The people who buy something like this (hopefully) have enough money where $3,500 doesn’t matter or are developers who want to get in early on something that might be big in a few versions.
Everyone else should avoid.
These are the early adopters phase. This always happens with high-end tech. I’m not sure how advanced this set is compared to the competition in order to justify that price.
It’s a native feature of the device that allows its user to get enormous amounts of attention, in real life and subsequently online, by simply wearing it in public.
Sounds horrible. I guess I’m not someone who seeks attention at any cost like some people, it public is the last situation I’d use this thing in. I would feel like a complete dumbass wearing it at a coffee shop and waving my hands around.
It’s the same problem google glass had. It can be the most information rich and user friendly device in the world but if you look like a dingus wearing it, it will never catch on.
That’s what I thought about the elephant tusk looking AirPods yet here we are.
The Reality Distortion Field sometimes makes things hard to predict when it comes to Apple products.
People on here are wired.
Air pods just look like regular apple headphones just without wires.
They sure as shit look less goofy than my huge pixel buds that stuck an inch out of my ear.
You’re probably thinking of the current gen AirPods rather than the original (comparison).
I’m kind of surprised people felt that way about AirPods. I don’t remember that at the time. They seem quite mild to me at this point - people didn’t mind wearing regular earbuds around, why worry if there’s a cord or not?
What if I already look like a dingus?
Then if you wear it you’ll be an even bigger dingus and make other dinguses look less dingusy. It would kinda be a public service of sorts I guess.
Two dingi don’t make a right. Or something.
Don’t they cancel each other out?
Unfortunately they multiply instead of cancel
One times one is still one
i times i is -1, though. Imagine that!
Its a 3500 dollar computer you wear on your face, that can only perform basic computing tasks which can more cheaply be performed on a cell phone, draws enormous amounts of attention to the user when used in public spaces, and both the ability to use it in public spaces and the attention drawing nature of it are marketed as pros.
Ok, so its now exceedingly clear that anyone who would get this thing is a wealthy idiot who has 0 experience with an impoverished community, as if you walked through a poorer area, you would just get mugged and have this high value device stolen from you.
And frankly at this point I would morally support that happening.
Not that it likely will, as anyone both dumb amd rich enough to have this happen to them generally has no kind of on foot commute through any such impoverished area.
The creator of the Apollo app recently tooted about wearing his out in public, getting noticed, and then secreting away to his hotel because the attention made him uncomfortable.
I’m probably more of an Apple fan than I like, but I can’t imagine owning one of these, let alone wearing it out in public.
It seems like Apple kind of forgot that good tech should first be good tech. They’re leaning heavy on this being a lifestyle item, but like - there’s no lifestyle out there that hinges on looking like boring versions of the guy from ready player one.That makes sense… he’s a fairly normal person. I could see using the Vision Pro at a co-working place anyway, especially for someone who’s an iOS app developer.
It does seem like an oddly clunky device by Apple standards. I don’t find the overall idea abhorrent and could picture owning one down the road - perhaps after they’ve had a few years to make the device smaller and less expensive. I have no idea what I’d use it for though. Maybe once there are more exciting games than repackaged mobile games like Super Mega Fruit Ninja.
Oh, yeah. More power to him. A later post by him said that the app he’s developing for it has already paid for the cost of the headset. I fully believe he’s just out there working.
I’m hoping in a few generations, when they’ve got the form factor worked out, and the price under control, that it’ll be more to my liking.
I don’t think I would ever want to interact with someone while wearing it, but it could be great for all the things VR is great for, but without the creepy Facebook privacy invasion. (I know - Apple is slipping down that slope, too. They’re just not as far down it yet.)
Yeah, last thing I want is more attention while wearing those things and the chance that people will be able to hear the audio from the pr0n I’d be watching on it.
The masturbating in public might be a dead give away too
Public? No officer, i was masturbating on the moon!
And it’ll get snatched from you faster than an iphone
Simple solution. Kensington lock attached to the gonads. The device can helpfully warn others against theft with an LED projection on the wearer saying Big Cojone Security is active.
I want it like crazy. No chance I’ll wear it in public after I pull the trigger.
I probably would throw it in my backpack on hikes to do some captures of stuff like waterfalls and nice mountain views. They’re really nice and not something you can do with my regular camera.
How does that work? Does it stitch together panoramas?
So I asked, and you can’t do captures to use for the backgrounds with the headset (I’m guessing they use better equipment and maybe some processing), but it does do “spatial photos and video”. That was part of the demo in the store and they’re really impressive. The 15 pro can also capture a 3D video that still looks cool, but has noticeably less depth than the captures with the headset.
I’m not sure the exact technical details, but there are a whole bunch of cameras and other sensors. I’m assuming it uses all of them combined to capture the 3D photos. But there was a lot of depth in the version I saw in the demo.
They bought Tim Cook a new private jet. I thought they’d have figured by now.
“Just park it next to the others.”
He doesn’t own one already?
That’s why they said a new one. Only peasants have just one private jet.
And here I am without even a private Cessna
Mate I have a private bike
Alright Mr Moneybags, no need to brags
He needs two so he can Van Damme between them.
I was not aware that existed. Why are they driving backwards? I’m more impressed by the skill of the truckers than that split.
For anyone else that is unaware. https://youtu.be/M7FIvfx5J10?si=WUoZYFGqwRvLl6a2
Seems it’s safer, if he fell, there’s not much risk
They bought themselves into a beta test/focus group. Apple still doesn’t know what this will be. It might be a Newton MessagePad. Or it might be the iPhone.
Apple is great at polishing and packaging things that already exist. The iPhone was a better Blackberry, the iPod a better MP3 player, the iMac a better all-in-one PC… I have a hard time thinking of stuff they truly pioneered. The Newton maybe? That did not end well for them.
If I had to bet, the Vision Pro will turn out to be a burnt pancake, but long term I have no doubt that something like it — something that augments reality one way or another — will become a thing. And in the meantime Apple has pockets more than deep enough to survive a failed Vision Pro.
The backlash against them trying to innovate is kind of dumb though. They aimed high for a change, and taking risks like this should be lauded not laughed at.
The problem is they didn’t aim high enough. AR/VR lives or dies on software. And for what they launched, it barely has the OS, and apparently that thing, although very polished UX wise, on security it’s a swiss cheese. And few people has the pockets to develop apps for it.
They are still failing, in 2024, to put touch capability into their computers. This isn’t a company that does innovativion well, and it hasn’t been for over 15 years. It’s totally fine to scoff at this attempt.
I have zero interest in touch screen on my laptop. It is not standard on Windows and has yet to show any really benefits.
I really don’t see touchscreens on laptops to be something to judge a company’s innovation on. I work in communications and I can really only think of two coworkers that personally own touchscreen laptops.
Apple Vision Pro Owners Are Struggling to Figure Out What They Just Bought
Im struggling to figure out why Apple Vision Pro Owners threw out $3500 on a device without knowing what they can use it for
Apple puts out a product, Apple users buy the product. Nothing to figure out.
I just wonder how much Apple would make selling empty boxes and marketing them as such.
The new Apple Log®
“I love log!”
I’m sure that the iBox would turn out a fair profit.
They kinda do already; Apple sells a twisted piece of metal for $1k, and people buy it from them.
If I had so much money that 3500 dollars didn’t matter to me, I’d have one.
From what I’ve seen on it, I’d play with it for a day and forget about it.
Maybe an hour. Seems like it’s pretty cool but there’s nothing on the headset worth buying the headset for, even at half the cost. Even at a third.
If Apple actually developed the technology in a sensible way, and that’s a big if, it could actually be a really interesting product.
Right now it’s a bit limited as essentially it is a very very expensive second display which only works with Apple devices.
Never seen anyone wearing them or promoting/showing it off
I’ve seen a few people making fun of it, and that’s the only reason I know it exists
Do we really want to live in a world where people are walking around with these things on their face, gesturing around like they are insane?
It’s bad enough to witness how awful public spaces have become since smartphones came out, but this is next level zombie.
It is inevitable to a degree. Obviously this is not the final form and I’m sure the goal is to make a more fashionable solution that fits into their phone/watch/airpods kind of edc strategy. But no doubt we’ll have a future where info is right there if we want it. This thing is the foray into developing that eventual product for Apple. To me it looks real dumb, but a sleeker version in the future that looks like glasses…well shit it might be nice to watch a show while washing dishes idk.
I was looking forward to the Google glass. Not because it was Google but because if a heavy hitter drops something more usually follow. To bad it flopped. I would love having something like that instead of my phone. Especially once there’s prescription versions of them.
I just want smart glasses like a smart watch. Show me notifications, let me decline calls, etc. I don’t want all the VR crap, just like 4 lines of text.
But no doubt we’ll have a future where info is right there if we want it.
But we’re already there. It’s called a smartphone.
The value add of replacing a pocket watch or a cellphone with a device about the same size that also fits in your pocket but also gives you access to all the world’s information in seconds is immense. And that’s why the smartphone revolutionized the world.
The value add of having that information strapped to your face at all times is… just not worth the physical discomfort of having said device strapped to your face.
I say this as a VR user. A device strapped over your face really sucks and you can’t wait to take it off. The only reason to tolerate it is that that’s the only way to trick your senses into thinking you are somewhere else.
I think they meant in the future when the form factor is the same as wearing glasses.
My glasses are on my face every minute of every day, except when showering and sleeping. I’m uncomfortable when they’re not there - and not just because I can’t see, but because I’m so used to it.
That’s probably the future - people being uncomfortable if a screen isn’t in their vision every waking moment, because it’s as physically comfortable and as “normal” as wearing glasses, and more comfortable than looking down at a phone.
It’d be an amazing feat for technology, but similarly as dystopian as having a social media-feeding PC in your pocket, or just any PC if you’re another generation older. Future people will eat it up though, just like we eat up the phones.
Now I’m imagining marketing where the old millennials are staring at their phones, and the young people are complaining about how grandpa never engages with other human beings or makes eye contact - but they’re still scrolling TikTok while talking to him.
It would be ar glasses I’d think, not a headset with a strap. At least that would be my guess as to the end state.
Do we really want to live in a world where people are walking around with these things on their face, gesturing around like they are insane?
You’ve seen someone talk on radio earbuds when the phone’s in their pocket? It’s the second most creepy thing I’ve ever seen with a phone conversation.
If people can behave, I don’t care what they wear or what they watch
About 200,000 years of history proves that we cannot lol
I want you to imagine a subway car, where 50% of the people have these on their face.
They are waving their hands around, sometimes accidentally hitting other passengers because of it.
They are too distracted to even catch their stop, so there’s always extra chaos because of it.
Some are using apps that record what they are seeing and makes other passengers “naked” in their headset, which they share online. Privacy is a thing of the past because they can record what they see.
Imagine nobody being able to even have a conversation with other people, or make human connections with strangers, because the person across from them has a digital mask on, and you have no idea if they are even aware of what’s going on around them.
Sure, you can have a great number of people “behaving” in this scenario, but is this something you want society to become? I don’t. It deprives the human experience to an absurd extent.
I’m sorry, but do you just talk to strangers on the subway?
We already have smartphones that everyone is looking at anyway.
Before that we had newspapers.
You are making up an imaginary dystopia to peddle fear for no reason.
I’m sorry, but do you just talk to strangers on the subway?
I very often greet people, say polite things, perhaps engage in some light conversation with strangers. It’s quite human to have these social interactions.
We already have smartphones that everyone is looking at anyway.
Yes, which is already bad enough. Why make it worse by having them on our faces?
Before that we had newspapers.
True, but newspapers didn’t take people out of the environment they were in - it was simply an object within that environment in which people were still fully able to interact with the outside world uninhibited.
These headsets are designed to remove you from reality, while you are still in it. =
You are making up an imaginary dystopia to peddle fear for no reason.
Nah, I just see where corporate interests are trying to move society, and I’m concerned about the negative impacts it will have.
Did you not see the video of the guy wearing his new tim apple ski goggles, in his semi-self driving Tesla cyber truck?
What makes you think people can behave?
Wh do you care?
It’s an AR iPad. It’s not that deep.
I would love to walk around with a video playing in a fixed hud while I go around doing chores. I’m constantly finding places to put my phone down every time I move to another station.
I’m not paying $3500 for that, though.
This is like 20€
If you weren’t aware https://youtube.com/shorts/zhXLC7n62YQ?si=TSu1p-WixFcbSxb2
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/shorts/zhXLC7n62YQ?si=TSu1p-WixFcbSxb2
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
That was the idea of Google glasses but it was too early and tech wasn’t ready. It was gonna give you just enough useful info and get out of the way.
Plus Google haters made “glass-holes” viral.
I’m not sure whether it would work better today.
What seems odd about the glasses is that they’re essentially bodycams, but just unobtrusive enough not to be identified as such from a distance.
Someone walking around with an AR headset makes it very clear they’re wearing a tech device, someone holding up a phone in front of them signals “I might be filming”, but someone wearing slightly unusual glasses won’t catch any attention. And that seems very weird to a lot of people.
I thought Google Glass was a really cool idea. I actually liked Google back then.
It’s not even AR… Didn’t they back down from that? Isn’t it mixed reality or something?
How is augmented reality different from mixed reality? Genuine question. They sound like the same thing.
I believe AR overlays information about the real world where as mixed reality just shows you the real world with a few apps floating about
Yes, AR analyses your world and you and gives you more info about the reality, Mixed Reality just has your screens attend into the world without interacting with it. The only thing I saw that was really AR was the use with a MacBook as a screen.
They are people who paid $4000 to be a voluntary QA team.
Is Apple heading down the road of Windows now? Release beta software and use the scream test to debug it?
Now?
Nah, it just has no apps, a poor battery life and like all new Apple product lines will be massively put to shame by its successors.
It doesn’t have a poor battery life it has a poor battery design. If they put a decent battery on the damn thing it would be okay, it’s not particularly power hungry but apple just give it a gnat’s testicle of a battery.
The design makes perfect sense. You can trivially add an additional pack with capacity if that’s your use case. The included pack does the power management and has enough for plenty of people without being in the way, and it’s as simple as plugging in any source of USC-C power at appropriate specs to extend it.
That would be a fine argument if the device didn’t cost more than my mortgage repayments. But for device that expensive, they absolutely need to put a decent battery on the thing.
A “decent battery” is bigger and more weight to carry around that plenty of use cases don’t want or benefit from. It’s not small for cost reasons. It’s because it’s a worse device if you force it to be huge.
The price is high, but only if you ignore how much tech is in it. A lesser but close dumb display from anyone else is thousands in its own.
When iPhone was released App Store didn’t even exist. A smartphone without apps is just a phone and VR glasses without apps are just a 360 degree monitor you wear on your face. I think Apple’s reasoning here is to provide the hardware and see what people do with it.
When Apple released the first iPhone no one had an app store, originally Apple wasn’t even going to have an app store it was all going to be web apps and then they realized that they could make more money with an app store. It wasn’t a feature people expected, but people do expect apps now and they’re not present.
We absolutely expected it when we realised no games or anything could be installed.
People who paid relatively a lot to feel that they are on with progress and have good taste. These are not things you can directly buy.
Of course, you can buy knowledge and powerful tooling, but I don’t see such hype over digital libraries and good e-ink readers, or over learning programming among Apple fans.
On good taste specifically - Apple has always marketed itself as brand connected to that and has always been the opposite of good taste. I gave up trying to understand that long ago.
And exactly to prove your point I want to mention phone cases with a cutout so you can see the apple logo.
And the whole green / blue messages bullshit. Apple never misses an opportunity to remind it’s users they’re paying a premium and everyone else is a plebe.
Or just which messages are SMS and which are an encrypted protocol. It was the users that turned that into a measure of status.
Except Apple will the ones that refused to allow iMessage on Android so it’s absolutely about status.
I don’t think it is good that they didn’t allow that but it seems non sequitur that means it is about status. I like to know if a message is sms or encrypted. Just like some jabber clients do for private messages. There should be some indication of the message status. And unless you can point to Apple indicating the intent of the colors is for social status and not an indication of protocol, I stand by that.
And I know it is hard to cut through the “fuck Apple” narrative. But to me, they are just another one of many scumbag corporations. I just don’t see any evidence that the intent is social status. That was driven by conspicuous consumers.
Additionally, Apple intentionally makes green bubbles harder to read than blue bubbles.
https://medium.com/@krvoller/how-iphone-violates-apples-accessibility-guidelines-6785172eb343
You missed the news, I guess.
Apple fully admitted a few times that it was intentional. It was 100% an artificially created mechanism to polarize users, and bully them into Apple’s “ecosystem”.
I didn’t miss that; that just isn’t what it says. Well it is what you say, but that’s not what I’m disagreeing with. I agree with you.
iMessage on Android would simply serve to remove an obstacle to iPhone families giving their kids Android Phones.
I’m not saying it isn’t a dirty business trick design to lock consumers in. It is. I’m saying it isn’t clear to me that it is designed as a social status issue. That was driven by a large group the users. Even still what this article is talking about is not having iMessage on android, which is not at all what I was disputing. I’m saying the colors serve a functional purpose. Not saying “only a functional purpose” but useful nevertheless.
I won’t be surprised if android likewise distinguishes between sms and messages using the new protocol.
Don’t they all? I’ve never looked for a case showing the logo, but every case I’ve ever had show it
And besides the tech bros with the throw away money, many of the people who have bought this thing are “influencers” and now are having trouble figuring out how to make content with or about this thing, because it’s early adopter play tech and has very little actual use, so the influencers are the ones putting out videos like “what would I even do with this?”
Hilarious. It doesn’t even look cool to wear it. It’s slightly better than Google Glass, but what are you going to do with it?
What people seem to be doing with it is driving around in Tesla’s with it and looking like even larger burks than they usually do.
I guess this is the new gold standard for douchebag detection. That used to be the gold apple watch, but this feels like a more glaring example.
What sucks is that at some point iPad marketing and Apple aesthetic etc felt for me a bit as if it’s going in the direction of the
hype over digital libraries and good e-ink readers, or over learning programming among Apple fans
for real, and I think that’s intentional, just like with M1 and adopting a Unix-like OS and what not, and some series on Apple TV not being that stupid, they always tease you in subtle ways, never ultimately delivering.
Its center of mass is definitely on the douchebag side, but until you clearly see their every move and retrospect over 20 years or so, you are never sure.
The current model has it’s problems, but I really think this is the start of a new major product line for Apple. This isn’t going to be relegated to only the rich forever. There are a few problems to over come. It needs to be lighter, it needs to be cheaper, and it needs better battery life. All of those should be somewhat resolved in the next 10 years. When it does, I think the market will explode.
The big selling point? TV. I know over the last few years I have kind of fought with my mom because she is hurting her viewing experience for the sake of aesthetics. The TV is mounted, but has a cabinet in front of it. It is loaded with tons of seasonal decorations. The reason? She can’t stand the site of a cord. So instead, she has figures tall enough to cover part of the screen blocking the view of the TV, all so the cords can be hidden behind the figures. So yes, she loses part of the viewing area, and the remote doesn’t work unless you get up and go to the side of the TV so the IR sensor isn’t blocked, but it LOOKS better!!
The thing is, she isn’t alone. I bought a TV last year. During the time researching it, I would see similar opinions to my mom’s. Peopel would post pictures of their TV setup, asking if the size was OK, or if it should be higher, and the responses would be similar, telling the person to run cables through the wall, or get smaller stands or other complaints. It made me realize that many people care about those kind of things, and it will drive their purchase decisions.
All the Apple Vision Pro has to do is show them that you can have a TV, with no bezel, make it any size and position you want, you get rid of glare from the sun, and it has no visible cables. That alone is enough for people to want to buy it. It isn’t there today, but it will get there in the somewhat near future.
deleted by creator
Given that most non-enthusiasts I know would consider 500 € to be way too expensive for a TV, prices will have to come down a lot for that use case. Especially for families where everyone would need one.
Apple is definitely no contender in that market; their prices would have to go down by 90-95 % to interest the mass market and they’re not interested in that kind of thin margin market segment.
The Quest is already pretty cheap. iPhones are not. The standard Vision will be half the price and people will buy it in droves with the right software.
I dunno. People said the same about 3DTV and that never took off even when more affordable models became available.
I don’t think VR/AR has a killer app so far. There are some neat things it can do but nothing that makes people chomp at the bit to get their hands hands on it.
VR gaming is nice but most gamers don’t consider it sufficiently better to a regular monitor to buy a VR rig. For screen replacement it gets worse because the constraints are even harder - smaller budgets, weaker host hardware, lower expectations that are already exceeded by traditional screens.
Apple might pull it off but they have one hell of a battle ahead of them.
I can’t argue with much of that, although I will dispute the 3DTV aspect, no one I knew gave a monkey’s about that and didn’t expect it to take off, mainly as we had experienced it in the cinema and saw little benefit. VR is a totally different kettle of fish in comparison, it reimagines interaction completely, and isn’t sitting in front of a static screen as per ‘3D’. HDTVs took off, then encouraged upgrades with 1080 and now 4K/HDR. Phones went from £30 to £1,000+.
VR makes Beat Saber a console seller (if I regard the Quest as one). Lack of controllers and games makes the Vision concept a difficult sell as it stands.
I find it to be fairly similar. Most people I know either don’t care about VR or bought/borrowed a rig and ended up not using it much. It’s typically seen as kinda nice but not nice enough to really bother with.
In terms of interactivity, most see VR as little better than the Kinect – and that didn’t exactly take the world by storm, robotics labs excluded.
I think most people are actually happy with their regular screens so it’s hard to sell them on something that does more.
Wasn’t Kinect the quickest selling item one Christmas?
It’s definitely a huge step up and sales are strong in gaming circles, wider adoption is going to need something else though, perhaps glasses-size headsets and long usability. I think those who do use it are impressed, at least those I know.
Once there is enough demand, some Chinese or Thai OEM - maybe the same one that manufactures these for Apple or Samsung - will sell them for a couple hundred Euro.
The problem is that demand will have to be generated first – something HTC, Google, Microsoft, and Meta have failed at so far.
So far it seems that VR/AR is behaving somewhat similarly to 3DTV: Some enthusiasts are really into it and a market exists but most people aren’t excited enough to spend any extra money on it. They’ll have to find a way around that if they really want mass-market adoption.
Apple now is extracting maximum value from its most loyal customers.
Huh. And here I am, like some poor person, with no AR headset and $3500 extra in my bank account. I feel like such an idiot.
You’re definitely not like a poor person if you’ve got $3,500 lol
In this economy, most people don’t even have that in their account. I guess that’s part of the status bit… If you have these, who can say your not doing well?
In reality, it just makes them look like the assholes they very likely are.
A 4K USD electronic device that’s what they bought…if they needed its features not sure but… that’s what they bought.
needed its* features
People walking around with them on is basically just their wait of saying “look at my butthole!”
Remember the Google Glassholes?
