Apple Could Release $2,000 'Apple Vision' Headset Next Year (macrumors.com) 20
Apple is working on a more affordable $2,000 "Apple Vision" spatial computing headset that could be launched as early as next year, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman. MacRumors reports: The new headset would be a lower-end counterpart to the $3,500 Apple Vision Pro, which was released in February. Apple reportedly expects this more affordable model to sell at least twice as many units as the Vision Pro, though "that's not saying much," adds Gurman. Apple will struggle to hit 500,000 Vision Pro sales this year, according to market tracker IDC.
To achieve the lower price point, the Apple Vision would likely use a less powerful processor and cheaper materials than aluminum and glass. The device is also expected to omit certain inessential features, such as the EyeSight display that shows the user's eyes on the outside of the headset. Apple could also use larger, lower resolution displays for the more affordable version of the Vision Pro headset, according to previous reports. Gurman also notes that Apple is working on a second-generation Vision Pro, slated for release in 2026, and a separate smart glasses device to accompany the Vision headsets.
To achieve the lower price point, the Apple Vision would likely use a less powerful processor and cheaper materials than aluminum and glass. The device is also expected to omit certain inessential features, such as the EyeSight display that shows the user's eyes on the outside of the headset. Apple could also use larger, lower resolution displays for the more affordable version of the Vision Pro headset, according to previous reports. Gurman also notes that Apple is working on a second-generation Vision Pro, slated for release in 2026, and a separate smart glasses device to accompany the Vision headsets.
Too expensive (Score:3, Funny)
The Meta Quest 3S VR headset is priced at $299.99 for the 128 GB model and $399.99 for the 256 GB model. It is $200 Cheaper Than the last model, the Quest 3 and $1,700 cheaper than the Apple Vision.
Still, people like luxury tech so maybe Apple just needs to figure out the right number. I'm not buying it though. I am probably going to break down and buy one of those stupid Digital Notebooks too, so I love luxury tech.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe I'm a luddite, but I like reducing the amount of screens I have to deal with to as few as possible. I don't have hours in the day to spend time with a headset. Maybe the cool kits driving their Cybertrucks wearing the Vision Pros are a lot more common than I, but I rather spend money on stuff that might go for retirement than toys which become laughingstock items in a few years. I just don't have time for game consoles, VR headsets, and other distractions.
I know that trillions have been thrown at V
Re: (Score:2)
Meta advertises "~20" pixels per degree (ppd) for the Quest 3S. The Apple Vision Pro has about 34 ppd. Your fovea can handle about 60 ppd, so both will be a bit grainy -- but the Meta headset will be noticeably more so. The Quest 3 had about 25 ppd, so it was better than the 3S. Not surprisingly, you get what you pay for. The Quest 3 and 3S might be fine for video games, but probably not good for AR or productivity.
Re: (Score:2)
The Meta Quest is not even in the same ballpark.
The Apple Vision is a full desktop computer equivalent. The Meta Quest is is equal to a Intel Core i7-5850HQ, basically a 9 year old computer.
People need to look beyond the "well this thing is cheaper." Yeah, and a windows Desktop with an i9-14900K that costs $5000 and a Chromebook with a N4020 that costs $200 are the same distance apart.
It is one thing to look at a device with a similar tier CPU and go "nah, the windows PC is a better value" and it's another
Cheaper materials? (Score:4, Insightful)
From TFS:
cheaper materials than aluminum and glass.
I don't think the price of aluminum and glass is the problem.
Re: (Score:3)
They have to give people some visual/tactile difference to make them feel like one is better than the other.
I don't see how they could compromise functionality to differentiate the lower-end models; there's not much function in these things to cut.
I'd be surprised if they hit even 500,000 sales. But I guess there must be a bunch of tech bros who could stand a bit more taxation.
Re: (Score:3)
The AVP has an outward-facing video screen to display the user's eyes to the people they interact with.
Most people don't want or need this feature.
It has been described as "creepy".
So that's an obvious feature that could be cut.
Re:Cheaper materials? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
They'll probably add a notch in rev 2...
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see how they could compromise functionality to differentiate the lower-end models; there's not much function in these things to cut.
Actually - what if they cut the resolution WAY, WAY DOWN to something like 20x50 and rebranded it as "Apple Vision: Minecraft Edition"?
Re: (Score:2)
The price of none of the components is the problem:
https://arstechnica.com/gadget... [arstechnica.com]
At a $2000 price point with this new device they're clearly still not going for the "Sell at a loss and corner the market"-strategy that Meta is (successfully) employing.
Then again, they have their own little garden of locked in faithful zealots, so even if the device ends up being overpriced and underwhelming they'll sell some. In any case them not giving up on VR yet helps the technology in the broader scene move forward,
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder how much it would cost if the sold it at whatever the manufacturing cost is.
Nope (Score:2)
Still too expensive. Still little to no good viable use cases. Still going to be ugly. Still going to be uncomfortable. Still going to be a failure.
Too heavy (Score:2)
The need to figure out how to put the compute module and its fans and all that crap in a separate puck.
Re: (Score:2)
The need to figure out how to put the compute module and its fans and all that crap in a separate puck.
There's already a separate "puck" for the battery, so it would make sense to make it bigger and move the compute module there.
I'd much rather have an extra 100 grams in my pocket than attached to my face.
Fire the design leads. (Score:1)
Apple spent billions of dollars developing this thing and itâ(TM)s just a knockoff of the Meta Quest that costs much more and doesnâ(TM)t come with gaming controllers. The people running the design team screwed the pooch on this one and itâ(TM)s time for heads to roll and get someone in touch with reality to unfuck this project.
It's Apple (Score:2)
From the people who brought you the Mac Pro Wheels Kit: https://www.apple.com/shop/pro... [apple.com]
The headset can cost $300, but:
Apple Head Straps: $2500
Apple USB Cable: $1999
Apple HeadSet Stand: $1500
All wrapped up in a gluten-free, free ranged, 200% recycled cardboard box with a negative carbon footprint :|
Sales Quantity Estimates (Score:2)
Apple reportedly expects this more affordable model to sell at least twice as many units as the Vision Pro
So, twice as many sales, at least as many returns. All three remaining users will be very happy. Oh wait, no mention of ditching the tethered battery pack and/or increasing battery life... leaving two very happy users.