasn’t quite designed for it (nor is MacOS in general), and that is simply as external monitors.
You know what’s annoying? Trying to use your computer outside, trying to use it on an airplane, or while travelling. Or being in an open plan office with a million visual distractions.
If you’re working in a professional setting where your company is already buying you a giant ultra wide display or multiple professional 27" screens then you’re approaching the territory of a thousand or two dollars spent on each employee, and suddenly a VR headset is starting to look more reasonable as a monitor replacement.
If this was closer to the size of the size of the Big Screen Beyond and just worked as an external display that could let you place as many windows / monitors around you as you wanted, they might actually have a compelling product.
Or if it was cheaper it could be used for gaming.
Or if it had transparent AR displays it could be used for industrial applications like Hololens.
But yeah, as is, it feels like it had a neat idea or two, some really fancy tech, and fell right in the middle of not being that useful for anyone.
I agree that using it as an unlimited display would be a great application. The only problem is that the device itself is too heavy for long-term usage, which goes back to the technology not being ready yet.
Maybe if all that you put on your face was a screen, and the rendering and power were offloaded to a desktop it could be made light enough to wear for hours at a time.
ETA: I haven’t had trouble with external monitors on Mac, and I’ve been running dual screens since 2002 when I grabbed an old 20" CRT from the garbage outside my dorm.
Would have been fine if it didn’t cost a kidney and they’d invested in app development more.
Too closed off. Too expensive.
They said this about iPads and Apple Watches too. Eventually this will be a big deal. It’s still pretty early though.
“No wifi. Less space than a Nomad. Lame.” - Slashdot reacting to the first iPod
Blackberry went hard against the iPhones’ lack of physical keyboard when it was announced too.
No support for VR or controllers. What a complete failure of design.
I would drop apple stock. Everything they work on is a flop recently.
5g modem , apple car, lightning, VR, apple tv is not profitable etc.
It’s a tech demo at this point, not a product. Tim Cook wanted something to cement his legacy so they released it even though the technology was not at all ready yet. The potential is impressive but we’re years away.
Say what you want about Steve Jobs. But his timing during his second stint at Apple was unrivaled. He knew what to bet on and when. And he wasn’t afraid to go all in and bet the company on it.
I’m not going to say we’re hitting a wall but there’s a serious hurdle here. The tech to make the AR/VR experience truly pleasant doesn’t really exist yet, and even once we get the tech nailed down it’s going to be really expensive
The shot that Apple took and I kind of agree with it, to a point, is that immersive VR is a secondary concern. It’s a game. It’s an occasional escape. Occasionally, you’ll throw yourself into a virtual world and hide away for a bit but it’s not where you’re going to spend most of your time.
AR is what we need to tackle. We need a bright clear high-res overlay capable of doing at least 90°. It needs to be close enough to the size and weight of a pair of glasses to wear comfortably. Maybe we stop carrying around the tablet sized cell phones and move back to candy bars that push the display for the glasses.
Meta has a somewhat promising looking prototype that costs $10,000 to manufacture.
The quest definitely scratched the itch for VR. It’s a great platform, super cheap, and as magic for short to medium balance of playing around in virtual worlds. But we need a tool, something that improves our existing lives not something that replaces them.
I just wanna get doxed in public by some dude wearing an implanted vision chip…then a year later he can’t see because that chip is not upgradable! Planned human obsolescence. Or Pho for short.
Apple’s development kit offers cutting-edge technology at a price point accessible to those who can afford it. For individuals like me, who need to prioritize essential expenses, spending $3,500 isn’t feasible. However, if circumstances were different, this would undoubtedly be an exciting gadget to explore.
deleted by creator
I understand your point. However, I believe Apple’s Vision Pro (at least the current iteration) was never intended as a mainstream product for the following reasons:
-
It’s unrealistic to expect a $3,500 headset to become a smashing hit overnight.
-
There’s limited software available to support it. Most applications merely showcase the use-case scenarios and potential of the hardware.
-
The device appears aimed at demonstrating Apple’s design capabilities and their “vision” of what an advanced headset should be.
Nevertheless, some news outlets report the product’s failure based on sales falling below 500,000 units in 2024. Apple Insider specifically reported approximately 370,000 units sold in the first three quarters of 2024.
While Apple has revised their expectations and reduced production, and interest has declined after the initial buzz, it’s worth noting a parallel: When Samsung first launched its Galaxy Fold, first-year sales fell significantly below forecasts. The product line has since improved over the years, though it’s not a major success compared to other Galaxy products.
The key questions now are: Will Apple discontinue this expensive proof of concept? Will there be an Apple Vision Pro 2? The answer might lie in monitoring competitors’ performance in this market. If other companies succeed with their smart glasses, Apple may introduce a scaled-down version of the Vision Pro, priced around $1,000, for their second attempt.
But as always, crystal ball gazing is a tough game.
-
Tech Press Derides Tech Press For Doing Tech Press Things.
Also, no mention of, or comparison to, AI. At least Apple created a viable product somebody wanted.
Did people get motion sickness from these. I know VR is diff, but the PS VR2 make my head hurt after 20 min or so.
No, because they weren’t for games and they pretty much had always-on video passthrough, which greatly reduces the chances of getting nausea.
No delay with the passthrough video? Still can be disorienting. Maybe it’s just me.
Right, hence I said “greatly reduces the chances”. I know some people are still affected.
I think with careful, controlled exposure, they could greatly lessen this feeling (or maybe even eliminate it), but it’d be a long road and I question how important it actually would be to them, so I don’t actually suggest it.
Personally, I love VR. I’ve always been an avid fan of 3D TV/Games and VR, and I always will be. I long for the day that AR is properly implemented.
But I also understand that others don’t share that love, for personal or even physiological reasons.
I wanna love VR but it makes me sick, which is odd because I fly drones with goggles and don’t get sick even with all the loops and flips.
