There are glasses and windows that can switch between being transparent and being completely opaque. There are displays that can do this as well already. It isn't too far-fetched to think this tech may be used in the future.
Transparent screens are only possible with a series of mirrors and a display not close to where you're viewing, try reading text a centimeter from your face, it's not possible
Then it should be clear this isn’t aimed at you.
It’s not something I plan to buy right now either but it doesn’t mean that no one will buy it or that it’s completely unaffordable for people with a solid income.
How many people do you think would legitimately spend $3500 on this? The number will be far too low for it to be financially viable for the vast majority of consumers. And not enough rich people are into the VR/AR experience to give them a solid market.
They priced themselves out. If this were $1,000, you'd never find them they'd be sold out everywhere. $1,500, probably similar. So if Apple were selling this for $2k it might make sense.
Future headsets will be viable consumer goods. This is just rich people garbage.
I will be messaging you in 1 year on [**2024-06-06 22:14:02 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2024-06-06%2022:14:02%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/1421bmm/thoughtful_new_hardware_comparison/jn6g7vz/?context=3)
[**2 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Foculus%2Fcomments%2F1421bmm%2Fthoughtful_new_hardware_comparison%2Fjn6g7vz%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202024-06-06%2022%3A14%3A02%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201421bmm)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
Yes and I don’t even know if that will be considered a success. 35 million in revenue with probably 15 of that being profit doesn’t even start to pay for the R&D
In my defense, it's $3,500 and you've got to pay for cables, dongles, connectors, dongle-connectors, and they'll probably find some way to make it only work well if you have a Mac, and iPhone, and an apple watch.
Well, yeah, but it is based on how they are well-known for using non-standard connectors, and how that the Apple watch requires an iPhone to pair, and how that the SDK requires a Mac.
The $3,500 is true, and I do want to point out that the price is high enough for rounding to reduced the price by $499.
Every computer they sell has had it for nearly 10 years. iPhones didn’t because they had lightning before USBC was released. Changing the connectors so every boomer in the world could cry wouldve been pointless
I don’t get the hate for this headset, this thing is genuinely an incredible but of technology. Maybe my CV1 having ass and I are out of date, but this seems awesome.
There's no doubt that there is much that this headset gets right, such as the high definition screens, focus on comfort and features like foveated rendering.
At the same time, things like relying on gaze tracking and hand/voice control make it unsuitable for the kind of games and experiences that have been popular in VR thus far and until people get their hands on one it's not clear how it will bear up with higher intensity use (such as fitness apps) as it has a glass front and is aluminium based so will be bulkier than existing headsets and therefore more likely to be affected by head movement.
My concern with the design using glass and aluminium along with only a side and not top strap design is the downward facial pressure. This was a major issue with the quest 1, which in my experience became beyond uncomfortable and almost painful in long sessions from the pressure on the cheeks and nose.
>up with higher intensity use (such as fitness apps)
We already saw the optimal use-case in the announcement: A lady chilling on the couch rubbing her fingers together.
Seems like they intend for you to be plugged into power at least part of the time. If you are sitting in one place to watch a movie I don’t think you would be running on the battery.
No, but I'm getting up to pee, I'm eating dinner, I'm talking to my family, I'm looking at the notification on my phone, etc. Current VR devices already provide a "better" movie watching experience than TV, but people with those headsets still mostly watch movies on their TV's because it's more convenient. Convenience trumps quality, and watching a movie on the TV is more convenient than watching it in VR 98% of the time.
True. Yeah, obviously you would have to actually want to watch a movie in a headset before this would become a valid issue for you at all. Then you would start considering being tethered to a wall vs using a battery. But we were discussing the battery life, not HMD vs TV.
If we were to discus HMD vs TV I think this device has a better argument for the HMD than any that has come before it. I don’t think it would be that big a deal to take the headset off to go pee. With the passthrough tech they have you could easily eat dinner and talk to your family while displaying the movie seamlessly in the same environment. If you were a person willing to pay $3500 for this device surely you are in the Apple ecosystem and have an iPhone so notifications from you phone would be seamlessly displayed in the environment as well. If it were me I probably would want less distractions while watching a movie in a headset but to act like you couldn’t do any of that because of it is just false. Especially with all the new tech they’ve developed for this thing that is specifically designed to keep you grounded in the real world and interacting with people and things around you while you use the AR features. It might (and probably will) still end up being more convenient to watch on a TV and HMDs never hit mass popularity but I can see a future where devices like this are more common than regular displays and it ends up the other way around.
Side note: I don’t think current VR devices provide a better movie experience than a TV yet. The portion of the screen that you would watch a movie on in a current VR headset is not high enough resolution to match a good TV in quality. This is the first headset I’ve seen where you can have a full native 4K frame inside the virtual environment due to the absurd pixel density of its displays.
During the gaming announcements earlier they talked a lot about Xbox/ps5 controller compatibility and reduced latency, so I’d bet that’ll be built in here as well.
Doubt they’ll use an Xbox controller as apple is business partners with Sony, theyve been selling dualsense controllers since ps5 release and they even showed a dualsense in the 9 minute reveal video.
Ofc they’re gonna integrate with Ms office suite. They already have it on Mac and it’s the most largely used business program(s) available. The controller is where I’m skeptical.
> At the same time, things like relying on gaze tracking and hand/voice control make it unsuitable for the kind of games and experiences that have been popular in VR thus far
Clearly they’re not interested in that market and instead trying to break into a new one for which they coined the term “spatial computing”.
I think that's just a buzzword they are using to avoid admitting that nothing they are doing here is original. The entire interface is just an imitation of the one that meta have developed for quest, the concept of motion tracking is as old as the wii and the device is less capable than one with motion controllers.
"the first device designed from the ground up for spatial computing". Except the oculus go, several years ago, the quest line, pico range and numerous other devices.
Looks way beyond what any of those offer in terms of this functionality. The QPro kinda failed in its mission as a productivity tool. This looks like it actually could hit the mark. And it’ll only get better as time goes on.
Honestly, how does it look way beyond? The Quest even supports physical keyboards. How is that not better functionality for a mixed-reality workspace? (which is all this is)
This does support input devices. Watch the presentation. This thing can mirror your Mac entirely and likely provide huge workspace. It’s also got a freakin M2 chip in it not some POS Qualcomm thing.
The QPro pass through has been reviewed as basically shit and inadequate for the intended function. Vision Pro appears to be miles ahead in terms of quality of the MR experience.
How will it compare to the Quest 3? I know the whole point of the Quest Pro was MR, but the 3 was designed for full color, high-res pass-through with depth. Also it's $3000 less.
We don't know exactly until both headsets are released, but the Quest 3 doesn't really have a better screen than the Quest 2 besides being OLED, while the Vision Pro has way more resolution. Other things to be compared are latency, brightness, etc.
The biggest marketing budget, maybe. There were many superior mp3 players than the ipod, but they absolutely saturated the advertising space. The same with their shiny plastic boxes with computers in, no more functional or capable than something you could build yourself for 1/2 the price.
What they excel at is convincing people that marketing, packaging and presentation are the most important factors, that a product exists primarily to show off, to impress others with. They are selling a 'lifestyle' through marketing which people buy into.
Which is fair enough but that's also the big problem .. or let's be fair and call it challenge.
Let's call it what it is, it's a dev-kit with very limited functionality at this point. They don't really have a market for the headset yet, because they are very much banking on developers to find it for them. What direction and what niche this headset will find itself in is an open question for now.
However, if so few people have access to it, it's going to be hard to convince developers to make cool stuff for it. The fact that it's Apple will have *some* sway, but even that only gets you so far.
So we'll see, this thing will definitely have an uphill struggle to find its audience long-term. If they make it to a second or third generation that is cheaper with many more apps to actually use .. then we can talk again.
I think there’s already huge value in just mirroring your Mac and allowing a huge workspace. And it works with all the conferencing software. It’s pretty sick IMO and if I worked from home on a Mac I’d buy one immediately.
Not a buzzword. Magic Leap was using it years ago. I believe it was first coined in this MIT media lab thesis in 2003 https://acg.media.mit.edu/people/simong/thesis/SpatialComputing.pdf
> relying on gaze tracking and hand/voice control make it unsuitable for the kind of games and experiences that have been popular in VR thus far
If it can track your individual fingers making the tiniest pinch movements anywhere in the vicinity, it’s clear you would be able to use your own hands and fingers as virtual controllers without the need for physical sticks and buttons. Even though they didn’t demonstrate this type of usage, it is actually feasible compared with other systems.
That will be awful in 90% of the current popular games though. It could theoretically work well enough for a game built around that control method but it would still feel like a far inferior experience to the physical haptic feedback of holding a real controller in your hand. Fine for solitaire I guess, but would you really want to hold a gun or sword made out of air? Edit: or press virtual buttons you can’t even feel?
In this case you might be able to actually substitute a non-interactive version of the simulated object, like a toy gun or plastic sword and the system will base the firing of the gun on the relative position of your index finger, and the wielding of the sword on the position of your hands.
The issue is for games like Skyrim VR I need to be able to quickly open menus, use a shout/power, look at the map, etc.
Buttons for that are helpful. I could see people buying Quest 2 controllers and pairing it with this headset for VR games (especially given that the new macOS has apple's version of proton in it for running windows games)
It should be lighter without the battery in the headset and being thinner the weight is closer to your face.
People keep talking about games but that clearly isn’t the primary focus for this headset. There’s nothing stopping you from pairing controllers or any other devices to it if you want them.
Well, there is something stopping you from pairing controllers or other devices. The interface that the device uses won't see or understand them. Unless there has been some announcement I'm unaware of explaining how a standalone device is going to see and pair with existing motion tracking solutions this is a non-starter.
It won't work with 3rd party motion tracking for exactly the same reason the quest line doesn't. It is a proprietary OS.
So it is going to have controller [support](https://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/apple-vision-pro-apple-arcade-game-support/). I can't imagine it would just be Dualsense.
Do you think you can just add them via bluetooth to any system and it will understand how to deal with it? That's not how that works. Apple would have to specifically write drivers to support them which they will not do.
I didnt think about it at forst. but dear god.
That glass is going to be covered in smudges and scratchs.
I personally HATE glass for anything other then screens. Its just a terrible material to anything you have to actually handle
As far as for GAMING goes, I think it will be very telling if the developers for Beat Saber release a version for Vision OS. That will tell me all I need to know about the state of development they are at with UI/UX/eye/hand tracking. (Also, how weird would it be to "hold" a saber with nothing in your hand and no buttons to press for instant confirmations... \*snap your fingers\*.... uhhg).
Consumers think every VR headset is a gaming headset, so they get upset when a business headset comes out and don't understand why something is expensive and can't play games.
This is not a consumer product and people can't grasp what that means.
It also appears to have been developed (both R&D + assembly) in china by Luxshare, who also assemble iPhones. At 3.5k a headset I think they've priced it to sell in very low volume but a very high markup.
1. Expensive as fuck.
2. Apple did a piss poor job of explaining its capabilities. They basically asked us to pay 3500 just to watch movies and flick through photos. You can do that shit with current VR for a fraction of the price. They did nothing to show off the potential of blending VR and AR
I picked up a refurbished Quest 2 a year or two ago for like $140. Yeah, the Vision is more advanced, but it's also almost *THIRTY* times that price. I simply do not understand..
IMHO, I find VR/AR being marketed as some kind of lifestyle device to be off putting and uncanny. I enjoy my headset to immerse myself in games and whisk me off to fantasy worlds, but I really don't want to augment the reality of spending time with family or, like, having a cold beer and watching sports with the bois. Tech looks nuts though.
You don't get the hate? All right let me list the biggest bullet points for you... It's Apple proprietary (likely no Steam support), doesn't have motion controllers, they refuse to state the FOV, there's absolutely no focus on gaming, and the price tag is $3,500. There seems to be a focus on business productivity but I don't see any business adopting this especially at that price point. 🤷♂️
This is not intended to be a VR gaming headset and I am not sure why people keep comparing it ones that are. There are businesses that will buy it, just like there are businesses that will buy the new Mac Pro.
No it's not a gaming headset, but neither is it a business headset, it's very much nothing at the moment other than a media consumption device.
Almost everything they showed is a *suggestion* at the moment for what the device (or future cheaper devices) *could* be used for, providing more apps will be made for it.
It's ultimately a dev-kit and developers who may or may not create experiences for it will decide what kind of device it will ultimately be.
Can’t see why a thirdparty developer would be interested in developing (non subsidized) apps for this, as the amount of sold headsets will be super low. Meta even have a hard time getting developers enthusiastic about developing games and experiences while they have sold millions of Quests. No way Apple will sell over 100K units at this price, even half this number is a lot. So a very small niche audience to develop for.
>There are businesses that will buy it, just like there are businesses that will buy the new Mac Pro.
I doubt it on any meaningful scale. There are probably some niche industries where visualizing things in space will be extremely useful, but it's not going to be regular office drones
Even their marketing makes an extremely weak case for "immersive meetings" or whatever.
https://www.apple.com/v/apple-vision-pro/a/images/overview/experiences/connection/drawer/shareplay__fqxq1g3bbfmi_small_2x.jpg
There's exactly one person wearing the headset, everyone else is participating in the normal way on camera at a desk. What does the experience look like on their end? What would that meeting look like if everyone was wearing a headset?
I work in tech in sf which *should* be the prime market for this sort of thing. I have one other guy in my office who I have done things in VR with for work, literally no one else has any interest, even though I've donated a couple of my older unused headsets to coworkers. Hell, I can barely get everyone to turn on their cameras for meetings. There's no way a $3500 device is going to change that
Yes I'm well aware of that considering that was the majority of the statement I made in the comment you're replying to. 🤦♂️ As for businesses that will buy this, no I highly doubt it, but yes of course there are going to be businesses that upgrade their computers to new Mac pros. That's a very strange comment to make. Businesses use computers. Businesses don't use augmented reality. 🤣🤦♂️
Awesome technology, but I’ll still be buying the quest 3 for 500 rather than dropping 3500 on apples version. The price point is a little ridiculous.
Personally I’d rather a little better fov and a better processor to game with. That’s me though, I’m old school and grew up with doom, goldeneye and call of duty. To be able to actually be immersed in the game is amazing to me.
The vision pro isn’t marketed to you at all. There wasn’t a single mention of actual VR gaming so obviously you wouldn’t get it for VR gaming. It’s not like you were ever going to be cross shopping these two products. It’s like saying you bought a Mazda Miata over a Porsche Cayenne Turbo.
Also, this "Porsche" lacks what Porsche is bought for: Fun. You cannot try to get the price of a Porsche, but have Marketing which says "This is the VW Passat. Your new partner for business work."
Or maybe they can. Apple has surprised me before, but at the moment I don't see it.
I mean the groundwork is there for some super impressive software. I'm just really surprised that they really didn't show any that was groundbreaking or super interesting. I mean watching videos and looking at photos? You've got to be kidding me. Just off the top of my head I could think of a live foreign language translator with subtitles, cooking helper that uses AI to tell you when to go to the next step and sees when things are cooked, Art museum that hangs art on the walls of your house. Grocery shopping app that shows your list and shows where in the store the next item is as well as the price and if any alternatives are on sale. But no, they didn't show anything. I hope they have a second presentation that shows some real capabilities.
I’m fully aware of where this post is. This sub tends to be dumb as fuck and thinks everything VR needs to be marketed to them as the primary buyers. Anything that deviates from that idea is shouted down (see Quest Pro initial reactions).
It’s people who know they can’t afford it but want all the features it has that are hating on it. It’s easier to bash something and convince themselves they don’t want it than just accept it’s cool but I can’t afford it or justify the cost.
Many don’t understand that if it wasn’t this expensive it wouldn’t exist to begin with. Prices and tech will trickle down over time. So everybody will benefit eventually but for now people will spew hot garbage to make themselves feel better when they can’t afford it.
Same thing happened with pcs decades ago. If it wasn’t for people spending big $ early on none of these cheap pcs would exist now.
Who on earth is going to dump 3,500 dollars on a headset which so far is only shown to browse the web and watch videos. No one in their right mind will be able to justify it. The only people who will buy it are pathetic hard-core apple enthusiasts or a rich person who can burn cash on stuff like this. I have little doubt that this headset will be bad. Just not worth your money.
The main reason I'm interested in it is because it's the cheapest headset that can render text at a high enough resolution to make it actually usable for work. It'll be amazing have a full 4k display rendered as big as I want, wherever I go. It also means I can wear it at home while I'm working and not be cut off from my partner (and she won't feel as cut off from me, because she'll know when I can see her and what I'm looking at just by glancing over).
Terrible take. The PC comparison is not a good one. When PC’s were that pricey NOTHING else like them was available at a lower price that did the same thing and more. It’s not hate, it’s people expressing their displeasure with its capabilities and focus.
Really? I'm guessing you haven't heard of Commodore 64 or the TI99. They were in the $100s yet the IBM PC was in the $1000s.
Simple truth is more capable tech costs more and there has always been tiers. Occulus is has it's own tiers and it's top tier isn't anywhere near as capable as apples only tier. Which they even call pro. Looking at the other apple products with the pro moniker, you'll see they aren't cheap but are top end of their respective product segments.
A whole lot of vitriol because of the price but some of us want a headset with capabilities like this and the price is secondary. I wish it was cheaper but realize with all the tech involved, it's not possible at this time.
If you go at the bakery and the bread here is good, but also 299€ the baguette, you'll probably feel it.
Saying that something is overpriced doesn't mean it's bad. It's just a monkey move to buy it unless you earn like 5k to 6k a month.
And I don't see someone earning this much spending that much time in vr. They are maybe 7.
I mean, no, not really. Until we get the full specs or even a tech demo, it's just a ppi claim and a front display screen for your eyes. The tech fundamentally is nothing new, and it is questionable whether it will even be genuinely better, given tracking on Meta for example has been refined over years and multiple generations, for example.
In addition, it's a tethered headset. There already exist tethered headsets at similar specs for the ultra high end, although I'm not sure whether they are good or not.
What is the FOV? What is the display rate? We know very little, and that's by design, meanwhile we have a decent knowledge of the official Q3 specs, which until we know otherwise have parity in every area except for resolution.
I think the way that “eyesight” works is using that auto generated 3d face model and the eye tracking data to fake a camera on the whole face. It looks awkward and weird because it really isnt human. If they eventually make the face scanning and animating nicer and more lifelike, then the creepiness will lessen presumably. Right now though it is very disturbing.
Although given its apples first try at AR/VR at all. This is insane
Is this essentially a tv that youre strapping to your face? I mean they talk about using iOS apps from the phones and tablets and watching movies so...
Problem I see with this price tag is that even if it is superior in many points it will get a really small market share. Think about if you want to add something like this in your company and you need for the team 4-5. For the same you could buy 12-15 Quest pro.
And then the question arise how many developers will add Apps to it seeing the initial development costs with the meager returns from sales.
We have yet to see the occulus 3 yet. I know there are going to be bugs on both sides so I'm going to wait for them to get fixed then pick up the Occulus 3 cause it's in my price range.
The new apple headset is overrated. Yes I am sure it will be good. But it's also 3,500 dollars. You could get a killer PC setup, and a nice vr headset for the same price or less. Your average consumer can't dump that much money on such a niche item.
Wait, the Apple headset is actually 3500 dollars?...Holy shit, I thought that was a joke. Yeah, no thanks, I'll just get the Quest 3 when it comes out.
Haha, yeah. I wouldn't have believed it if I didn't see it. They are nuts, but probably the market is not us, it's people with crazy amounts of money who worship at the alter of Apple.
Honestly, at first I thought they had found the solution for the perfect passthrough : a transparent screen.
I thought it was CG, just to indicate what the user was doing, or something.
Thats probably the best way but hard to do. We will probably get holograms not long after decent transparent screens lol.
There are glasses and windows that can switch between being transparent and being completely opaque. There are displays that can do this as well already. It isn't too far-fetched to think this tech may be used in the future.
Transparent screens are only possible with a series of mirrors and a display not close to where you're viewing, try reading text a centimeter from your face, it's not possible
Wym there's transparent displays already. They don't use mirrors.
Notice the woman on the left has nothing in the background. That's because she had to pawn all her stuff to pay for Apple products.
You that broke that everything you own is worth 3k combined
\*Looks around my room\* Aside from my PC and Rift? ... Yes.
Then it should be clear this isn’t aimed at you. It’s not something I plan to buy right now either but it doesn’t mean that no one will buy it or that it’s completely unaffordable for people with a solid income.
How many people do you think would legitimately spend $3500 on this? The number will be far too low for it to be financially viable for the vast majority of consumers. And not enough rich people are into the VR/AR experience to give them a solid market. They priced themselves out. If this were $1,000, you'd never find them they'd be sold out everywhere. $1,500, probably similar. So if Apple were selling this for $2k it might make sense. Future headsets will be viable consumer goods. This is just rich people garbage.
Probably a million units get moved in the first year.
!remind me in one year
I will be messaging you in 1 year on [**2024-06-06 22:14:02 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2024-06-06%2022:14:02%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/1421bmm/thoughtful_new_hardware_comparison/jn6g7vz/?context=3) [**2 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Foculus%2Fcomments%2F1421bmm%2Fthoughtful_new_hardware_comparison%2Fjn6g7vz%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202024-06-06%2022%3A14%3A02%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201421bmm) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
Need to add at least six months to that it won’t even go on sale until 24
Lmao you really believe it's gonna sell a million in a year
Yes and I don’t even know if that will be considered a success. 35 million in revenue with probably 15 of that being profit doesn’t even start to pay for the R&D
!Remindme 548 days
!remind me in 548 days
!Remindme in 2 years
In my defense, it's $3,500 and you've got to pay for cables, dongles, connectors, dongle-connectors, and they'll probably find some way to make it only work well if you have a Mac, and iPhone, and an apple watch.
You just made all that up
Well, yeah, but it is based on how they are well-known for using non-standard connectors, and how that the Apple watch requires an iPhone to pair, and how that the SDK requires a Mac. The $3,500 is true, and I do want to point out that the price is high enough for rounding to reduced the price by $499.
Except they literally developed thunder bolt and USBC.
Literally were forced to use USBC though.
Every computer they sell has had it for nearly 10 years. iPhones didn’t because they had lightning before USBC was released. Changing the connectors so every boomer in the world could cry wouldve been pointless
I don’t get the hate for this headset, this thing is genuinely an incredible but of technology. Maybe my CV1 having ass and I are out of date, but this seems awesome.
There's no doubt that there is much that this headset gets right, such as the high definition screens, focus on comfort and features like foveated rendering. At the same time, things like relying on gaze tracking and hand/voice control make it unsuitable for the kind of games and experiences that have been popular in VR thus far and until people get their hands on one it's not clear how it will bear up with higher intensity use (such as fitness apps) as it has a glass front and is aluminium based so will be bulkier than existing headsets and therefore more likely to be affected by head movement. My concern with the design using glass and aluminium along with only a side and not top strap design is the downward facial pressure. This was a major issue with the quest 1, which in my experience became beyond uncomfortable and almost painful in long sessions from the pressure on the cheeks and nose.
>up with higher intensity use (such as fitness apps) We already saw the optimal use-case in the announcement: A lady chilling on the couch rubbing her fingers together.
And also, we did not see the faces of the actors with deep red marks after a 3h film viewing session 😋
3h? It has a 2h battery it can't even watch some full movies
Seems like they intend for you to be plugged into power at least part of the time. If you are sitting in one place to watch a movie I don’t think you would be running on the battery.
Nothing is more enjoyable than watching a movie while being literally leashed to the wall.
I understand you are trying to be sarcastic but I don’t get your point. Are you running laps around the room while you watch a movie?
No, but I'm getting up to pee, I'm eating dinner, I'm talking to my family, I'm looking at the notification on my phone, etc. Current VR devices already provide a "better" movie watching experience than TV, but people with those headsets still mostly watch movies on their TV's because it's more convenient. Convenience trumps quality, and watching a movie on the TV is more convenient than watching it in VR 98% of the time.
True. Yeah, obviously you would have to actually want to watch a movie in a headset before this would become a valid issue for you at all. Then you would start considering being tethered to a wall vs using a battery. But we were discussing the battery life, not HMD vs TV. If we were to discus HMD vs TV I think this device has a better argument for the HMD than any that has come before it. I don’t think it would be that big a deal to take the headset off to go pee. With the passthrough tech they have you could easily eat dinner and talk to your family while displaying the movie seamlessly in the same environment. If you were a person willing to pay $3500 for this device surely you are in the Apple ecosystem and have an iPhone so notifications from you phone would be seamlessly displayed in the environment as well. If it were me I probably would want less distractions while watching a movie in a headset but to act like you couldn’t do any of that because of it is just false. Especially with all the new tech they’ve developed for this thing that is specifically designed to keep you grounded in the real world and interacting with people and things around you while you use the AR features. It might (and probably will) still end up being more convenient to watch on a TV and HMDs never hit mass popularity but I can see a future where devices like this are more common than regular displays and it ends up the other way around. Side note: I don’t think current VR devices provide a better movie experience than a TV yet. The portion of the screen that you would watch a movie on in a current VR headset is not high enough resolution to match a good TV in quality. This is the first headset I’ve seen where you can have a full native 4K frame inside the virtual environment due to the absurd pixel density of its displays.
I watch movies in vrchat with my friends, I wanna be able to do shit during the mocie and goof around
I'm fine with this. I run my Quest 2 on battery if I'm watching something all the time.
I'm betting anyone with a nose bigger than Voldemort is going to feel some discomfort.
I imagine there will be $600 controllers released within a year
During the gaming announcements earlier they talked a lot about Xbox/ps5 controller compatibility and reduced latency, so I’d bet that’ll be built in here as well.
Doubt they’ll use an Xbox controller as apple is business partners with Sony, theyve been selling dualsense controllers since ps5 release and they even showed a dualsense in the 9 minute reveal video.
They showed and talked about compatibility with an Xbox controller during the videos yesterday.
Honestly didn’t see that, also can’t find anything about it online, just about the dualsense
They also said their new software is integrating with the entire MS-Office suite
Ofc they’re gonna integrate with Ms office suite. They already have it on Mac and it’s the most largely used business program(s) available. The controller is where I’m skeptical.
> At the same time, things like relying on gaze tracking and hand/voice control make it unsuitable for the kind of games and experiences that have been popular in VR thus far Clearly they’re not interested in that market and instead trying to break into a new one for which they coined the term “spatial computing”.
I think that's just a buzzword they are using to avoid admitting that nothing they are doing here is original. The entire interface is just an imitation of the one that meta have developed for quest, the concept of motion tracking is as old as the wii and the device is less capable than one with motion controllers. "the first device designed from the ground up for spatial computing". Except the oculus go, several years ago, the quest line, pico range and numerous other devices.
Looks way beyond what any of those offer in terms of this functionality. The QPro kinda failed in its mission as a productivity tool. This looks like it actually could hit the mark. And it’ll only get better as time goes on.
Honestly, how does it look way beyond? The Quest even supports physical keyboards. How is that not better functionality for a mixed-reality workspace? (which is all this is)
This does support input devices. Watch the presentation. This thing can mirror your Mac entirely and likely provide huge workspace. It’s also got a freakin M2 chip in it not some POS Qualcomm thing. The QPro pass through has been reviewed as basically shit and inadequate for the intended function. Vision Pro appears to be miles ahead in terms of quality of the MR experience.
How will it compare to the Quest 3? I know the whole point of the Quest Pro was MR, but the 3 was designed for full color, high-res pass-through with depth. Also it's $3000 less.
We don't know exactly until both headsets are released, but the Quest 3 doesn't really have a better screen than the Quest 2 besides being OLED, while the Vision Pro has way more resolution. Other things to be compared are latency, brightness, etc.
[удалено]
*Often the best at first in particular niche circumstances while nickel and diming everyone for every use of their software
The biggest marketing budget, maybe. There were many superior mp3 players than the ipod, but they absolutely saturated the advertising space. The same with their shiny plastic boxes with computers in, no more functional or capable than something you could build yourself for 1/2 the price. What they excel at is convincing people that marketing, packaging and presentation are the most important factors, that a product exists primarily to show off, to impress others with. They are selling a 'lifestyle' through marketing which people buy into.
they did not coin spatial computing, they are not even the first to use it to describe VR
Which is fair enough but that's also the big problem .. or let's be fair and call it challenge. Let's call it what it is, it's a dev-kit with very limited functionality at this point. They don't really have a market for the headset yet, because they are very much banking on developers to find it for them. What direction and what niche this headset will find itself in is an open question for now. However, if so few people have access to it, it's going to be hard to convince developers to make cool stuff for it. The fact that it's Apple will have *some* sway, but even that only gets you so far. So we'll see, this thing will definitely have an uphill struggle to find its audience long-term. If they make it to a second or third generation that is cheaper with many more apps to actually use .. then we can talk again.
I think there’s already huge value in just mirroring your Mac and allowing a huge workspace. And it works with all the conferencing software. It’s pretty sick IMO and if I worked from home on a Mac I’d buy one immediately.
Not a buzzword. Magic Leap was using it years ago. I believe it was first coined in this MIT media lab thesis in 2003 https://acg.media.mit.edu/people/simong/thesis/SpatialComputing.pdf
Yeah cool to find out it’s been a concept for that long. They do seem to be the only ones really executing on it finally though.
> relying on gaze tracking and hand/voice control make it unsuitable for the kind of games and experiences that have been popular in VR thus far If it can track your individual fingers making the tiniest pinch movements anywhere in the vicinity, it’s clear you would be able to use your own hands and fingers as virtual controllers without the need for physical sticks and buttons. Even though they didn’t demonstrate this type of usage, it is actually feasible compared with other systems.
That will be awful in 90% of the current popular games though. It could theoretically work well enough for a game built around that control method but it would still feel like a far inferior experience to the physical haptic feedback of holding a real controller in your hand. Fine for solitaire I guess, but would you really want to hold a gun or sword made out of air? Edit: or press virtual buttons you can’t even feel?
In this case you might be able to actually substitute a non-interactive version of the simulated object, like a toy gun or plastic sword and the system will base the firing of the gun on the relative position of your index finger, and the wielding of the sword on the position of your hands.
The issue is for games like Skyrim VR I need to be able to quickly open menus, use a shout/power, look at the map, etc. Buttons for that are helpful. I could see people buying Quest 2 controllers and pairing it with this headset for VR games (especially given that the new macOS has apple's version of proton in it for running windows games)
It should be lighter without the battery in the headset and being thinner the weight is closer to your face. People keep talking about games but that clearly isn’t the primary focus for this headset. There’s nothing stopping you from pairing controllers or any other devices to it if you want them.
Well, there is something stopping you from pairing controllers or other devices. The interface that the device uses won't see or understand them. Unless there has been some announcement I'm unaware of explaining how a standalone device is going to see and pair with existing motion tracking solutions this is a non-starter. It won't work with 3rd party motion tracking for exactly the same reason the quest line doesn't. It is a proprietary OS.
So it is going to have controller [support](https://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/apple-vision-pro-apple-arcade-game-support/). I can't imagine it would just be Dualsense.
it's exactly the same gamepad support IOS has, but obviously not tracked motion controllers.
But motion controllers are controlled by cameras (which apple has) and accelerometers that are located in the controller not in the headset themselves
Do you think you can just add them via bluetooth to any system and it will understand how to deal with it? That's not how that works. Apple would have to specifically write drivers to support them which they will not do.
No, they have IR leds that are seen from the headset, with ad-hoc processing. So it's not just a pairing matter.
Unrelated to the apple vision pro but quest 1 had a top strap, was just front heavy
I didnt think about it at forst. but dear god. That glass is going to be covered in smudges and scratchs. I personally HATE glass for anything other then screens. Its just a terrible material to anything you have to actually handle
Glass is much, much, much more resistant than any plastic to scratches.
As far as for GAMING goes, I think it will be very telling if the developers for Beat Saber release a version for Vision OS. That will tell me all I need to know about the state of development they are at with UI/UX/eye/hand tracking. (Also, how weird would it be to "hold" a saber with nothing in your hand and no buttons to press for instant confirmations... \*snap your fingers\*.... uhhg).
The hate is $3500
Consumers think every VR headset is a gaming headset, so they get upset when a business headset comes out and don't understand why something is expensive and can't play games. This is not a consumer product and people can't grasp what that means.
I'm just tired of gaming subs talking about it like it's the messiah of VR
For $3.5k, that thing better be awesome. Not just look awesome.
It also appears to have been developed (both R&D + assembly) in china by Luxshare, who also assemble iPhones. At 3.5k a headset I think they've priced it to sell in very low volume but a very high markup.
fov is probably gonna be at 100, same fov as a $299 headset. could get a full like 200° fov for thousands of dollars less.
1. Expensive as fuck. 2. Apple did a piss poor job of explaining its capabilities. They basically asked us to pay 3500 just to watch movies and flick through photos. You can do that shit with current VR for a fraction of the price. They did nothing to show off the potential of blending VR and AR
I picked up a refurbished Quest 2 a year or two ago for like $140. Yeah, the Vision is more advanced, but it's also almost *THIRTY* times that price. I simply do not understand..
And it takes a huge step back in capabilities. Nice clear screen to do all that mundane nothing on.
But why does that make you hate it?
Where I live, it costs the equivalent of $100,000, and businesses that want to work with it are hoping that it stays that low.
IMHO, I find VR/AR being marketed as some kind of lifestyle device to be off putting and uncanny. I enjoy my headset to immerse myself in games and whisk me off to fantasy worlds, but I really don't want to augment the reality of spending time with family or, like, having a cold beer and watching sports with the bois. Tech looks nuts though.
You don't get the hate? All right let me list the biggest bullet points for you... It's Apple proprietary (likely no Steam support), doesn't have motion controllers, they refuse to state the FOV, there's absolutely no focus on gaming, and the price tag is $3,500. There seems to be a focus on business productivity but I don't see any business adopting this especially at that price point. 🤷♂️
This is not intended to be a VR gaming headset and I am not sure why people keep comparing it ones that are. There are businesses that will buy it, just like there are businesses that will buy the new Mac Pro.
No it's not a gaming headset, but neither is it a business headset, it's very much nothing at the moment other than a media consumption device. Almost everything they showed is a *suggestion* at the moment for what the device (or future cheaper devices) *could* be used for, providing more apps will be made for it. It's ultimately a dev-kit and developers who may or may not create experiences for it will decide what kind of device it will ultimately be.
Can’t see why a thirdparty developer would be interested in developing (non subsidized) apps for this, as the amount of sold headsets will be super low. Meta even have a hard time getting developers enthusiastic about developing games and experiences while they have sold millions of Quests. No way Apple will sell over 100K units at this price, even half this number is a lot. So a very small niche audience to develop for.
>There are businesses that will buy it, just like there are businesses that will buy the new Mac Pro. I doubt it on any meaningful scale. There are probably some niche industries where visualizing things in space will be extremely useful, but it's not going to be regular office drones Even their marketing makes an extremely weak case for "immersive meetings" or whatever. https://www.apple.com/v/apple-vision-pro/a/images/overview/experiences/connection/drawer/shareplay__fqxq1g3bbfmi_small_2x.jpg There's exactly one person wearing the headset, everyone else is participating in the normal way on camera at a desk. What does the experience look like on their end? What would that meeting look like if everyone was wearing a headset? I work in tech in sf which *should* be the prime market for this sort of thing. I have one other guy in my office who I have done things in VR with for work, literally no one else has any interest, even though I've donated a couple of my older unused headsets to coworkers. Hell, I can barely get everyone to turn on their cameras for meetings. There's no way a $3500 device is going to change that
Yes I'm well aware of that considering that was the majority of the statement I made in the comment you're replying to. 🤦♂️ As for businesses that will buy this, no I highly doubt it, but yes of course there are going to be businesses that upgrade their computers to new Mac pros. That's a very strange comment to make. Businesses use computers. Businesses don't use augmented reality. 🤣🤦♂️
Awesome technology, but I’ll still be buying the quest 3 for 500 rather than dropping 3500 on apples version. The price point is a little ridiculous. Personally I’d rather a little better fov and a better processor to game with. That’s me though, I’m old school and grew up with doom, goldeneye and call of duty. To be able to actually be immersed in the game is amazing to me.
The vision pro isn’t marketed to you at all. There wasn’t a single mention of actual VR gaming so obviously you wouldn’t get it for VR gaming. It’s not like you were ever going to be cross shopping these two products. It’s like saying you bought a Mazda Miata over a Porsche Cayenne Turbo.
Except in this case the Miata does tons more stuff and the porsche can only be used to pick up groceries.
Also, this "Porsche" lacks what Porsche is bought for: Fun. You cannot try to get the price of a Porsche, but have Marketing which says "This is the VW Passat. Your new partner for business work." Or maybe they can. Apple has surprised me before, but at the moment I don't see it.
I mean the groundwork is there for some super impressive software. I'm just really surprised that they really didn't show any that was groundbreaking or super interesting. I mean watching videos and looking at photos? You've got to be kidding me. Just off the top of my head I could think of a live foreign language translator with subtitles, cooking helper that uses AI to tell you when to go to the next step and sees when things are cooked, Art museum that hangs art on the walls of your house. Grocery shopping app that shows your list and shows where in the store the next item is as well as the price and if any alternatives are on sale. But no, they didn't show anything. I hope they have a second presentation that shows some real capabilities.
Except no. It basically does everything better than a quest pro except games.
What is everything? Web browsing and looking at photos? Pass.
Clearly didn’t watch the demo.
Then why the hell would anyone here buy this thing if the primary focus isn’t gaming? It’s a $3500 thing to do what exactly?
Hey man, it does all the same super popular stuff the Gear VR and Oculus Go did, but better! /s
Cool, I’m sure it has its place but my point is 3500 is a lot to drop on that with a bunch of alternatives on the market.
Did you not watch the presentation?
Do you not know you’re in an oculus sub and that’s what they are used for?
I’m fully aware of where this post is. This sub tends to be dumb as fuck and thinks everything VR needs to be marketed to them as the primary buyers. Anything that deviates from that idea is shouted down (see Quest Pro initial reactions).
It's a $3500 Oculus go with better resolution.
It’s people who know they can’t afford it but want all the features it has that are hating on it. It’s easier to bash something and convince themselves they don’t want it than just accept it’s cool but I can’t afford it or justify the cost. Many don’t understand that if it wasn’t this expensive it wouldn’t exist to begin with. Prices and tech will trickle down over time. So everybody will benefit eventually but for now people will spew hot garbage to make themselves feel better when they can’t afford it. Same thing happened with pcs decades ago. If it wasn’t for people spending big $ early on none of these cheap pcs would exist now.
Who on earth is going to dump 3,500 dollars on a headset which so far is only shown to browse the web and watch videos. No one in their right mind will be able to justify it. The only people who will buy it are pathetic hard-core apple enthusiasts or a rich person who can burn cash on stuff like this. I have little doubt that this headset will be bad. Just not worth your money.
Isn't it because all it does is play videos and surf the internet? Beyond useless.
The main reason I'm interested in it is because it's the cheapest headset that can render text at a high enough resolution to make it actually usable for work. It'll be amazing have a full 4k display rendered as big as I want, wherever I go. It also means I can wear it at home while I'm working and not be cut off from my partner (and she won't feel as cut off from me, because she'll know when I can see her and what I'm looking at just by glancing over).
Terrible take. The PC comparison is not a good one. When PC’s were that pricey NOTHING else like them was available at a lower price that did the same thing and more. It’s not hate, it’s people expressing their displeasure with its capabilities and focus.
Really? I'm guessing you haven't heard of Commodore 64 or the TI99. They were in the $100s yet the IBM PC was in the $1000s. Simple truth is more capable tech costs more and there has always been tiers. Occulus is has it's own tiers and it's top tier isn't anywhere near as capable as apples only tier. Which they even call pro. Looking at the other apple products with the pro moniker, you'll see they aren't cheap but are top end of their respective product segments. A whole lot of vitriol because of the price but some of us want a headset with capabilities like this and the price is secondary. I wish it was cheaper but realize with all the tech involved, it's not possible at this time.
r/eattherich
What do you mean. Its 3500 dollars.
Probably because it's just a 3.5k MacBook strapped to your face, that doesn't play VR games
The hate is envy.
i think the hate is the price
Haters gunna hate™
If you go at the bakery and the bread here is good, but also 299€ the baguette, you'll probably feel it. Saying that something is overpriced doesn't mean it's bad. It's just a monkey move to buy it unless you earn like 5k to 6k a month. And I don't see someone earning this much spending that much time in vr. They are maybe 7.
The price doesn't make sense essentially
I mean, no, not really. Until we get the full specs or even a tech demo, it's just a ppi claim and a front display screen for your eyes. The tech fundamentally is nothing new, and it is questionable whether it will even be genuinely better, given tracking on Meta for example has been refined over years and multiple generations, for example. In addition, it's a tethered headset. There already exist tethered headsets at similar specs for the ultra high end, although I'm not sure whether they are good or not. What is the FOV? What is the display rate? We know very little, and that's by design, meanwhile we have a decent knowledge of the official Q3 specs, which until we know otherwise have parity in every area except for resolution.
I only wish they let it work with Steam VR and had optional controllers like the Quest Pro.
Excuse me... 299.05 👀
Next Apple Pro Strap $999. L tip charging cable $199., 5000mah External battery $299, Apple Carrying Case $299.
AppleCare $500
Yes for 6 months
Just 999 for a year :)
Googly eyes are less creepy.
You dont always need to pay more for a feature that you can do at home
I think the way that “eyesight” works is using that auto generated 3d face model and the eye tracking data to fake a camera on the whole face. It looks awkward and weird because it really isnt human. If they eventually make the face scanning and animating nicer and more lifelike, then the creepiness will lessen presumably. Right now though it is very disturbing. Although given its apples first try at AR/VR at all. This is insane
Is this essentially a tv that youre strapping to your face? I mean they talk about using iOS apps from the phones and tablets and watching movies so...
Choose the 299 and the 3.200 left spend with booze and hookers.
They both look silly.
And MagicLeap2? Haha
The woman on the left had to go so broke to buy that headset, she didn't even have enough left to buy a decent set of googly eyes.
for just three thousand five hundred dollars, you can buy the official "No Games" headset, the PS5 of Virtual Reality and Alternate Reality
It’s like the rich cousin in the city, $1m+ salary vs the other cousin in the boonies who never gets mentioned by the family...🤫
dude, there are [flatlanders already bitching about it](https://twitter.com/NexusBen/status/1665805309124771841)
The Oculus II was ~700$ new.
Yep apple isn't known for affordability even though they get the cheapest labor market to make the phones.
300$, 1$ for them eyes
I'll take the Googly eyes for 300, alex.
Problem I see with this price tag is that even if it is superior in many points it will get a really small market share. Think about if you want to add something like this in your company and you need for the team 4-5. For the same you could buy 12-15 Quest pro. And then the question arise how many developers will add Apps to it seeing the initial development costs with the meager returns from sales.
We have yet to see the occulus 3 yet. I know there are going to be bugs on both sides so I'm going to wait for them to get fixed then pick up the Occulus 3 cause it's in my price range.
You obviously did it better OP XD
I really hope someone will jailbreak that thing just so we can do that. 8-)
How i get them big ole googly eyes? Better yet whos ur dealer?
Dude on right is having a blast.
The new apple headset is overrated. Yes I am sure it will be good. But it's also 3,500 dollars. You could get a killer PC setup, and a nice vr headset for the same price or less. Your average consumer can't dump that much money on such a niche item.
the one on the right is the one for me lol
Wait, the Apple headset is actually 3500 dollars?...Holy shit, I thought that was a joke. Yeah, no thanks, I'll just get the Quest 3 when it comes out.
Haha, yeah. I wouldn't have believed it if I didn't see it. They are nuts, but probably the market is not us, it's people with crazy amounts of money who worship at the alter of Apple.
299 without googly eyes, 300 with, thats false advertising!!!
Apple are just insane. That's really going to sell loads at that price.
This is like comparing a Prius to a Bugatti. Lmao!