IDC Estimates Apple Shipped Just 45,000 Vision Pros Last Quarter (ft.com) 57
Apple's Chinese manufacturing partner Luxshare halted production of the Vision Pro headset at the start of 2025, according to market research firm IDC, after the device shipped 390,000 units during its 2024 launch year. The $3,499 headset has also seen its digital advertising budget cut by more than 95% year to date in the US and UK, according to market intelligence group Sensor Tower.
IDC expects Apple to ship just 45,000 new units in the fourth quarter of 2025. Apple launched an upgraded M5 version in October featuring a more powerful chip, extended battery life, and a redesigned headband. The company sells the device directly in 13 countries and did not expand availability in 2025.
IDC expects Apple to ship just 45,000 new units in the fourth quarter of 2025. Apple launched an upgraded M5 version in October featuring a more powerful chip, extended battery life, and a redesigned headband. The company sells the device directly in 13 countries and did not expand availability in 2025.
Woah (Score:1, Insightful)
That's around 50,000 more than I expected for that extremely expensive trash.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
This is sloppy, lazy thinking. The Apple Vision Pro is one of, if not the most advanced consumer technologies ever released. Just because it’s not affordable doesn’t mean it’s not a fantastic value. You get a full movie theater experience in your home (or airplane seat, etc.). You get a gigantic, crisp display for your laptop and phone. Those two things are worth thousands. Now ply me with your too heavy/proprietary OS argument.
Re:Woah (Score:5, Insightful)
Its useless. It doesn't do anything anyone needs or wants. Which is why VR headsets have failed in the market repeatedly, and at much cheaper pricepoints. That's why it's not a fantastic value- it's no better than existing tech, it doesn't solve a problem, nobody wants the category, and it's priced at nearly 10x the competition. On every front it's the exact opposite of value.
Re: (Score:2)
The Meta Quest 3 VR headset is selling quite well: https://www.roadtovr.com/quest... [roadtovr.com]
The AVP is just way overpriced and doesn't have the app ecosystem to make it interesting enough.
Re: (Score:2)
"On every front it's the exact opposite of value."
It's not a "value" product.
"It doesn't do anything anyone needs or wants."
Makes the classic mistake of assuming that everyone's needs and wants are identical to your own.
Re: Woah (Score:3)
Re:Woah (Score:5, Insightful)
Just because it’s not affordable doesn’t mean it’s not a fantastic value.
No, just because it's not affordable doesn't mean that it isn't good technology. However, being unaffordable does mean that it's a bad value. $3500 is cheap for a car because of what the car offers, but $3500 is expensive for what the Vision Pro offers. Hence, it's a bad value. If buyers considered it to be a good value, it would have garnered more demand.
Re: (Score:2)
My mom always told me not to sit so close to the TV.
Dont sit so close to the TV, you'll ruin your eyes (Score:2)
TeeVee bad, computar worse, tablet worser, smartphone more worser, VR most worsterest.
Re: Woah (Score:3)
But does it, though? Does it really fill my field of vision with super crisp pixels, or is it like wearing a sixties scuba mask or looking through binoculars?
The demand for VR is like the demand for a flying car, every few years someone glues cardboard wings on a Camry and says "Look, we finally made a car with wings! Give us money!"
Do I even care what Vision Pro is? (Score:2)
This is sloppy, lazy thinking...
So you "feed" it and propagate its vacuous Subject?
As for the story, I originally thought it was some kind of VR thing, but now guess it's genAI or something--and feel even less reason to care.
Re: (Score:2)
If something is considered overpriced that is an indicator that the price is beyond it's actual worth.
If people are not willing to pay the price on something that means the value is less than the price.
If something is considered not affordable then the value (ROI) is not being met.
The number of units for sale on ebay for half price or less is not indicative that end users are getting their value from the device.
What is the application on your Vision Pro unit that you can't live without?
People spend large am
Re: (Score:2)
I tried an AVP and it was indeed better hardware just not $3000 better. For what it costs it should be able to dual boot or have a VM where you can run the latest MacOS. Yes, I have a MacBook Pro, and more Apple productions than I would like to admit. The MacBook Pro even cost more than the AVP. But it is a real computer and I shouldn't have to haul it around in addition to a $3500 computer in order to get a work environment.
The AVP is amazing ha
Re: (Score:2)
So they only grossed $157 million on them last quarter??? Or $1.2 billion in 2024? I wish all of my failures were so lucky.
Then again, it's said that Apple has spent $7B on it. so I suppose that's a loss. OTOH, Meta has seen operating losses of more than $77 billion since 2020 in its Reality Labs/metaverse division.
(BTW, currently reading this page on my Mac using the AVP Ultrawide monitor.)
Silver lining (Score:5, Funny)
They beat the Cybertruck
Re:Silver lining (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
They beat the Cybertruck
Even robotic colectomies beat the Cybertruck.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, the Cybertruck outsold a lot of other EVs combined.
Option 1
Chevrolet Blazer EV ~20,800
Nissan Leaf ~10,000 (approx historical)
Kia EV6 ~8,000 (approx)
Total ~38,800
Option 2
Rivian R1T ~15,000
Nissan Leaf ~10,000
Re: (Score:3)
The Ford F-150 Lightning, widely seen as a failure and canceled, outsold the cybertruck by about double. So no, I wouldn't say the cybertruck is successful by any measure.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Does it really count if SpaceX is buying Cyber trucks in bulk from Tesla?
SpaceX Buys Over 1,000 Cybertrucks as Tesla Struggles With Weak Demand [driving.ca]
Re: (Score:2)
Not defending Cybertruck, Tesla, or Musk... but the facts... "Tesla sold 38,965 Cybertruck pickup trucks in 2024, according to estimates from Cox Automotive. In its first full year on sale, the Cybertruck dunked on the electric version of the famed Ford F-150. It ran circles around the Chevrolet Silverado EV. It trounced the Rivian R1T, too. It was the best-selling electric pickup in the U.S., and the fifth best-selling battery-powered model overall."
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but (a) that number for all of 2024 is less than the 4Q 2025 number for the AVP, and (b) Cybertruck sales in 2025 fell off a cliff compared to 2024, totalling something like 16100 vehicles over the first three quarters.
trade-ins (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Except even Apple doesn't want them back.
Re: (Score:2)
They'd have shipped a lot more if they made something that wasn't over-priced useless pointless crap.
It's not useless, or pointless, or crap. In fact, its the opposite of all of those things. It' just priced 10X more than 99% of the population is willing to pay for something that does the things it does.
Re:trade-ins (Score:5, Interesting)
Exactly. People are upset about affordability and will overlook value and quality. That said, Apple made a few strange decisions... it shouldn't have a front facing screen. Electronics should be in the battery pack, not on the face. Material selection should prioritize weight savings, the battery should be wearable without accessories, it needs an USB-C thunderbolt port by default. All straightforward fixes for a company like apple.
$1.3 BILLION product sales = failure for Apple?? (Score:1)
Re:$1.3 BILLION product sales = failure for Apple? (Score:5, Insightful)
WHat were there expectations? If they were much higher, then it's a disappointment. If it was inline, then it isn't. How much did they spend in R&D on the device? Again, if it was a net loss, it's a disappointment. If it was a profit, it might not be. (A loss might also be ok if it launches a category that becomes successful, but this doesn't seem to be the case here).
Given that they shut down manufacturing, it seems very likely they sold way under expectation and overbuilt capacity. It also seems likely in that case they lost money. Which would make this a disappointment.
Re:$1.3 BILLION product sales = failure for Apple? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:$1.3 BILLION product sales = failure for Apple? (Score:5, Interesting)
Experience only matters if you make a new version. Otherwise the experience has no value. The patents are only useful if enforcable, and if they provide defensive value against companies they don't already have defense against, orif the category becomes big enough to leverage against others who do succeed. Seeing as they shut down production, it's unlikely they will create a new version anytime soon. There's not enough demand. They have an extensive patent portfolio, so the defensive value is questionable. The offensive value is also negligible, as they're unlikely to get much out of it given the lack of success in the category. So no, not a good return.
Re: (Score:2)
There is no solid evidence that manufacturing was shut down. You are believing what some guy wants you to think.
Has there ever been... (Score:3)
Has there ever been a successful VR headset that has survived long term after the initial launch frenzy? It just seems like something that people are trying to will into existence, but most people have no interest in it. A niche product for hardcore gamers and a few useful applications in science and medicine. No one's come up with a 'gotta have it' application for them. Most of generative AI is trash, but there are more useful applications for that than for VR headsets.
Re: (Score:2)
Has there ever been a successful VR headset that has survived long term after the initial launch frenzy?
Not one made by Apple.
That many? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm kind of surprised that it's as high as that, frankly. I figured there'd be a giant fanboi blip followed by a continuous flat line.
Re: (Score:3)
I suspect there is a market for them as a design/visualization tool for professionals. They aren't cheap or easy enough for casual entertainment, but for people with corporate budgets and a need to see what something will look like in 3D space before committing the money to actually create it, they are good deal.
Re: (Score:2)
Are they any good for that though? Being locked down Apple crap, it's not like you can just plug them into your workstation and your CAD software does the rest.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I would have guessed it would be more like 4 or 5 units
My company was willing to consider getting me one to use as a screen while flying and traveling (which I do a lot of). So I got the demoit was ok. I’m pretty all in these days on Apple, and I used to work in AR, so you’d think I’d be a perfect customer. But it just didn’t seem worth it.
VR fails again (Score:2)
This is the 6th or 8th time? The tech is not there, the software is not there and people do not actually need it or really want it an the price-tag is too high.
Re: (Score:2)
VR is doing just fine, only Apple has failed here. This year saw again millions of devices sold making Quest headsets far more popular than many (very much not failed) gaming consoles. The hardware is just fine, the software is great within its niche (gaming, with plenty of great games to choose from), and the price is 1/3rd of that of an xbox putting it within reach of any commoner.
But you have your head stuck in the sand (or somewhere worse) as usual with every VR article. You continue to comment about th
Re: (Score:2)
The reality is more nuanced. The tech is there... but Apple hasn't delivered a balanced system. Its incredibly advanced and will matured into a much better selling product once they bring things like weight and cost down.
Re: (Score:3)
. Its incredibly advanced and will matured into a much better selling product once they bring things like weight and cost down.
Nothing "incredible" here except to the usual clueless people. And "once they bring things like weight and cost down"? Sure, some time in the next 30-100 years that will likely happen. But not anytime soon. Because these are major reason all the other VR hypes failed.
Re: (Score:1)
Yes people are clueless for enjoying something that you don't. And it's not incredible to have tech that was unthinkable only a few years back. Maybe you should have a new years resolution of not being a grumpy gaslighting fuck?
Re: (Score:2)
And it's not incredible to have tech that was unthinkable only a few years back.
You must be reeeeaaaly clueless if you think that. This tech was thinkable and actually available about 30 years ago. It just never got cheap enough or usable enough, and that includes content creation. But architects, for example, have been using VR walkthroughs as a means of evaluating buildings for decades.
Re: (Score:1)
I was looking back through your comment history.
You might find this link useful: https://www.autismspeaks.org/a... [autismspeaks.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Hahahaha, no. What a transparent effort at elevating yourself with nothing.
For the record, I have had autist students. I know what it looks like. I am not one of them. What I am is an actual expert on quite a few of the topics discussed here. Yes, shocking, I know.
Hardly surprising (Score:2, Flamebait)
It's overpriced Apple slop which has virtually no application - mostly due to Apple's inability to sell the consumer a device that just does what they want. If Apple can't subsequently nickel and dime you to death, they have no interest in the product.
Consequently, it's a device for spendthrift morons, not the average consumer. It's a measure of Apple's arrogance that they actually thought they could get away with it.
It's not even that (Score:3)
If Apple can't subsequently nickel and dime you to death, they have no interest in the product.
Obviously, Apple would prefer to create something that enables post-purchase monetization...but forget Apple for a second. Facebook couldn't make them happen, HTC couldn't make them happen, Oculus couldn't make them happen.
They have fundamental problems that nobody can fix. People don't generally like putting things on their face. They tend to need more room; nobody likes accidentally banging their hand on a lamp they didn't realize was there. The use case (beyond niche industrial and medical uses) has been
The $3,499 headset....well geez ! (Score:2)
That's a lot (Score:2)
Manufacturing cost is probably $2K or less. So that means they are getting $100 million profit a quarter that they can put into the R&D team. They probably have 500 people working on R&D, which is a lot. As far as hardware, recall .. they don't have to design the chip, and the board is probably the same or very similar to what the MacBook Pro team designed. They need some people to work on modelling/managing device heat flow. The biggest expense is probably the optics team and the display evaluation
I really want to like the Vision Pro (Score:1)