Apple Cuts Vision Pro Shipments As Demand Falls 'Sharply Beyond Expectations' (macrumors.com) 133
An anonymous reader shares a report: Apple has dropped the number of Vision Pro units that it plans to ship in 2024, going from an expected 700 to 800k units to just 400k to 450k units, according to Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo. Orders have been scaled back before the Vision Pro has launched in markets outside of the United States, which Kuo says is a sign that demand in the U.S. has "fallen sharply beyond expectations."
As a result, Apple is expected to take a "conservative view" of headset demand when the Vision Pro launches in additional countries. Kuo previously said that Apple will introduce the Vision Pro in new markets before the June Worldwide Developers Conference, which suggests that we could see it available in additional areas in the next month or so.
As a result, Apple is expected to take a "conservative view" of headset demand when the Vision Pro launches in additional countries. Kuo previously said that Apple will introduce the Vision Pro in new markets before the June Worldwide Developers Conference, which suggests that we could see it available in additional areas in the next month or so.
Another one down (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Just another in the long list of failed 3D headsets going all the way back to the Nintendo Virtual Boy. Don't worry, someone will try again next year.
Maybe people just don't want to wear obnoxious heavy goggles on their head?
No they clearly do. You can see that from the sales of the Quest (which since you compared it to something like Nintendo, is actually more popular than the well regarded Gamecube). What people don't want to do is pay $3500 to wear obnoxious heavy goggles on their head. Devices which lose the trailing zero sell extremely well.
Re:Another one down (Score:4, Interesting)
Call me back when AR/VR can be done with a set of lightweight normal size glasses, since I'm wearing those already because my eyes aren't the greatest. I'll even be okay if it has an umbilical cord to a device. I'm just not strapping the full headset on anymore, because I hate it for a variety of reasons - it's heavy, it obstructs my view of the rest of the world, and I certainly don't really need it.
Re:Another one down (Score:5, Informative)
The cheaper ones might sell well
The price is a big problem. I considered buying one but decided to wait for the next version at a (hopefully) lower price.
But another reason I decided to wait is Apple would let me try it. Dropping $3500 on a product I'm not allowed to test isn't gonna happen.
I did the in-store demo, but it is totally scripted and 100% focused on consuming content. Going off-script is a big no-no.
The demo does not include using the AVP with a keyboard and mouse or integrating with a MacBook.
I also wanted to try using the AVP while reclining or lying down. Not allowed.
Re: (Score:2)
The cheaper ones might sell well
The price is a big problem. I considered buying one but decided to wait for the next version at a (hopefully) lower price.
But another reason I decided to wait is Apple would let me try it. Dropping $3500 on a product I'm not allowed to test isn't gonna happen.
I did the in-store demo, but it is totally scripted and 100% focused on consuming content. Going off-script is a big no-no.
The demo does not include using the AVP with a keyboard and mouse or integrating with a MacBook.
I also wanted to try using the AVP while reclining or lying down. Not allowed.
Well, they certainly know how to sell to their market. "DO AS WE SAY! NOT AS YOU WANT!" Do they at least chain you up and whip you while you try it? You know, make it worth your while?
Re: (Score:3)
Do they at least chain you up and whip you while you try it?
There were no chains or whips. But an Apple sales rep sits with you and guides you through the script. There is no ability to just try stuff on your own.
But the demo is cool. You should make an appointment and go see it. It's amazing technology.
At half the price and half the weight, it'd be a huge hit.
I'll buy one eventually.
Re:Another one down (Score:4)
Do they at least chain you up and whip you while you try it?
There were no chains or whips. But an Apple sales rep sits with you and guides you through the script.
So, close enough.
There is no ability to just try stuff on your own.
But the demo is cool. You should make an appointment and go see it. It's amazing technology.
At half the price and half the weight, it'd be a huge hit.
I'll buy one eventually.
Yeah, I'm not big on tech "demos" that require A) A script and B) A tour guide to force me to stick to the script. It may be amazing technology, but my annoyance level would reach peak before I even strapped it on with all that happening.
Re: (Score:2)
Do they at least chain you up and whip you while you try it?
There were no chains or whips. But an Apple sales rep sits with you and guides you through the script.
So, close enough.
There is no ability to just try stuff on your own.
But the demo is cool. You should make an appointment and go see it. It's amazing technology.
At half the price and half the weight, it'd be a huge hit.
I'll buy one eventually.
Yeah, I'm not big on tech "demos" that require A) A script and B) A tour guide to force me to stick to the script. It may be amazing technology, but my annoyance level would reach peak before I even strapped it on with all that happening.
It's kind of different-enough technology that, without a "tour-guide", most people, even tech-savvy ones, would waste most of the demo-time just getting familiar with Navigation and other basic concepts, and would probably just flail around for half an hour.
Sorry; but if you think about it, you know what I am saying is true.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed, I demo'd the vision last week- i was surprised to see that there were many time slots available for demos, starting pretty much immediately.
It's a damn cool device. it's a little heavy, and the typing aspect of it is a problem for me. But i got used to the pointing and clicking immediately and it really looked great. Not QUITE retina res, but pretty damn close. I could read the names and numbers on sports uniforms, which (even though i never watch sports except for Super Bowl. But other
Re: (Score:2)
The cheaper ones might sell well
The price is a big problem. I considered buying one but decided to wait for the next version at a (hopefully) lower price.
But another reason I decided to wait is Apple would let me try it. Dropping $3500 on a product I'm not allowed to test isn't gonna happen.
I did the in-store demo, but it is totally scripted and 100% focused on consuming content. Going off-script is a big no-no.
The demo does not include using the AVP with a keyboard and mouse or integrating with a MacBook.
I also wanted to try using the AVP while reclining or lying down. Not allowed.
Apple offers a 14-day, no questions asked, refund policy on all products, including Vision Pro.
Test drive it at home/work, with your Apps, your setup, your Media, your use-cases. Install whatever you want. Shoot/Watch some 3D video, etc... All for days on end. Just like some high-end speaker manufacturers.
Don't like it? Take/Send it back! If you buy online, I think Apple even sends a mailer and Call Tag. What could be better?
Re: (Score:2)
The idea of using it as a mobile workstation with a MacBook was nerfed by Apple. You can only mirror your MacBook screen, not use the AVP as a second screen. It's larger, but also you need to have a heavy and hot brick strapped to your face to use it.
Re: (Score:2)
The idea of using it as a mobile workstation with a MacBook was nerfed by Apple. You can only mirror your MacBook screen, not use the AVP as a second screen. It's larger, but also you need to have a heavy and hot brick strapped to your face to use it.
It doesn't mirror the MacBook screen. It blacks it out and replaces it entirely, making it the ultimate privacy screen.
But you have to either use the computer's keyboard/trackpad or an external Bluetooth keyboard and mouse/trackpad/trackball, so you can't usefully use it as the only display unless you're sitting right at the computer, so it is basically useless unless you are working on an airplane, on a bus, in a coffee shop, or in an open office and you don't want other people seeing what you're doing.
Re: (Score:2)
I generally think it's sleazy to buy something with it being likely that you will return it because you don't "like" it. However when the product is available for testing "in store", but the access to it is intentionally limited to a scripted experience (and an unscripted experience would not damage the product) I don't think it's sleazy to "buy to try for real".
Particality (Score:2)
Call me back when AR/VR can be done with a set of lightweight normal size glasses,
Sadly, those pesky physics stand in the way.
(No controllable way to "project black", meaning you need some blocking/filtering;
No practical way to project a picture without at least some optics: all the alternative things - like waveguides - which were tried turned out rather crappy)
There are some attempts at making smaller headsets (e.g.: some like Bigscreen [bigscreenvr.com] are trying to be as light as an immersive VR can be) or less isolating (e.g.: stuff like Lynx [lynx-r.com] has roughly similar optic to the AVP, but the mask is opt
Re: (Score:2)
(No controllable way to "project black", meaning you need some blocking/filtering;
Passive LEDs have blocked light for decades. That's solvable. So in theory, if you combined a projection-style setup like Google Glass used with a 1-bit LCD panel, you might be able to do a passable job. But I've obviously never tried it, so I could be wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
I bought a Quest 2 a few years ago, because I'm interested in the technology. It actually has a lot of cool tech packed in a small package. But it's been collecting dust for a while now. I haven't used it in almost a year... the last time I pulled it out was when I got Covid and was self isolating. It's surprisingly comfortable to watch Netflix on a virtual big screen while laying in bed, but you really have to struggle with the software to get it to let you. It really doesn't like it when you're lying down
Re: (Score:2)
I bought a Quest 2 a few years ago, because I'm interested in the technology. It actually has a lot of cool tech packed in a small package. But it's been collecting dust for a while now. I haven't used it in almost a year... the last time I pulled it out was when I got Covid and was self isolating. It's surprisingly comfortable to watch Netflix on a virtual big screen while laying in bed, but you really have to struggle with the software to get it to let you. It really doesn't like it when you're lying down.
Other than that, there's a real paucity of content, and the games on there are unequivocally novelty toys. There are lots of ways it can improve... Better resolution, refresh rate, more lightweight... but I don't think any of those would really get me to buy another one. It's clear the product hasn't found its legs. VR remains a solution in search of a problem.
What does your litany of problems with the Quest 2 have to do with the AVP? For example, the AVP works fine for laying in bed and watching movies; in fact, Tim Cook said that's one of his favorite ways to use it.
And the Vision Pro whips on the Quest 2 in the Display Department; so why bring it up, here?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I bought a Quest 2 a few years ago, because I'm interested in the technology. It actually has a lot of cool tech packed in a small package. But it's been collecting dust for a while now. I haven't used it in almost a year... the last time I pulled it out was when I got Covid and was self isolating. It's surprisingly comfortable to watch Netflix on a virtual big screen while laying in bed, but you really have to struggle with the software to get it to let you. It really doesn't like it when you're lying down.
Other than that, there's a real paucity of content, and the games on there are unequivocally novelty toys. There are lots of ways it can improve... Better resolution, refresh rate, more lightweight... but I don't think any of those would really get me to buy another one. It's clear the product hasn't found its legs. VR remains a solution in search of a problem.
What does your litany of problems with the Quest 2 have to do with the AVP? For example, the AVP works fine for laying in bed and watching movies; in fact, Tim Cook said that's one of his favorite ways to use it.
AVP has serious problems when lying down, though. Yes, if you can get a virtual screen positioned correctly before you lie down, it works, but try repositioning it while lying flat, and it jumps in random directions and is completely as unusable as the Quest 2.
AVP also lacks any obvious way for the user to mark a screen as "floating". One way I'd like to use it is as a media consumption device while out for a walk. Have a picture-in-picture with the screen floating in front of me. But I haven't been abl
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The cheaper ones might sell well, but they still sit on a shelf collecting dust. I got a Quest for free from my work as a gift, and I used it for a while, played some cool games, but lost interest after about 6 months.
Congrats? For every one of you I know I know many other people who don't have it sitting on their shelf. You're not an industry trend.
Yeah, it's still a pain to strap the thing on for any length of time
You have a Quest. It is widely known to be one of the least comfortable headsets on the market. Replace the strap and you can happily wear it for hours with zero discomfort (and given that after market straps sell really well - the BOBO VR S3 is sold out *AGAIN* - it shows that there are plenty of people who use their Quests for an extended period of time).
I'm certainly not going to be spending money on another one
I just sold my Ques
Re: (Score:2)
Congrats? For every one of you and everyone you know, I know many other people with it sitting on their shelf. Every single one of them.
>You have a Quest. It is widely known to be one of the least comfortable headsets on the market.
Apparently many people complain about a $3600 headset also having the same exact problem. You would think for that price it would be
Re: Another one down (Score:2)
Gamecube wasn't will regarded... In fact every Nintendo console after SNES and before Wii was considered a commercial failure.
Re: (Score:3)
There's a market, it's viable, but it's not set the world on fire. Apple's device aimed for a market that seemingly wasn't there (too expensive particularly for an unproven ecosystem). But other devices have done well enough to have a business justification.
Re: (Score:2)
Not really. You need to take into account that the pricing is for the larger number. Apple will now likely lose money on these and that means the product will get scrapped as soon as they can.
Re: (Score:2)
I meant that the wider market. Even if Apple's strategy isn't going to be profitable, a subset of Meta's efforts can be (the devices can be profitable, but they spent way too much money on certain projects that will not pan out).
Apple may make a return to the market with an amended product that fit the business case.
Re: (Score:2)
Not necessarily. Never underestimate apple's ego. The homepod was a commercial failure but they kept making more of them for a while.
Besides, you have people like nomoreacs and archiebunker who wear their vision pro headsets even while the battery is dead just they want to make a fashion statement.
The HomePod wasn't a failure; it just needed some adjusting. The HomePod mini does fine at $99. And there are rumors that the larger HomePod may come back soon in a slightly less-ambitious form.
And thanks for the Shout Out; but I have neither a Vision Pro nor a HomePod.
Re: Another one down (Score:3)
The HomePod wasn't a failure; it just needed some adjusting. The HomePod mini does fine at $99.
It got 10% of what is already a small market. That's not what commercially successful looks like.
And there are rumors that the larger HomePod may come back soon in a slightly less-ambitious form.
Good grief...In their words their first one was a "breakthrough", and it was less than unremarkable compared to the ones already on the market, especially with a voice assistant that managed to be even worse than cortana. I can only imagine how the "less ambitious" version turns out.
And thanks for the Shout Out; but I have neither a Vision Pro nor a HomePod.
Wtf so you're just walking around in public with a fake one then? Is that all just so you can flash yet another apple logo?
Re: Another one down (Score:2)
There are a lot of good things about the Vision Pro, but in reality the price puts it in the realm of early adopters and businesses with a specific need.
Despite the issues, Apple got some real feedback, in a way lab testing would not have revealed. I am feeling hopeful that theyâ(TM)ll take what they learnt and make something even better. I say this based on experiences like the iPod, the iPad and the iPhone, which while not immediate successes did far better than the alternatives.
Re: Another one down (Score:2)
The technology to do it well enough for consumer acceptance doesn't exist yet. What apple learned is what everyone else already knows. Yay?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So which one you think apple wasted more money on, Project Titanic( the car) or this one?
Apple spent $10 billion on the car project.
I don't know the NRE expenses for the AVP, but Apple spends $70B annually on R&D. It's reasonable to assume a good chunk of that was on the AVP.
EDIT: Here's a link [konvoy.vc] that says they spent $20 billion to develop it. It's from a VC, and they never lie.
More like Newton (Score:3)
I say this based on experiences like the iPod, the iPad and the iPhone, which while not immediate successes did far better than the alternatives.
My impression is that this is more like the Newton, when Apple utterly failed at making a succesful portable/pocket computer, to the point that they abandoned the form factor, and it took Palm to teach a lesson in how to actually make a success in that form factor before Apple made another somewhat less lackluster attempt with the iPhone and iPod Touch (after having seen a demo of the Handspring + modem Springboard).
Also Vision Pro doesn't have a killer app.
(The "extra screen while on the move" is very limi
Re: (Score:2)
(The "extra screen while on the move" is very limited in practice due to resolution limitation of VR).
Not to mention that screens tend not to move with you on the Vision Pro, and neither do physical keyboards and trackpads. Their text input story, other than with a keyboard (where you might as well use a real computer) is basically nonexistent, and a "spatial computer" that can only be used for media consumption device and gaming doesn't make much sense (because you might as well buy a Quest for a fraction of the price).
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. I remember hypes like this failing back in the ATARI ST days. Yes, sure, people want it, but the tech is just not ready and still on the level of "expensive lab demo". Eventually it will be ready and affordable and there will be content, but I expect that will take another 20-50 years, maybe more.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. I remember hypes like this failing back in the ATARI ST days. Yes, sure, people want it, but the tech is just not ready and still on the level of "expensive lab demo". Eventually it will be ready and affordable and there will be content, but I expect that will take another 20-50 years, maybe more.
5-10 years max; probably less.
You honestly think the Vision Pro 2, Vision Air and Vision SE aren't already 2/3 through the R&D Pipeline?
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it's like in Econ 101 when you studied equillibrium prices. At $3500 the number of units demanded is small, but if you dropped that to $1000 there should be more units demanded, assuming consumers are economically rational.
There is a tech adoption curve [wikipedia.org] in which different groups of people play important roles in each stage of a new product's life cycle. At the stage Vision Pro is at now, you'd be focused on only about 1% of the potential market. The linked article calls these people "innovators", b
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Solution in search of a problem.
falls *below* expectations, not beyond (Score:2)
Where is the killer app? (Score:2)
I think Apple expected people to gobble these things up despite the fact there was no pressing need for them. I know a certain slashdotter will be along to praise Apple here in a moment and scold any naysayers, but there's really nothing special about this very expensive toy unless there's a particularly awesome thing it can do that you can't do on a phone, an iPad, or a full-fledged system whether it be laptop or desktop. Until we have that? I don't expect anyone to sell massive numbers of this type of hea
Re: (Score:2)
I think the "killer app" will be (mostly) full sensory immersion VR. Before that, what is the point? Obviously, that is a "maybe this century and maybe not yet" tech as a lot of fundamental research is missing.
Re: Where is the killer app? (Score:3)
High quality AR with normal glasses has an absolute crapload of obvious applications. Low quality AR with a huge machine strapped to your face has very few.
Re: (Score:2)
High quality AR with normal glasses has an absolute crapload of obvious applications.
Oh? I do not see any in a private setting. Industrial setting, yes, and they are used.
Re: (Score:2)
High quality AR with normal glasses has an absolute crapload of obvious applications.
Oh? I do not see any in a private setting. Industrial setting, yes, and they are used.
I dunno. I think I'd use them to be entertained while I'm stuck with people I don't necessarily connect with but don't wish to offend. I might also use them to look up information regarding a movie or TV series I'm watching on a big screen without having to hit pause. And having a see-through schematic before my eyes while I'm building or working on some piece of equipment might be pretty compelling.
That said, they'd really have to be at first glance almost indistinguishable from my regular glasses - and th
Re: (Score:2)
High quality AR with normal glasses has an absolute crapload of obvious applications.
Oh? I do not see any in a private setting. Industrial setting, yes, and they are used.
I dunno. I think I'd use them to be entertained while I'm stuck with people I don't necessarily connect with but don't wish to offend. I might also use them to look up information regarding a movie or TV series I'm watching on a big screen without having to hit pause. And having a see-through schematic before my eyes while I'm building or working on some piece of equipment might be pretty compelling.
That said, they'd really have to be at first glance almost indistinguishable from my regular glasses - and they'd have to correct my vision as well. I can't imagine that would ever happen, at least not in what's left of my lifetime.
Not unless you want your Glasses physically tethered to a powerful computer with a substantial cable, rather than something you can freely roam around with for at least a few hours.
Re: (Score:2)
Not unless you want your Glasses physically tethered to a powerful computer with a substantial cable, rather than something you can freely roam around with for at least a few hours.
There's no reason it needs any more than a USB-C cable to carry power and compressed video. When I think "substantial" cable I think something like a VGA cable, where even the narrowest ones are quite a bit bigger than that (and also absolute smeg quality.) By the same token, there's no reason it needs to be driven by a computer any larger than a typical power bank, which will fit comfortably in pocket or purse. Your average decent phone has enough processing power to drive such a device, unless you have hi
Re: (Score:2)
Just watching people walk around the grocery store juggling their phone (with their shopping list on it) while also needing their hands to reach for, pick up, and examine products seems like a good use case for "VR with 'ordinary' glasses" at a "reasonable price".
VR coupled w/input via hand gestures or voice could be used to:
Re: (Score:2)
...seems like a good use case for "VR with 'ordinary' glasses"....
That's never going to happen. It would require a power source a quarter of the size of a AAA battery with the power density of a small nuclear reactor.
AR will likely never be feasible in a mobile capacity, but has tons of uses in a controlled environment. Given that the Quest owns the VR space and is getting into the AR market, it will likely be first to market with affordable AR.
The Apple Pro failing was obvious at launch, as the price was too high and tethered you to an external power source that is clun
Re: (Score:2)
High quality AR with normal glasses has an absolute crapload of obvious applications.
Games, I guess?
I mean I can certainly think of industrial usecases. I can't think of any outside of games for consumer AR. Of course a HUD for navigation can work, but we can do that already, it's not really AR, since the graphics aren't tightly registered to the world. There's other entertainment like a view to an extra screen, but... does the registration to the world help? Screens in a headset have been around but not ve
Re: Where is the killer app? (Score:2)
What I want is something that recognizes stuff, labels it if I look at it long enough, provides links to more info, does translations of written text from signs to books, does measurements of objects... Basically a lot of stuff I can do with my phone already but which would be a lot more convenient without having to use my hands. Look at an engine part and get the right manual page, look at a bolt and get a torque spec...
Re: (Score:2)
I think the "killer app" will be (mostly) full sensory immersion VR. Before that, what is the point? Obviously, that is a "maybe this century and maybe not yet" tech as a lot of fundamental research is missing.
I believe you meant "full sensory perversion." That would be the killer app that'll get it adapted.
Re: (Score:2)
Definitely, but not only. The other applications are gaming, simulated vacations, concerts, etc.
Re: (Score:3)
Does anybody have any killer app ideas?
Sell virtual "front row" tickets to NBA games. The NBA would add extra cameras and then write an application that intelligently stitches the video streams together into a real 3D image. Users could then experience something similar to sitting front row. There might be a market considering that front row NBA tickets are one of the few things that can make the Vision Pro look cheap.
Re: (Score:3)
Does anybody have any killer app ideas?
Sell virtual "front row" tickets to NBA games. The NBA would add extra cameras and then write an application that intelligently stitches the video streams together into a real 3D image. Users could then experience something similar to sitting front row. There might be a market considering that front row NBA tickets are one of the few things that can make the Vision Pro look cheap.
Concerts too, for the most part. Heck, even the typical metal show that would have been twenty-five bucks a couple decades back is running into the mid 250s now to get gen-admin/pit tickets.
Re: (Score:2)
Sell virtual "front row" tickets to NBA games.
That's been a VR feature from almost the very start, and even Google Cardboard was able to do it. It would be idiotic to spend $3,500 on what requires little more than a glorified ViewMaster to view.
Re:Where is the killer app? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Everybody seems to think we want to have virtual meetings with these things when half of the folks don't even bother putting an avatar photo into their Teams profile, let alone turn the camera on or desire better camera interfaces.
The greatest benefit of remote meetings is not having to look at one another. The only people that want to ruin that are people that live to have meetings, and don't really see them as a function of the job.
Re: (Score:2)
The greatest benefit of remote meetings is not having to look at one another
And not wearing pants, thats another benefit.
Re: (Score:2)
Everybody seems to think we want to have virtual meetings with these things when half of the folks don't even bother putting an avatar photo into their Teams profile, let alone turn the camera on or desire better camera interfaces.
The greatest benefit of remote meetings is not having to look at one another. The only people that want to ruin that are people that live to have meetings, and don't really see them as a function of the job.
I thought the greatest benefit of remote meetings was the ability to put yourself on mute and then get on with some actual work/play on your phone/zone out whilst Gerard from presales drones on about something that has zero relevance.
Re: (Score:2)
Everybody seems to think we want to have virtual meetings with these things when half of the folks don't even bother putting an avatar photo into their Teams profile, let alone turn the camera on or desire better camera interfaces.
The greatest benefit of remote meetings is not having to look at one another. The only people that want to ruin that are people that live to have meetings, and don't really see them as a function of the job.
I thought the greatest benefit of remote meetings was the ability to put yourself on mute and then get on with some actual work/play on your phone/zone out whilst Gerard from presales drones on about something that has zero relevance.
I consider that a side benefit of not having to see one another. You try getting actual work done during a meeting where you're all sitting around a table and someone will try to call you out for it. On a remote meeting, nobody even notices.
Re: (Score:2)
Everybody seems to think we want to have virtual meetings with these things....
Very few people think that. I thing Mark Z. was the only one who thought that. Everyone else thought it was stupid.
No killer app, indeed (Score:2)
My personal hope is for something along the lines of the Vision Pro providing me with some really killer virtual monitor arrangements. Or maybe just an iMax like view of my 3D projects or music scores. But it's the only currently available thing I see these being useful for.
And it's not a very well done thing, mostly due to the not so stellar resolution even in the middle of the field of view. Works for workload where one doesn't need super fine resolution (e.g.: video editing), but forget about using this with walls of tiny next (not usable for coding, for example).
Another use that some people have experimented and Apple has touted with their "spacial computing" moniker: leaving multiple windows and applet floating virtually around a large real-world space (e.g.: have various
Re: (Score:3)
And it's not a very well done thing, mostly due to the not so stellar resolution even in the middle of the field of view. Works for workload where one doesn't need super fine resolution (e.g.: video editing), but forget about using this with walls of tiny next (not usable for coding, for example).
Actually, I find it to work pretty well for that — better than a laptop screen, anyway.
What doesn't work well are:
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I thought, initially, that getting these into developer's hands would lead us to the killer app. Surely somebody out there had enough money to buy one, and enough vision + time to develop whatever it was they saw in their heads as the reason for it. It doesn't seem like there are even any exciting announcements about plans for something killer coming down the pipeline.
I has been available for what, about two months, and you're whining about App Availability?!? Gimme a break!
Re: (Score:2)
I thought, initially, that getting these into developer's hands would lead us to the killer app. Surely somebody out there had enough money to buy one, and enough vision + time to develop whatever it was they saw in their heads as the reason for it. It doesn't seem like there are even any exciting announcements about plans for something killer coming down the pipeline.
I has been available for what, about two months, and you're whining about App Availability?!? Gimme a break!
In the typical software cycle, the hype should have been started about a day after release by some enterprising grifter, er, I mean developer. When even the early liars can't come up with a compelling sell? There's a problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Does anybody have any killer app ideas?
For me, the killer app would be a virtualization environment running macOS Sonoma, combined with high-quality vision analysis that can let you type on a virtual keyboard floating in front of you.
Another one bites the dust (Score:2)
This is, what, the 5th time some "VR Ready Now!" hype falls short? I remember this stuff getting pushed 30 years ago or so. In actual reality, this is not ready and will not be ready for quite a while. Sure, nice tech demo, but fitness for general use takes a few decades more.
Re: (Score:2)
I watched the video Joanna Stern (IIRC) did where she wore the Vision Pro for a day or two. I remember she was talking about how great it was to cook, having the recipe right there and being able to put up multiple timers for things. I was thinking "I can already do all that with the Paprika app on my Phone, without sacrificing my peripheral vision".
I do think if there's a path for this sort of thing to move into the mainstream, it's going to be AR versus VR - so Apple's at least got that right. But I've ye
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. I think the only real application scenario is sensory immersion (more or less fully) and the tech is not yet there for that and will not be for quite some time.
For the cooking scenario, I just print out recipes. That way I can annotate, prioritize, etc. just fine and with an interface that has been optimized for a few 1000 years.
Impressive sales (Score:2)
I don't know when (let alone if) these will ever see mass market success. The hardware and the software need at least another 5 years and the cost needs to come down substantially as well. If I were them I'd be sending excess product to academic r
Re: (Score:2)
I'm impressed there are even 400,000 people who want to buy a first generation product
There aren't, that's their new forecast for sales which may end up being as over-optimistic as the one it replaced.
Re: (Score:2)
I think most of the problem is the price tag. If it's for digital entertainment, it needs to be in the $500, the price of a gaming console. If low-cost knock-off take the price further down, then it can be a large success.
Price tag is too high (Score:2)
I get it's better than the cheaper Meta headsets, but if the previous experiences of the HTC Vive and Quest are anything like it, the wow factor ends soon and then you start feeling the weight of the headset, the dizziness, the discomfort, the eye strain and the price tag.
And people talk. They comment it, review it online and share their overall experiences.
So... (Score:2)
fallen sharply beyond expectations
How far had Apple expected it to fall?
The only use for this, that I can see.. (Score:2)
The only use for this, and any other similar thing, is to be able to watch a fullly-cinematic presentation in an airplane. Without having to hold your phone to your eyeballs, or put the tablet on the meal tray or your lap.
People do get a kick that I choose Airplane! every time I do the FLL - ATL run. If you start the movie when they shut the door on the real plane at the terminal, and you take off without undue delay, they push the drinks cart in the real flight around the time they push the meal cart in
Re: The only use for this, that I can see.. (Score:2)
The 1/4-ish weight, 1/4 price, smaller glasses for watching movies on a plane already exist. I can't remember the brand names, but there are a few that have been on sale longer than the MacGoggles.
Re: (Score:2)
The 1/4-ish weight, 1/4 price, smaller glasses for watching movies on a plane already exist. I can't remember the brand names, but there are a few that have been on sale longer than the MacGoggles.
I live a mostly ad-less existence, so no surprise that i've missed a thing or two.
I am reminded of this humorous comment (Score:4, Funny)
https://slashdot.org/comments.... [slashdot.org]
Ten years of laughter!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect not.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah someone doesn't understand how exponentials work for new emerging technology. There will be 100million units sold, but likely in the coming 5 years, definitely not 5 years out of 2014. No technology not even the computer itself had that level of growth.
I wish I could be the kind of marketing drone (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
the "real" market (Score:2)
Lonely nerd wants to wear the headset.
While driving his car.
His virtual car.
To his girlfriend's house.
His AI-generative virtual girlfriend.
Hands-free operation is essential...
Re: (Score:2)
Lonely nerd wants to wear the headset.
While driving his car.
His virtual car.
To his girlfriend's house.
His AI-generative virtual girlfriend.
Hands-free operation is essential...
Getting "head" in the mid 2020s.
Re: (Score:2)
The beginning of the end (Score:2)
Ask not for whom the bell tolls.
It's mistake after mistake for Apple these days and the problems and competency issues are really piling up.
This is not surprising (Score:4, Interesting)
It seems like well made, but kinda useless, tech
I've been following the VR hype since the beginning. I even worked on a well funded VR project for a major corporation
VR is hard, really hard. Brains and eyeballs are very fine tuned to real reality, and close enough isn't good enough
Even if the tech was perfect, finding real uses for it is difficult. Most of the proposed uses are silly
Re: (Score:2)
Useless is the word. You can see the difference in approach from Apple vs Meta in their product announcements.
Apple: spent 45min on the hardware and 10min showing things which are better done on a screen, and 5minutes showing new and novel ideas (albeit with a lack of content).
Meta: spent 5 minutes on the hardware and 55minutes on a gaming showcase.
Content matters. No one puts on a VR headset because they want to feel the warmth of a screen close to their eyes.
Re: (Score:2)
Useless is the word. You can see the difference in approach from Apple vs Meta in their product announcements. Apple: spent 45min on the hardware and 10min showing things which are better done on a screen, and 5minutes showing new and novel ideas (albeit with a lack of content). Meta: spent 5 minutes on the hardware and 55minutes on a gaming showcase.
Content matters. No one puts on a VR headset because they want to feel the warmth of a screen close to their eyes.
That's because almost nobody has released games for this thing yet. I mean, apart from subscription-only Apple Arcade games, I really didn't find very many out there that are worth playing.
It just makes no sense in real life (Score:2)
When the demo first came out, I had a really short conversation with someone who thought it was really cool that went like this:
"But movies on it would be so cool! It's cheap compared to my expensive home theater!"
"Right. But how many people can watch your home theater at once?"
"Oh. Right."
That rare dude who invests in a home theater to watch alone, that's the target audience.
And that's really it. Like 3D TVs and Google Glass, but far more expensive than either, no humans want to sit around in a room with t
Re: (Score:2)
When the demo first came out, I had a really short conversation with someone who thought it was really cool that went like this:
"But movies on it would be so cool! It's cheap compared to my expensive home theater!"
"Right. But how many people can watch your home theater at once?"
"Oh. Right."
That rare dude who invests in a home theater to watch alone, that's the target audience.
And that's really it. Like 3D TVs and Google Glass, but far more expensive than either, no humans want to sit around in a room with these creepy headsets on.
Now I've got one of those sci-fi dystopian scenes in my head where everybody goes to a theater, and then the pan across the audience and everybody in the place is laying back in a recliner wearing some massive headset for full immersion.
See, Apple missed the boat. They should have just sold these to theaters!
but returns were higher than expected ;-) (Score:2)
If the prices had been more reasonable, then sales would have been much higher.
augmented reality (Score:3)
When it includes "Undressing" mode and "Beer Goggles" mode then they'll sell a lot more.
Apple is clueless (Score:2)
Too expensive.
No games.
No VR porn.
Who would buy this?
(Almost no-one is the answer).
Meta Quest 3 hello (Score:3)
It turns out that most people would rather pay ~$600 for the Meta Quest 3 instead of $3500 for the Vision Pro.
Analyst cuts unfounded expectations (Score:2)
Ming-Chi Kuo cuts Ming-Chi Kuo's expectations for sales as estimated by Ming-Chi Kuo. Actual sales will be later confirmed by Ming-Chi Kuo.
Being an analyst means never having to say you're wrong, since you are only judged by criteria that you yourself make up.
Apple (Score:2)
Any other company would be cutting the price so they didn't make as much profit per unit but could shift units.
But Apple just stop producing as many units and retain the same price (which is going to be at least 50% profit, probably more like 80-90%, given Apple's history here).
This product's gonna be dead in 2 years, and they likely won't make another.