Apple Has Given Up on the Vision Pro After M5 Refresh Flop
Posted by HelloSlowly@reddit | hardware | View on Reddit | 312 comments
Posted by HelloSlowly@reddit | hardware | View on Reddit | 312 comments
Stilgar314@reddit
I vividly remember redditors convinced it was a very good product for a first iteration and sure Apple would keep perfecting it until delivering "VR for everyone that just works". They were so convincing... I wonder where they are now.
dparks1234@reddit
I knew VR was doomed when Apple spent a decade on it and ended up having to release a prototype because they still couldn’t make it “just work” for the general public.
DeliciousPangolin@reddit
Facebook dropped $90 billion on subsidizing VR, and most of those headsets are moldering in a closet next to the Wii and the Kinect. It's a neat experience, but ultimately very few people find it compelling over the long term.
CaptainAwesome8@reddit
I fucking hate meta but the quests have genuinely been solid, I’d even say great. I know they’re probably hemorrhaging money on it, but I hope they keep making them and pricing them the way they have been
phire@reddit
TBH, we should have written off AR back when Google Glass failed.
Not because it was a bad product, but because the way the general public was instantly very hostile to the idea of cameras mounted on glasses.
Whirblewind@reddit
Are the imagined apologists in the room with us now?
AndroTux@reddit
I said that. And I’m still saying that. It was a very good product for a first iteration. Obviously, it was way too expensive. I don’t think a single person on earth would disagree with you on that. But had they iterated on the idea instead of just slapping an M5 in it, it would have had real potential. I know I’d have bought it.
Stop simplifying nuanced statements to make them fit your narrative.
gokarrt@reddit
to be fair, apple is really good at just that. but vr/ar is just a hole in which people throw hope.
PaulTheMerc@reddit
Were we on the same reddit? Basically everyone laughed at the pricetag and called it DoA at that price.
ResponsibleJudge3172@reddit
No, I'm not sure how you missed them, they were more vocal than the Valve fans are today
Stingray88@reddit
It was a pretty good product for a first iteration. Just at a totally unaffordable price point. If it was closer to $1000-1500 it probably would have been a lot more popular for the niche use cases. But with the hardware included there’s now way that price point would have given Apple a margin they would be happy with.
DarthBuzzard@reddit
It's misguided to think VR can't be between niche and for everyone. We have a word for that: mainstream.
Rodot@reddit
Problem is VR doesn't actually do anything. It doesn't solve any problems. Its appeal is in the novelty, but it doesn't actually do anything besides be kind of neat
DarthBuzzard@reddit
Sure it does. VR solves problems in communication, telepresence, education, training, fitness, health, computing.
And even if it didn't solve any problems, that still wouldn't be an issue. Consoles solve none.
Rodot@reddit
What issues does it solve in those fields? The fact that you didn't really name any issues that it solves says about as much as me saying "Consoles solve many problems in the living room, the bedroom, cars, airplanes, and hotels". Like, you can see how non-specific that is and that I'd probably be hinting at things that aren't really problems
DarthBuzzard@reddit
Communication:
VR is the most human and freeing way to hang out digitally. Unlike videocalls you get the feeling of being face to face with someone, it's less fatiguing, it's more natural, you can make eye contact, it actually provides missing subtle body language through parallax depth cues, there are far more interaction capabilities, and you get to share spaces and activities with people rather than stare at each other's backgrounds on a video call.
Telepresence:
Live digital events like concerts and sporting events never feel like you are there with the artists or there courtside if using a TV/Phone etc. It does with VR which fills the need for people to want to be there when they can't go IRL.
Education:
VR education is a great way to further engage students and have them learn in a more hands-on approach/visual approach to get them to retain information more easily. Concepts can be explored in new ways such as going inside blood cells, touring the solar system at real scale, or manipulating dangerous chemicals that wouldn't be allowed in a real school lab.
Training:
Training people in VR is a great way to put people into dangerous scenarios or build hands-on knowledge of concepts that would otherwise require unfeasible amounts of resources. Having a medical student train in VR in their dorm room would be a new benefit beyond just reading in their dorm.
Fitness:
Giving people a gamified experience can help entice people to get their share of exercise with a side of fun. This tends to allow people to exercise for longer periods as the body just forgets, to some degree, that this is exercise because the user is enjoying themselves in game-like experiences with the immersion of VR. This can be done in a shared virtual environment to help encourage your fitness routines and have personal trainers that can guide you better than on a videocall.
Health:
VR is a way to treat and/or solve various medical problems mostly in the area of neurology due to how VR can easily kick in neuroplasticity to help rewire our brain and restore functions or improve conditions. VR is known to treat amblyopia, strabismus, diplopia, nystagmus, stereoblindness, macular degeneration, achromatopsia, PTSD, various phobias, social anxiety, general anxiety, depression, chronic pain, stroke recovery, phantom limb pain. Some of these are for home users and others would be received in a professional environment.
Computing.:
Being able to have as many monitors around you as you want wherever you are without taking up physical space is a great way to enable workstation-grade productivity for frequent business travellers or those with small spaces.
Rodot@reddit
Did you really have to use AI to respond to me? What an embarrassment
DarthBuzzard@reddit
Do you really think every well laid out reddit comment is AI? The mistake is on your part.
Stingray88@reddit
I really do not think VR will ever be mainstream, and I don’t think that’s misguided at all.
TVs have greater worldwide adoption than everything else you listed, including smartphones. And even then only 4 out of 5 households own a TV. I think you’re overstating smartphone ownership.
DarthBuzzard@reddit
The problem is these thoughts are based on current tech rather than taking into account where it can go and its full set of usecases. VR/AR will probably see the biggest changes/advances of any technology to date because they are such wide fields, and interface with humans the greatest, making each change more impactful than it would be for other prior tech advances like CLI->GUI for example.
In other words, the UX of VR will change to an unimaginable degree.
There are about 2 billion TVs in use compared to 5 billion for smartphones.
Stingray88@reddit
No these thoughts are based on tech that doesn’t even exist yet, at even mass consumer affordable prices.
TVs aren’t personal devices, smartphones are. Most families don’t have more TVs than they have people, they don’t need to.
DarthBuzzard@reddit
So you're saying you've thought about holography, full body photoreal avatars, volumetric video, HDR, haptics, holodeck style AI generation?
And not just thought but actually understand how these can reshape the tech?
Stingray88@reddit
That is indeed what I’m saying. I think you’re underestimating the barrier to entry that wearable devices have.
DarthBuzzard@reddit
Then what issues would be left if all of these advances came to be?
Stingray88@reddit
There are a lot of people who would earnestly benefit from the features of your average smart watch, but simply don’t want to wear a watch. And they’re fully cognizant of it. This will be an even larger barrier for something you have to wear on your face.
DarthBuzzard@reddit
Yes it's something you wear on your face, but why is that the showstopper given the 1+ billion headphone and 4+ billion glasses wearers out there?
Are there any other issues?
Stingray88@reddit
It’s not a showstopper, it’s simply a barrier. People don’t wear headphones all the time because they become uncomfortable after a while, usually just a few hours. Likewise, a hefty portion of people who need corrective lenses prefer contacts to glasses because wearing glasses all the time is uncomfortable. I wore glasses since 1st grade, and after switching to contacts only in high school I would never consider going back… glasses are awful.
There’s a lot of features to my smart watch that become less valuable unless I’m wearing my watch during all waking hours. Thankfully, I don’t mind wearing a watch, so I get to use those features to their fullest potential. But for a lot of people wearing a watch at all is not attractive, just like wearing glasses all the time isn’t attractive to me.
DarthBuzzard@reddit
A billion people using headphones frequently in their lives, for a few hours at a time, would be considered a massive success. Most already mainstream device categories don't get used for more than a few hours.
That value proposition is prescription glasses, not VR/AR glasses. There's very different goals in mind; VR can be fun unlike prescription glasses.
laffer1@reddit
I would have bought one at 1000 dollars
Stingray88@reddit
I’m pretty sure I would have as well. And I don’t yet own any VR/AR hardware, but I’ve been very tempted by many of the (non-Meta) options out there. I’m pretty dead set on picking up the Steam Frame at this point. Obviously different use cases though…
theholylancer@reddit
they were hoping that apple, with its huge bank, would do what facebook has done and sink an ass load of money into the project and make it cheaper and cheaper with their supply chain
which is what the neo has done, but obviously I think apple has wisely decided that after looking at what happened with the zuck they opted out lol
Stingray88@reddit
The thing is Apple just doesn’t do small margins on hardware, and they definitely don’t operate any hardware at a loss. Even the Neo has an estimated 15-20% margin. Conversely Meta sold the quest at cost, or even a loss, with the goal of mass adoption.
With the hardware in the Vision Pro, Apple would definitely have to sell it at a big loss in order to get anywhere close to the Quest, and that was never going to happen.
randylush@reddit
Yeah apple didn’t want to race Facebook to the bottom
aggthemighty@reddit
Yep, I remember folks saying that Apple would be the company to make VR mainstream, that their first product was just a proof of concept priced as a luxury and that future iterations would be cheaper and have mass market appeal, etc
260X@reddit
Can say the same about Valve Index.
VR bros...
Stilgar314@reddit
Lol no. Just visit any gamer sub. Polite attention is the best Steam Frame is getting.
pepega_1993@reddit
They didn’t even try with the Vision Pro. The M5 version was just a chip change. They didn’t even try to update the design after 2 years. If they went with a lighter design, removed the outside display and made it cheaper it would have done much better.
Plank_With_A_Nail_In@reddit
Price isn't the problem, its a good bit of kit for then money, the problem is there is no market willing to pay the price for Apple to make a profit, they can half the price and sell some more but they would likely be making a loss and still have no market.
In retail no one is buying VR/AR, there is no money to pay for any of the R&d.
ResponsibleJudge3172@reddit
Price is always the problem in the VR industry. Unless you are Pimax
ThrowItAllAway1269@reddit
Pimax has its own QA issues
ResponsibleJudge3172@reddit
That's why I singled them out. They are too infamous
Creepy-Bell-4527@reddit
I loved to hate on the eyesight display but according to my partner who's used to me using the Quest 3 around her, it helps feel less disconnected.
pepega_1993@reddit
In theory yes. But it’s just added weight and worse battery life on already a very expensive headset. It would be great once we reach a stage where we have compact lightweight headset.
But adding it on top of a brick strapped to your face is not the best idea
Creepy-Bell-4527@reddit
That's why there needs to be an Apple Vision Air. A lighter, less bells-and-whistles, cheaper version. But until it's ready for the mainstream - including the pricing - it's not worth dividing the already limited market.
Lazy-Estimate-5264@reddit
I would love that! I have the Vision Pro as a tool to create an adaptive environment for myself. For I can’t sit at a desk with multiple monitors but the weight is definitely an issue
poofyhairguy@reddit
Yeah but that’s not worth an extra $1000 on the price likely and a bunch of weight.
Soylentstef@reddit
Specially With the price of googly eyes stickers.
Creepy-Bell-4527@reddit
Where are you getting that the eyesight display is adding 1k to the price from?
unsurejunior@reddit
It's like an extra 2.5k lol I don't think the meta quest 3 is that expensive
Farados55@reddit
A productivity focused AR platform that isn't really meant for gaming and restricted to the macOS environment? Who knew it'd be niche as hell.
cloud_t@reddit
Apple had the right strategy, in theory, to get into a market that was somewhat stable years before by Oculus and HTC, even Google and partners. Problem is they expected the same use cases with novel hardware that had everything to NOT have the same use cases, and they came in without a single (or even remotely close to) killer app.
...and developers had 0 incentive to produce one with the absurdities of getting the hardware for them, let alone get them to potential buyers of their app.
FlyingBishop@reddit
Not having Beatsaber at launch was just mind-boggling. It would've cost them nothing and it would've been a great hook. I get that they didn't want it to be a gaming device, but not having any good games definitely hurt it.
cloud_t@reddit
It would've cost them subservience to Meta. They had already acquired Oculus, which owned Beat Saber already.
FlyingBishop@reddit
all they had to do was give them some headsets and get them to approve the app. I guess it's possible Meta explicitly wanted Beatsaber to be a Meta-exclusive title.
Another thing would've been like Half-Life Alyx, there are a number of games that would've been amazing on AVP and people would've bought it just for that. I think the real problem is they would've had to compromise their vision and give people access to their locked-down APIs, but the whole concept of having locked-down APIs on such an experimental headset is dumb anyway.
cloud_t@reddit
Well yeah. But they're Apple. They are probably snob enough to make mistakes like this and not feel overly dramatic about it. Which is good for them, not so much for us.
leoklaus@reddit
I said it before, I think the biggest miss was Apple not incentivising developers to build for the Vision Pro.
I suggested letting devs buy it with their AppStore revenue (omitting the 15%/30% and reducing the taxable income).
That way, they’d pretty much lose no money while offering a major discount. I likely would’ve gotten one for effectively <2k and likely would’ve started creating apps for it. At 3700€, no chance.
iOS and iPad OS have phenomenal third party apps, many by very small teams or even solo developers. These are the kinds of apps selling devices in my eyes.
GHz-Man@reddit
Doesn't matter. No consumers are interested in a $3,500 headset lmao
And even if it cost $500, people said it was uncomfortable to wear for longer than 30-45 minutes. It's like having a very heavy pair of ski goggles strapped to your face.
I don't understand the appeal of VR at all aside from watching a movie (alone) or playing a video game (alone) for 1-2 hours.
TheCh0rt@reddit
I wish it were restricted to the macOS environment. It’s restricted to the mobile iOS/iPad environment. You can basically use it as a mobile device which I think makes it useless for most productivity purposes. That being said I think it’s still a useless device. I forgot they refreshed it.
SharkBaitDLS@reddit
The worst part of it being built atop iOS is it doesn’t allow multiple audio sources to run concurrently. So a basic multitasking thing you might want to do in AR, like have a YouTube video on in the background while you do your main task, is literally impossible because the OS inherits iOS’s “only one media playback at a time” behavior.
randylush@reddit
That’s so dumb, but I’ve heard that the macOS audio stack is basically surrounded in barbed wire. So I’m not too surprised that they said “we’ll “solve” multiple audio sources next decade”
TheCh0rt@reddit
The macOS audio system is surrounded to an extent yes but it’s also highly stable which is why it’s so trusted in high speed production environments.
There’s plenty of tool’s and kernel extensions to modify the audio system though. It’s not impenetrable or anything. Just super stable
randylush@reddit
but I've also heard that in Windows, since about 1995, you could mix audio between applications, but you still can't do that in macOS since 2026, basically because nobody wants to touch that shit. which is mind blowing to me because it's actually an incredibly useful feature
RabidHexley@reddit
I'm not super familiar with the nuances of the Apple software ecosytem, but this is wild to me from a PC perspective. I wouldn't expect Voicemeeter-esque functionality, but audio mixing feels like a basic feature for a desktop device to have.
TheCh0rt@reddit
You cannot mix individual app volume. That much is correct and it fucking SUCKS. However there are applications that can install a kernel extension that intercepts the audio from an app first and distribute it however you’d like. You can end up routing some crazy shit if you’d like.
virtualmnemonic@reddit
iOS audio session API is explicitly built around a single audio source. There is a way to mix audio with other apps, but doing so removes all user media controls.
Meanwhile Android can output individual apps to specific outputs...
AdulterousStapler@reddit
I thought they'd fixed that on the iPad? I had an iPad pro, I could swear it could do that. Switched to an actual computer, so I'm not totally sure if that remained among my long list of frustrations with iPad OS
LeoNatan@reddit
It’s not fixed. It behaves just as you expect. The only exception is if you have multiple Safari “windows” open—each can play independently. But if you switch to another app and play something, the Safari players pause. 🤦♂️
Strazdas1@reddit
Thats grim. This is a solved issue in other ecosystems for like 20+ years.
SharkBaitDLS@reddit
I don’t have an iPad Pro but it’s definitely still not fixed in VisionOS. Just put it on and tested it and trying to play an NBA stream and a YouTube video at the same time causes one of them to be forcibly paused.
DETRosen@reddit
Not making Apple only compatible was clearly a mistake
Farados55@reddit
Ah, so the apps etc are mobile apps? I thought it was compatible with macOS apps, but I think I misremembered with being able to access a macbook via that overlay thing. Even worse!
Kyanche@reddit
You can remote desktop into a mac with it, basically.
Bderken@reddit
That’s how I use it almost everyday. Have a giant ultra wide monitor in the VisionPro. It’s weird because that ultra wide works better than my real one with Mac’s weird scaling.
thegreatmattsby24@reddit
I am just now learning they refreshed it!
whatThePleb@reddit
Especially for such a high price it's doomed to fail with such stupid limitations.
Creepy-Bell-4527@reddit
It was built to complement a Mac, and it does that very well. I prefer Mac Virtual Display to actually using my Macbook at a desk.
Farados55@reddit
How does your head feel after an hour?
Creepy-Bell-4527@reddit
Absolutely fine.
I demoed a M2 Vision Pro with the original knit band and within the 15 minutes demo, my neck was aching like hell and my face was hurting.
The dual knit band? I watched Star Wars ep 6-9 in 1 sitting, no discomfort at all (except for the fact I was watching Rise of Skywalker again, sOmEhOw PaLpAtInE rEtUrNeD)
Farados55@reddit
The fact that you rewatched the last jedi tells me enough
Creepy-Bell-4527@reddit
The spectacle of it being 4k 3d HDR helps distract from bad writing, but even that has its limits.
Viper_NZ@reddit
Only sold in limited markets for an incredibly high price.
Why is no one buying this?
steve09089@reddit
Correction, restricted to iPadOS.
It’s a good thing it failed, otherwise, the disease that is iPadOS would’ve started spreading to Macs.
Original-Material301@reddit
They had an M5 VP?
I thought they gave up after the first try.
Ploddit@reddit
VR of any kind is already niche. $3500 VR has an audience of 10 people.
zushiba@reddit
It was pretty much just YouTubers. I know quite literally no one that bought one. I would love to have one to play with but I won’t pay for it.
omegafivethreefive@reddit
I'm the ideal customer for it, I'm an exec in tech R&D, particularly integrating more modern technologies/alternative interfaces and AI into bespoke solutions.
I also game and my personal "tech for fun" budget is 10k/y.
My problem with it is that I have no idea what to even do with it.
It's not made for enterprise use. It's not good for PCVR. It's Apple so just building apps for it sucks.
Popping up screens in a 3D environment just doesn't beat having top of the line ultrawide curved monitors.
Seanspeed@reddit
That was their big mistake. This really needed to be aimed at business use cases. As a consumer product, the price is insanity.
RabidHexley@reddit
It likely still wouldn't have saved it, but this is the thing that ensured the device wouldn't even find partial success. The VR space is niche, but it's still a space where there is an existing customer base for devices like these. A customer base that is accustomed to paying top-dollar for high-end gear, which could have potentially been leveraged by Apple's premium-device-magic.
But Apple was completely dedicated to ensuring their device would as useless as possible for that demographic in the name of essentially inventing a completely new market, and not being labelled a "VR Headset".
Diverryanc@reddit
I have days where we meet up for work in a shared office space and bringing an AVP to pop up a giant ultrawide curved monitor absolutely beats bringing the actual monitor from home! It’s still a niche application for the device though.
xraycat82@reddit
This experience in a Meta Quest 3 is also good though. And it’s 90% cheaper.
Diverryanc@reddit
I had a coworker that used that…once he tried my AVP he hasn’t been able to go back to the quest. It’s 90% cheaper for sure, and it will get the job done, but it’s just not the same.
RabidHexley@reddit
Different person, but I mean, I would hope a device that costs 10x more would be significantly better at a shared use-case (if it wasn't you might as well just throw it in the garbage at that point). But you're ultimately still paying 10x the price to optimize for niche use-cases.
FinancialRip2008@reddit
lol this is where you lost me. just give me a giant flat panel rather than that goofy novelty stuff.
ExtremeFreedom@reddit
Once you get to 34" ultrawides not having a curve actually makes them less useable. And once you are on a 49" ultrawide it's a requirement. Just think of how you setup 2 24 or 27" monitors next to each other, I bet they are at a slight angle to each other right? Same thing goes for ultrawides. And ultrawides are amazing for spreadsheets or having up multiple windows. I actually have two 49" ultrawides one on top of the other, great for having email, teams, discord, some browser windows, excel, etc. up. There isn't a good way to split a single 4k monitor in a way that is as useful as this. I've tried with 4k oled tvs and it's just not as good as this. Also on CS you see more to the left and right so it gives you a competitive advantage. Same on LoL, you get more left and right vision. I'm sure other games are like this as well. You mentioned there being some "hassle" in your other comment and I have no idea what you are talking about.
lowlymarine@reddit
Huh, I thought competitive CS players were required by law to play in stretched 4:3.
r_z_n@reddit
49” or larger curved ultrawides are amazing for sim racing. It’s not a novelty, it just needs the right use case.
FinancialRip2008@reddit
how are they better than simply using a larger screen?
TBoner101@reddit
They’re closer to the curvature of the human eye compared to a flat monitor, for one.
I get that you don’t like them, regret your purchase, and feel like you got had (which sucks, I’ve been there, I think most of us who are tech enthusiasts have), but that doesn’t mean everyone else feels the same way, that we’re ALL somehow in denial and thus are attempting to convince others in the process as a result, simply in order to defend “bad purchasing decisions”.
I read a few accounts like yours that almost prevented me from getting an UW. If anything, I wish mine had a bigger curve than it does.
Dzov@reddit
I would add that the curve keeps the distance of different parts of the screen somewhat closer together, thus reducing eye focusing.
TBoner101@reddit
Are you talking about the total area being less due to the aspect ratio?
Dzov@reddit
No. I meant that a flat screen means your eye has to work harder focusing between the center and the edges.
Here’s some marketing/claims from ViewSonic that maybe explains it better than I can:
Curved Monitors Increase Eye Comfort The above factors also make curved monitors more comfortable overall. Essentially, the curvature of the monitors allows our eyes to take in everything at once without strain.
This comes in opposition to flat screens, which may cause eyestrain if the screen exceeds a viewer’s natural field of view. The ability to take in a scene without strain is something that occurs naturally in everyday life.
By being able to take in the entirety of a curved screen, even at very large sizes, your eyes take advantage of that natural feeling to remain comfortable. All in all, when considering curved vs. flat monitors, bear in mind that your eyes will be able to do their job more comfortably when viewing the former.
r_z_n@reddit
The curve provides a more realistic field of view with the way the display curves around you vs a flat panel, particularly on the >49” screens with an aggressive curve.
FinancialRip2008@reddit
as someone who owns a coupla curved screens. nope. absolutely not.
i got hooked by that bullshit and i regret it so hard. i lowkey think it's malicious to suggest curved screens aren't just a tool to get people to buy awful screens they then need to replace.
r_z_n@reddit
I own one (Samsung Odyssey, 49” 1000R curve) and use it with my sim rig for iRacing. I also have a 38” ultra wide with no curve, a different 49” Ultrawide with no curve, and other smaller flat panel screens and 65” and 75” 4K television. Respectfully disagree. For racing specifically the curved ultrawides are very good and it’s a noticeable difference.
FinancialRip2008@reddit
amusingly, i have a sim rig too. i use a VR headset. sometimes i just use the AR glasses i bought on a whim (they're not fatiguing). either is a massive improvement over looking at a screen.
ima stick with 'curved screens shouldn't exist.' in the niches where they're better than a flat panel... it's a screen for 1 person sitting in a specific spot, at which point there are better solutions.
and that's still not touching how using a larger screen is more immersive and less fussy than using a wonky aspect ratio.
r_z_n@reddit
For racing it’s not really about the size of the screen, it’s the field of view. Wider is better because it translates into seeing more of the track, and a wider screen allows a wider FOV without distortion. That is why triple monitor setups are generally the best.
VR headsets are amazing and definitely the best option if you can handle wearing them, especially with head tracking, but I find VR headsets difficult to tolerate over longer periods of time.
dparks1234@reddit
Depends how wide the screen is
Strazdas1@reddit
It doesnt.
FinancialRip2008@reddit
it really doesn't. gimmicky aspect ratios are just a hassle unless you're invested in the kool-aid.
frostygrin@reddit
And the curve isn't a big change on a standard, small screen, so it's senseless to hate it.
Dzov@reddit
Curved monitors are fine for one person. Curved TVs are largely stupid.
Gatecrasher3@reddit
"Popping up screens in a 3D environment just doesn't beat having top of the line ultrawide curved monitors."
I don't know. Id love to have one for flipping down on the couch, and then streaming my gaming PC to it via Sunshine/Moonlight, gaming on a 150" floating monitor while on the couch sounds pretty dank.
I hear you can get them for reasonable prices on FB marketplace as people are just dumping them on there.
FlyingBishop@reddit
Yeah but for $3500 you can install multiple monitors and hang them from the ceiling or whatever. And you know it's Apple so they have gone out of their way to make gaming worse than it should be.
meeeeeeeeeeeeeeh@reddit
It's oddly good for reading and retaining information. Apparently the memory palace technique applies to VR at least for me.
It's really good for 3D movies and the apple immersive videos are all amazing.
The 3D picture conversion of your photo library is amazing.
The apple ecosystem integration and UI is really compelling. You can pretty much use it for everything you would use an iPad for.
ALVR is okay for PCVR and there is controller support now. I do hope steam link adds PCVR support though.
For me personally if they just had a few more apps like Nomad Sculpt where 3D would really benefit the workflow it would easily justify 3.5k.
They are pretty reasonable on the used market now. I like mine, I get the hate, but they are honestly pretty fantastic besides the price.
parasubvert@reddit
I'll take screens in a 3D environment over UW monitors any day frankly. the portability and free placement is the ideal.
It's also quite good for PCVR. Building apps with Reality Kit and Metal is quite a lot more fun than OpenXR...
Creepy-Bell-4527@reddit
It is good for PCVR, building apps for it is pretty decent with SwiftUI and RealityKit, and popping up an ultrawide monitor floating at eye level whilst you use your MacBook on a sofa or bed? Unbeatable! Being able to seamlessly use the touchpad and keyboard on said MacBook to then control whatever visionOS windows your ADHD ass has floating around that virtual display? Magical.
I say this as someone who has a top of the line monitor: Mac Virtual Display beats using it at the desk. I resent having to sit at the desk for video calls for work.
evangelism2@reddit
Gotta use xcode, so its shit.
LeSeanMcoy@reddit
When it was announced, I thought it was a really cool. The idea of cooking and having recipes in front of me in AR, putting TV screens around my apartment, etc. was really novel and interestingly. I remember thinking: "Eh, likely will be closer to $1000-$1500. Not sure if I'll put the trigger at that price... kinda a lot. We'll see how reviews go." When it came at $3500 I just laughed. Zero chance I'd ever buy it for that much, especially knowing it would be bare at launch.
PigSlam@reddit
So you seriously think you’d strap that on your face then stand in your kitchen and cook a meal? I wouldn’t do that if they paid me $3,500 to do it.
cp_carl@reddit
Has someone who cooks a lot I can only imagine how much grease would build up on that screen
Jordan_Jackson@reddit
The grease in the strap would be truly, next level disgusting. Anybody that cooks knows that cooking causes dirt and grime to get everywhere.
ENaC2@reddit
Better than the alternative for the other type of user.
Strazdas1@reddit
Sure but if they paid me 35000 i would do it anyway :)
LeSeanMcoy@reddit
Idk, I would feel like a tool after seeing how big it is lol. Plus, if there's a lot of heat/steam/smoke I wonder how it deals with getting fogged up.
But depending on how well it was received, if they could've made it a bit smaller and less obnoxious I 100% would be interested in using it for that.
PigSlam@reddit
If it l fit in something like regular glasses, sure, it’d be plausible. I’d imagine at some point, we’ll be able to shrink that part of things to a contact lens scale, and that’d be really something.
DarthBuzzard@reddit
I imagine that a pair of glasses that does this for <$1000 will be a normal way to cook in the future.
algaefied_creek@reddit
Seems like there have been some interesting medical uses.
I can see it being used for that, high-end car mechanic work/complex engine work, but outdoor/trades work or daily wear is a no go at $3500per
Outrageous_Mail_8381@reddit
The Apple Vision pro is incredibly heavy for a headset, people often complain about how tiring it is to wear after limited (under 1hr) of use.
ZombiePope@reddit
That thing would not survive a day in a mechanic's shop. It's not rugged enough for the only environments it would make sense in.
MDCCCLV@reddit
Like most things it needs to be updated and still get another 1-2 generations smaller and more comfortable before it's really ready for heavy use, but for that you just have to make it non porous chemical resistant plastic and easily wipeable. For AR use like with that it should be possible to just have regular thick glasses.
FlyingBishop@reddit
The thing is in addition to being too big the hardware is actually still kind of underpowered. The effective resolution is actually pretty shit when you consider that you could buy a half a dozen computers and put them in strategic locations for the same price, and they would probably actually be more readable and not require a GPU chugging just to make sure that it doesn't make you motion sick repositioning and doing passthrough video.
algaefied_creek@reddit
Well dang that sucks. That and jet engines would make hella sense.
PMARC14@reddit
We had that called Microsoft Hololens, and it also went nowhere long-term.
Frostsorrow@reddit
From my friend who worked at MS during the Hololens, it sold extremely well. Just not to the public. It was sold to the military.
FlyingBishop@reddit
I think the military buy was actually kind of a disaster and most of the units were not well-used, but Pentagon procurement is so opaque nobody cares if you waste $1B.
That said I'm sure there were and are a lot of great uses for it, even if it was generally a flop.
max123246@reddit
Yeah VR/AR has a lot of applications in industry and medical settings. None of those get headlines like consumer products so the average person doesn't know about it.
PaulTheMerc@reddit
AR & the hololens is EXACTLY what I was hoping for.
The training applications alone of AR could be amazing. But like...I think MS realized that and pivoted towards companies/military instead of end consumers.
Outrageous_Mail_8381@reddit
It literally didnt come out with Netflix or Youtube apps at launch, its was incredibly bare, think it only got a native Youtube app 2 months back.
Cheerful_Champion@reddit
Arguably, the biggest impact of the Vision Pro was scaring Meta into improving many aspects of its OS
SausageMcMerkin@reddit
Go Birds!
UnaidedGinger@reddit
I’m not a YouTuber and I have one. It’s good for watching shows if you travel a lot on planes or spend a lot of time by yourself in hotels. I look like an idiot on the plane and I’ve never seen another person using one or any vr for that matter. Normally I just weird people out sitting in economy with it on lol
Cohibaluxe@reddit
I bought some AR goggles like 4 years ago that cost around $300 for watching movies on planes. They also look 10x less stupid than the Vision Pro (they pretty much just look like slightly large sunglasses). You might actually fool someone into thinking you're just blind and/or hung over with them
I'm sure the Vision Pro is slightly better... but not 10 times better
_hlvnhlv@reddit
Most likely it is.
Many AR glasses have laughably bad field of views and poor colour consistency, and due to the open nature of it, poor contrast too (there are inserts that you can add to the thing)
The resolution is another big one, most AR glasses don't even go beyond 1080p.
The AVP has a much bigger FOV, display, resolution, contrast, everything really.
Yes, it's somewhat comparable, but it's like comparing a 1080p LCD phone screen with an 6k oled monitor...
I'm not joking, the AVP has a display that is 6k per eye, 3660 x 3142p
Still, not worth it, just saying that there is an abysmal difference.
UnaidedGinger@reddit
I saw something like this recently for like $500 Connect’s via usb c and honestly looks awesome for plane stuff. Does it make you feel motion sick at all
_hlvnhlv@reddit
It shouldn't, as it's just an HUD with a floating window in front of you
DarthBuzzard@reddit
What product did you buy?
Cohibaluxe@reddit
Yes, but they had a plastic attachment for blinding out your surroundings. Nreal Air
DarthBuzzard@reddit
In that case I can answer your remark: Yes, Vision Pro is at least 10x better if not much more than that.
The difference between seethrough AR glasses and opaque VR/AR headsets is fundamental.
Nreal Air has about half the field of view, can't produce true blacks and fully opaque visuals, and was 3DoF only. 3DoF VR devices like the old Samsung Gear VR are considered poison to the industry, often considered not to be real VR which is 6DoF. So you have that massive restriction on top of all the other major restrictions from transparent vs opaque XR devices.
Cohibaluxe@reddit
Sure, sure. But for watching movies on a plane - which is specifically what the user I responded to seems to use it for exclusively, or at least mostly - all that doesn’t actually matter that much. Yes, the blacks aren’t quite as good. But they’re still perfectly usable. With the blackout attachment it’s better than any airplane monitor and perfectly good enough to watch stuff enjoyably. The FOV isn’t quite as wide, but it’s still a large part of your vision and appears much bigger than even a large laptop screen sitting on your lap, or anything else that isn’t strapped to your face.
Hey, if you’ve got the cash to spend 10x more for slightly deeper blacks and a slightly bigger screen - you do you. I don’t think it’s anywhere close to 10x the value for this specific use case.
ZoddImmortal@reddit
So Im not who was replying to you, but the VR really is better, and I didn't even have a Vision Pro to compare it to. I bought a RayNeo Air 3s Pro back in December, and I own a Quest 3. In comparison the screen is bigger, the edges are much clearer, and the pixel density is way higher. I really wanted to like the smaller tech glasses, but I couldn't deal with it.
nicklor@reddit
How is the battery life in not going to bite for 3500 but I am very interested in vr in general
DarthBuzzard@reddit
2-3 hours depending on what you're doing. This is very typical of VR at the moment. Personally I have a battery strap for my Quest 3 which gives me about 7 hours in total.
nicklor@reddit
That's pretty decent I'm still using my O+ wmr headset which still works pretty well for my use but I'm sure something from this decade would be a bit improvement
KenTrotts@reddit
You have a $3500 headset and still fly economy?
KomandirHoek@reddit
Hey you dont get rich by spending your money
pixelpoet_nz@reddit
If you read carefully, they didn't say they're sitting in economy.
KomandirHoek@reddit
That's literally what he did say 😆
UnaidedGinger@reddit
Buddy I’ve worn that thing on a spirit flight
Bderken@reddit
Yeah I like mine and use it everyday lol
FlyingBishop@reddit
If Valve released a $3500 VR headset I would buy it, but I'm not paying for a locked-down Apple headset with no software. I'm not a fan of iOS to begin with, but the model is totally stupid when the device doesn't even have a solid use case.
Like the device wouldn't let you move more than a few feet in any direction without kicking you out of VR. And that's a totally sensible default but when the device is such a weird thing that no one knows what to do with it's pretty stupid to put those kinds of arbitrary restrictions and make them impossible to override. The killer app that's worth $3500 might require that feature, but we'll never know.
jameskond@reddit
Pretty sure those people just got them for free...
parasubvert@reddit
and developers, and enthusiasts. I have two, one is for my wife. I have friends and colleagues with it, though not many.
Intrepid_Lecture@reddit
I know one person who bought one. High income. Cares about being flashy. Big Apple fan.
She returned it.
loudshirtgames@reddit
I bought one on launch. Used for maybe 3 hours today. Use my quest almost every day.
scotaf@reddit
My brother bought one! It was really nice but not affordable to me.
DesperateAdvantage76@reddit
VR needs to reach price and resolution parity with monitors. Vision Pro would have done much better at a lower price.
GHz-Man@reddit
Doubt it. No one's really interested in VR in general.
Look at "Meta" lol
ResponsibleJudge3172@reddit
Meta loses money on the absurd RND than anything
GHz-Man@reddit
Who's buying the headsets? Almost no one.
Strazdas1@reddit
The sales are counted in millions of units. someone is.
GHz-Man@reddit
No they aren't lol
No-Improvement-8316@reddit
lol, what a гetaгd.
2023:
https://www.gamedeveloper.com/business/meta-has-sold-almost-20-million-quest-headsets
2025 estimates from Reality Atlas:
https://www.reality-atlas.com/blog/xr-industry-statistics
GHz-Man@reddit
We're still using that word in 2026? Yikes.
No-Improvement-8316@reddit
Yes, we use the word 'гetaгd' to describe гetaгded people like you.
GHz-Man@reddit
Enjoy having your account banned lol
No-Improvement-8316@reddit
Enjoy being a гetaгd.
slakin@reddit
What a small pathetic man who can't handle being proven wrong.
Strazdas1@reddit
Yes, they are. And by far most of them are used for VRChat too. People are weird.
GHz-Man@reddit
No
half-baked_axx@reddit
Not only that, $3500 VR that was made purposefully incompatible with any and all VR content ever made. Because apple gotta apple and be snobby about their software. So the audience is further reduced to like 5 people.
DeliciousPangolin@reddit
If it had been SteamVR compatible it would have had a market among high-end users. A tiny market, but at least it would have sold to people who already spend big money on VR hardware. Headsets are core technology for flight and driving sims.
If it had a standard controller with a similar layout to every other headset, then at least you could port games from other platforms over without having to completely change the control scheme. It would still be overpriced for that market, but there are people who pay for elaborate setups to run VRChat.
Failing all that, they should have at least signed deals with all the major streaming video services. A headset that is entirely focused on watching videos that can't play Netflix in a native app is the biggest of all their failures.
bargu@reddit
I don't think that would've helped much, the fact that they decided to make it out of aluminum (light but much heavier than plastic) and glass (extremely heavy and fragile) is the definition of form over function, people don't want to get neck pain after 30 minutes of gaming.
_hlvnhlv@reddit
People have managed to use a fork of ALVR and play with it on PCVR, it's a really tiny audience tho, but it's there
leoklaus@reddit
This is exactly the kind of stuff I’d hope Ternus will do better than Cook.
mayoforbutter@reddit
Next up: your iPhone will use Bluetooth and wifi to scan for other devices. It will then refuse to work until you have purged your house of heretical hardware
Deep90@reddit
10 really loud people.
It's amazing it took apple so long to realize this wasn't a viable product.
mollymoo@reddit
I found it weird that they released it because in the past Apple have been really good at waiting to release hardware until there is a legit software & services use-case for it. Like NFC was on Androids for years but basically nobody used it, whereas Apple waited till they had ApplePay in the works and NFC was actually useful.
But nobody seems to have figured out what AVP is actually good for, despite being some clever tech that apparently works very well.
Sictirmaxim@reddit
VR in general has the most die hard and loud voices on the net. Probably beating even high end audiophiles.
Its been a dead end ship for ages by now,but they will tell you otherwise at every chance they get.
GHz-Man@reddit
Not really. Tim Cook wanted it very much, for some reason.
He also supported the now-cancelled self-driving car.
Many of the other executives (including John Ternus, the upcoming CEO) thought it was a stupid product and didn't support it.
Creepy-Bell-4527@reddit
As a VR enthusiast that's owned pretty much every generation of VR headset since the Rift DK2, the AVP genuinely doesn't feel like a VR headset to use. It very much feels like a distinct product category that meaningfully augments the Mac experience and delightfully replaces the at-home media consumption experience. I don't know if I would call it a spatial computer but it definitely warranted a distinct term from VR.
It can be used as a decent PCVR headset, but that was clearly an afterthought (tracked controllers came out in 26.0 and foveated streaming in 26.4, so a very recent afterthought).
ElmerLeo@reddit
I 100% agree with your initial point of it been a different product from other VR headsets.
But I don't see this as a pro...
I love my VRs as a videogame machines.
I don't see much vantage in VR for any other function...
Like, maybe movies but a good TV is better in 99% of the time. Working it would begin to be possible only if you work from home and even them a good setup with 3+ monitors is equal or even better...
So to pivot away from games was the worst idea for the AVP...
account312@reddit
I just want something compact and high res that I can carry around instead of some monitors.
GrE1sS@reddit
And it's not even sold everywhere... I would consider buying it, but it's not supported in my country...
Dzov@reddit
And they made sure it wouldn’t work with games.
OverlyOptimisticNerd@reddit
Especially when Apple is doing their best to prevent games from being brought to the device.
Apparently someone at Apple thought it was a good idea to sell a niche product for an absurd price, and then not focus on the primary thing that people buy it for.
parasubvert@reddit
well... more like 700k ... and then there's Varjo which is even more expensive but mostly sold to governments.
LavenderDay3544@reddit
The best AR would use existing phones via the camera similar to Google Lens instead of having a whole headset.
DarthBuzzard@reddit
Phone based AR is a bit gimmicky. It doesn't fulfil the promise in any real way.
Headsets/Glasses are needed.
LavenderDay3544@reddit
They're really not and they're obstructive. Just move your phone around and get information about things you see through the camera. Nothing gimmicky about it.
PaulTheMerc@reddit
for some applications like say, object identification, navigation, etc. that would work.
For applications like training with vr, assistance in applications like car repair and such, you would likely want glasses/headset so you would have better field of view, and use of both hands.
Iscariot-@reddit
“Glasses are obstructive” is an interesting take. Lol
chemastico@reddit
Yeah wtf do they know regular glasses are literally augmented reality for shortsighted people lol
moofunk@reddit
Why would I want that? Suppose I need to use both hands in the AR environment.
If I'm a worker and not standing on the ground or having my fingers inside some machinery, I can't be fumbling around with a phone.
Also, the FOV is shit on the phone.
DarthBuzzard@reddit
Holding your phone up around you is tiresome for little added effect. You're getting only a small 2D view and have very little ability to interface properly with it because a phone is a poor method of input for AR.
saikrishnav@reddit
They actually hoped it would pick up and hardware costs will go down.
Not even cheap headsets could give a good market for it.
Problem is the overall setup to have a good experience is cumbersome. People prefer hand held gaming to this. And that has some potential.
Apple should have made a handheld gaming device which would boost its gaming portfolio - if they throw money at some studios.
Console doesn’t work because there’s no room in market.
PeterDTown@reddit
Apparently 600,000 people. Still not enough for apple to keep going with it.
Ploddit@reddit
Baffling.
i_did_nothing_@reddit
Especially when you can get one WITH controllers for about $350
Balavadan@reddit
If the headset was smaller and cheaper then I would buy it just for watching sports and media alone
260X@reddit
Not necessarily.
I wouldn't mind buying AR/VR glasses with a day long battery life that are no larger than my eyeglasses.
I just don't see the big idea of a headset the size of a freakin' watermelon!
QuantumUtility@reddit
There are 179 job postings on Apple’s website regarding the Vision Pro. 14 were posted today.
Doesn’t seem like they are giving up on anything.
suppreme@reddit
Apple often keeps on executing the initial plan (including staffing etc) up until executives pull the plug. Then everybody gets reassigned.
It'd be more telling to see which employees go seek those jobs.
floorshitter69@reddit
Same corporate stuff a few people I know have experienced. They get accepted for a new job, only to find out the entire department got axed in their first month.
Such_Ad_6680@reddit
Damn, I always look forward to the presentations random scenarios of when VR in the real world would be useful.
nameless_food@reddit
I had gotten the impression that this thing was priced like a prototype.
jbourne0129@reddit
nothing like paying $3500 to be a beta tester
diskowmoskow@reddit
Like a rare engineering sample
ExtremisEdge@reddit
I want one. But I want it to be more open and have game applications. I think the tech is neat. But it’s expensive even for an Apple product. If they could bring the price down to 1200 and have some killer apps it would be a holiday monster.
Loose_Skill6641@reddit
no surprise
people don't want to work in AR
RealLordDevien@reddit
I am a people and work in vr :(
Stilgar314@reddit
and you want to?
RealLordDevien@reddit
Sure. Its awesome
EdliA@reddit
There are tens of you around the globe
ConejoSarten@reddit
No, you are the person that works in VR
PaulTheMerc@reddit
I'd like to, but it would have to be: responsive af, configurable, actually good.
Personally I'd prefer glasses though.
doscomputer@reddit
lots of people want to, rocco botte of mega64 is a prolific user of the vision pro for video editing, and the other guys all wish they could have one too but the price is the only reason they wont get one
weirdotorpedo@reddit
Ive said this for quite some time. The vision pro should have been for developers only to give them time to develop apps for the device and to give feedback on the design which most likely would have included too heavy and the glass eye screen on the front is pointless.
at that point release a vision pro with m series chip and a vision with an a series chip and some other differences and heres the key part NOT CHARGE $3500 for the vision pro. the audacity that they thought they could charge that for a device with so few apps and so heavyis crazy to me
i think the vision pro can still be viable but some people have to put their ego aside and listen to feedback and give out units to developers and try again in a year or 2.
VR could be great but Apples ego on design and idiotic pricing killed it in this instance
DropTheMixtape@reddit
I keep checking Facebook marketplace for one. I’m down to pay 500 cad it will happen one day. Someone will take the loss.
gomurifle@reddit
From the first moment I saw it, I said that it's not a vaible product, it's a collector's item.
Falkenmond79@reddit
VR with integrated components is the wrong move and always will be. Look how hard it is to get a modern game to run at 4K with a decent frame rate. Now they all want it strapped to your head with a steady 90 or 120fps to make it usable. In my opinion we need 80-100hz per eye so 160-200FPS and that can only be achieved by clever tech like the new steam frame and having a beefy PC to provide the compute power. Just work on low latency picture streaming to a headset, preferably wireless and stop trying to cram a whole PC into the thing.
ElmerLeo@reddit
The most used headsets been the quest 3 and 2 (Both stand alone) goes against your point...
Both can be(and I do) used linked to a PC But the stand alone capacity is a big part of the alure.
I'm traveling for work right now, and I come back to the hotel everyday and play a little on my quest. Mostly, RE4, population1, and beat saber.
At home I play alot of "battle Talent", but in the hotel room I would end up punching a wall.....
EdliA@reddit
I use my quest 3 only for streaming PC games. Zero interest on the crappy native games.
Strazdas1@reddit
And the most used Gpus are budget variants. The reason is because people buy cheapest option, not because its better.
Falkenmond79@reddit
Be honest. The quest is also heavily subsidized by meta and thus cheap. I’d say that’s the more likely reason why it sold so well. Technical stats-wise it’s pretty meh, too.
ElmerLeo@reddit
Would the price I paid more than 3 years ago have any weight in the time I used the quest 2 literally today?
What is the use you want?
To play games is a hell of a "console".
-Do you want 4k movies?
Buy a TV
-Do you want to do meaningful work?
Buy a good pc setup (3 screens etc)
-Do you want to shoot at zombies, fight goblins or cut floting cubes following a song?
Then buy any modern VR(other than the AVP).
And connecting the quest (and for that I use the 3) to my PC I can even play WarThunder VR and any other PCVR game.
Falkenmond79@reddit
What I (and many other gamers I suspect) want, is a headset with at least 80fps per eye, fov of 140 degrees, a resolution that eliminates any and all screen door effects and that paired with graphics that don’t look like any other indie game with bonbon-low poly graphics or comic style. We don’t want yet another minimalist beat saber. Those things are fine for getting our non-gamer spouses to get into it.
What I want is what I nearly got with a heavily modded Skyrim VR. Immersion. Total immersion. I have a reverb G2 with 2096x2096 per eye, so effectively about 4K in total. But the Fov sucks and it gets hot as all hell and the tracking is meh, good enough. The cable keeps breaking and it randomly stops working. Actually got two of them. When they threw out windows mixed reality from Win11 you could get them for dirt cheap, like 100-130 bucks. They now work again with steam oasis drivers, but only sometimes. 🤷🏻♂️All in all pretty shitty experience.
I set my hopes in the new valve frame and pray it will be good. I almost don’t care about the price. I just hope it’s a valve-typical good product.
I even would have paid apple the 3000 bucks, if it wasn’t so mired in the Apple walled garden. I am a reformed apple hater, but this is one thing I truly don’t like about them. Price gouging through forcing you into their infrastructure universe. 🤷🏻♂️
ElmerLeo@reddit
Ohh, I totally agree in the wants.
My point is mostly that the difference in VR is in the immersion, and contrary to what some people say, immersion =/= realistic graphics.
Do I want more resolution and more FPS? 100%
Does the AVP with that price, that specs but with almost no games makes any sense what so ever? Nooooo.
Ps: the steam deck (I'm buying first day it's available) will also be standalone + "PCVR" like the MetaQuest ones.
By price, ease of use(considering both modes), etc
I don't see any other competition with the quest3...
Is it so popular because it's cheap? Yeh, of course.
"There's no bad product. Just bad prices."
Falkenmond79@reddit
Yeah I was toying with the idea of getting one of those big Pimax headsets but they have their caveats, too. One thing Meta seems to have gotten right is getting rid of some of the jankyness. I used to have a oculus rift s and it hurts a little to not be able to get to play all the oculus store stuff anymore, I spent way too much on it back then.
Right now I own a 7800x3d Pc with a 4080 and that already struggles with graphically intense games at 4K. DLSS and co make it a bit better, but we are not there yet. Photorealism isn’t the big goal either, but neither is too rudimentary graphics. I could lose myself for hours in fallout 4 VR, for example. The feeling of raising your arm to look at the pip boy alone was glorious. As was manually aiming. Even a shitty pipe gun felt 10x better than usual.
This, with better textures and less screen door would be the goal. 🤣
StickFlick@reddit
Agreed. We have the existing tech right now for this. The integrated crap is a future problem. Getting people interested by making it affordable <- (big key point) and integratable with their existing gaming/workstation hardware is a no brainer.
The again this is Apple. The maker of the 1000 dollar monitor stand.
Man I hope the steam frame has a decent entry point price.
SmileyBMM@reddit
It won't unless ram prices drop massively within the year.
Creepy-Bell-4527@reddit
Then you'll be thrilled to hear the M5 AVP is actually a 120Hz device fully capable of rendering at that rate 😉
robert1005@reddit
Only light stuff, let's not kid ourselves shall we.
Creepy-Bell-4527@reddit
It can run multiple apps concurrently in an immersive environment at that rate and that’s all it was designed to do.
If you want gaming, you pair it with a gaming PC. It’s not a gaming headset.
thegreatpotatogod@reddit
I got to do a demo of it at the Apple Store, and it was an incredible experience, I really enjoyed it, and ended up getting a Quest 3 partially because of that experience, as the closest thing that was affordable for me. The quest 3 is far too uncomfortable though, even with a 3rd party headband that is supposed to be a lot more comfortable, it makes my face sore within minutes. The Vision Pro, while heavy, was a far more comfortable and ergonomic design, and I'd been looking forward to getting a more affordable follow-up model down the road. Sad to hear such a device likely won't be made after all.
noonetoldmeismelled@reddit
I was saying the same thing since the beginning. While the Apple faithful were talking about workstation replacement as a revolutionary idea, that has been a common use-case for VR/HMD headsets for over a decade now. Sure the AVP has a way better display, but not so much better to make working in an HMD revolutionary better in enough ways.
VR medical training, corporate training, warehouse logistics replacing tablets/pen/paper. Nothing new but Apple faithful treated it like it was a new revolution. TV/movie theater display, the last decade of people that were highly impressed but still abandoned their headsets would not be representative of AVP users. Not only is the AVP so much better, AVP users are so much more cultured. Live sporting events in VR, this time it'll be a major mainstream selling point. Travel agency, real estate, home remodeling, etc - VR will be revolutionary unlike how it was anytime in the previous 10 years
No standard game wands/controller. AVP is meant to be for the mainstream who don't want to look like sweaty geeks. AVP is for cool people. Aspirational. AVP doesn't want to be associated with video games but it'll be so popular from being such an aspirational device, video game devs will make non physical control games for the AVP and it's sub million active users for a platform that's mobile phone adjacent so I imagine being a market that doesn't support well paid video games. So try to be free to play for a sub million active user base and be something that can support a full time dev across years
To that point, video games have been just about the most common usecase for VR headsets for the previous 10 years and to today. It's pretty much the 90s to the near present where graphics cards makers marketed heavily to gamers until they found more and more data center customers. Apple decided to build a new isolated device software market that's removed from the last decade of interactive VR application releases and price it like a good 100" television where all the greatest content available for VR is not on AVP, is available on way cheaper headsets, and usually wants motion control wands with buttons on them
Also not solving the HMD size problem. No decision maker marketing this thought could remember the google glass glassholes era. Now this that's like 10 times larger with weird eyes. Every VR headset is fun to watch movies on in limited amounts before the discomfort and annoyances overwhelms. AVP though is the one that's not good at gaming and has the least amount of applications built for it. Glorified head mounted iPad
ResponsibleJudge3172@reddit
People are just like that. Exact same thing I see with Valve fans
what595654@reddit
Apple selling estimated $2.1 billion worth of Vision Pros is a failure.
Valve selling estimated 2.1 billion worth of Steam Decks is a sucess.
260X@reddit
Sure, if we compare them in a vacuum, which is rather childish.
Apple spent billions of dollars on Vision Pro's R&D as it was supposed to be Tim Cook's iPhone moment.
While I'm not exactly a fan of Vision Pro, I can't deny that it was a technological feat.
A bit too ahead of its time.
doscomputer@reddit
it was never comparable to that, and I don't think anyone at apple had that angle either
vision pro launched at $3500 and didn't invent/revolutionize the segment, iPhone at $599 and was unlike any other smart phone you could get at the time
260X@reddit
iPhone at $600 was easily 2x more expensive than most 'mainstream' phones.
It was a luxury product.
Heck, Steve Ballmer famously called it the "most expensive phone in the world."
SamuelLeonardo57@reddit
It is imperative to distinguish between market saturation and long-term R&D lifecycles. Attributing a 'flop' to a hypothetical M5 refresh is technically premature, considering the current iteration is built on M2/R1 architecture. Apple’s trajectory with first-generation spatial computing is not focused on immediate mass-market volume, but rather on establishing a specialized developer ecosystem.
From a systems engineering perspective, the pivot isn't toward abandonment, but toward architectural optimization. The real challenge lies in the thermal envelopes and the bill of materials (BoM) efficiency. Until we see the integration of the next-gen silicon intended for the 'non-Pro' model, labeling the project as 'given up' ignores the historical iterative pattern of Apple Silicon. This is a strategic recalibration, not an exit.
ConcaveNips@reddit
Exclusivity too exclusive.
Polar_Banny@reddit
Ca you imagine this critical information got leaked such a disappointment delivered by Apple’s shadow marketing team🤣
biotech997@reddit
I would love to purchase one but at that price I can't justify it for casual productivity and entertainment. I think it would sell well if there was a SE version for under $1000.
Sobeman@reddit
it was designed for rich people to use once and let collect dust in their 3 houses.
superslomotion@reddit
I hope one day they can laser stuff directly into your retina so these headsets can be a lot smaller.
BigBonedCartman@reddit
Remember 15 years ago when EVERY new TV had 3D glasses…. yeah VR ain’t worth it either
Betancorea@reddit
Too expensive to realistically be picked up by the masses. I also spend most of my time on the PC so the Vision Pro would purely be a leisure thing. Not worth it for my use case
howmanyavengers@reddit
I am shocked, I tell you. Shocked!
No_Corner805@reddit
Well not that shocked.
howmanyavengers@reddit
r/woosh
Nikiaf@reddit
I think you whooshed yourself on this one.
howmanyavengers@reddit
Haha, it appears I have.
No_Corner805@reddit
i was making a futurama reference.
TheReturningMan@reddit
Vision Pro has been given attention at 1 Apple event and has gotten 1 hardware refresh that did not address any issues people had with the previous version of the hardware. How surprising that it hasn’t turned around.
ylluminate@reddit
Upsetting. Been saving up to get one for when I have time to work with this. Would be perfect with a MacBook Pro for versatile working with mobile multi displays
doscomputer@reddit
Legit boggles my mind that they didn't ever come out with a cheaper model with a slower chip (A series), no front OLED, and a smaller headstrap mounted battery.
Apple going all in on the premium stand alone product instead of making it a true companion/display for macs and even phones. its not like the iphone pro hasn't been more than powerful enough for VR/AR since like 2020
NOTstartingfires@reddit
It's literally $3500 usd.
And it wasn't a rolls royce in a Toyota market... It was just a nicer trim Toyota at 7x the price...
Va1crist@reddit
VR was plummeting before that product even came out the idea of someone spending 3500-4000 on a product that can literally do even less then what is already very niche and limited in the VR space is comical
DXsocko007@reddit
My buddy bought the first one. Went to his house… it was the best vr I had experienced quality wise but zero software. When you don’t have a reason for the device… why buy it
bushwickhero@reddit
We’ve tried nothing and are all out of ideas.
Fixitwithducttape42@reddit
I know of 0 people who bought this, even those who were big on tech and had the funds to buy it. Only people who I heard of buying this were Youtubers and other reviewers.
For the actual consumers I don't even know of a single good use for it. You can't game on it, no real business use, it serves no real purpose.
PeterDTown@reddit
/r/visionpro in shambles
SpaceDandye@reddit
I just can't get over the motel sickness. Most people I know are the same, no matter how good the screens are.
Framed-Photo@reddit
This had to be less than 1k, and be actually comfortable to wear. Making it cost over 3k and be a giant heavy glass monstrosity was definitely a choice.
ruipmjorge@reddit
I think Vision Pro was a playground to test and develop (and get apps and feedback) for Apple glasses that should use the same OS.
They knew this wasn’t gonna sell for the masses.
jdprgm@reddit
0% of people didn't buy the original VisionPro because it didn't have an m5. Slice the price in three.
ClubChaos@reddit
Sadley is going to be so disappointed 😆
Plank_With_A_Nail_In@reddit
They showed the US military industrial complex they have something, that may or may not be important...who the fuck knows.
I expect everyone to drop VR headsets except valve. Facebook/Meta or whatever the fuck they are called won't be able to keep investors at bay forever.
Renard4@reddit
I don't care how much everyone else is screaming that I'm wrong, VR proves to be useless while having no commercial future year after year, even as the tech improves.
dropthemagic@reddit
For those of us who have it it’s been a cool example of what the future will be like. I think it was just a bit too ahead of its time.
czyzczyz@reddit
Headline says “Apple has given up…”, lede says “Apple has all but given up…” (emphasis mine). That doesn’t sound definitive, particularly if Apple’s still working on smart glasses (where does AVP end and smart glasses begin?).
If smart glasses are anything like a much lighter AVP with no light seal and no front display, that sounds just fine.
Jaanbaaz_Sipahi@reddit
Apple lacked the vision for this product 😏
Jaanbaaz_Sipahi@reddit
I would love to get one second hand for like maybe $700 or so. That’s the max I would pay.
AIgeek@reddit
This is BS. No way anyone thought that a new headband and chip will suddenly make Vision Pro a selling product. Also, The headline is misleading.
Creepy-Bell-4527@reddit
The headband was the change that finally sold me on it. I really wanted to want one, but the OG straps were both so damn uncomfortable.
JavenatoR@reddit
I know a few people that got a chance to use the Vision Pro without purchasing it and they said it was pretty awesome, but still could not justify the ridiculous price tag.
DarthBuzzard@reddit
Source: Trust me bro. Only MacRumors is reporting on this, and they're known to be untrustworthy.
It also doesn't fit with the moves Apple has been making in recent weeks.
260X@reddit
Vision Pro was Tim Cook's baby.
With him out of the picture for good, it's not exactly shocking that Apple is ditching the Vision Pro like Apple Newton.
The Vision Pro's concept is sound. I just think it is (was) too ahead of its time, just like Newton.
DarthBuzzard@reddit
John Ternus said this last week:
Exist50@reddit
The source is a known leaker. Whether you trust them is another matter.
What moves?
DarthBuzzard@reddit
They mention no known leaker in the article. They provide nothing about their source.
New job listings specifically mentioning Vision Pro, new VisionOS updates, the recent long-term bullish comment on Vision Pro by John Ternus, and the continued investment into Apple Immersive Video.
Exist50@reddit
Whoops. Also had this open, and got the two rumors mixed up. Sorry about that. https://www.macrumors.com/2026/04/29/apple-questioning-iphone-magsafe/
We'll see, at least. Nothing there seems too convincing, especially in the backdrop of future AR products, but maybe it's all fake.
recurrence@reddit
The price on this killed it so badly. Apple had to have their monster margins and destroyed the whole segment for them.
Bderken@reddit
I use my Vision Pro almost daily for work. Stream my Mac to it. I really like it and hope it still gets updates.
Also watching 3D movies on it is unreal as a 3D projector enthusiast.
Creepy-Bell-4527@reddit
I bought a 3D TV and a 3D monitor back in the day and it was a cool gimmick but nothing more, watching 3D content on the Quest 2 was when I realised it could actually be a good experience (potentially better than the cinema).
Then watching 4k 3D in Disney+ for the first time, on a giant screen floating above a lake at night, was... a more magical experience than watching 3D in the cinema for the first time.
Bderken@reddit
Yes my first experience was also with a quest! I got the Vision Pro specifically for its insanely high PPI.
FieldOfFox@reddit
You are the only person in the entire world that does this, I promise you.
Bderken@reddit
Cringe Reddit parrot bot
RealLordDevien@reddit
No. I am also a Person and use it Daily for work. Its amaizing
Creepy-Bell-4527@reddit
No, they are not.
taptwoblue93@reddit
And nobody is surprised
Really one of the stupidest products Apple has launched in quite a while
dfv157@reddit
There are no bad products, just bad prices.
Meister1888@reddit
VR was a decade late.
The hardware was not ready then.
The market has moved on now.
It's too bad because I think there were some great applications for these goggles.
SourceScope@reddit
Well its just too expensive
And they know it
jenny_905@reddit
Who'd have thought the company that treats gaming like some sort of dirty habit wasn't great at selling a VR headset.
JackhorseBowman@reddit
I'm actually into VR and even I have been finding it a little hard to be excited about these days.
guzhogi@reddit
I wonder what one would be worth in 10-20 years, if it was still in the original packaging?
got-trunks@reddit
All I want is AR so I can have arbitrary traditional screen wherever I want. Like windows popping up in Reboot.
smaad@reddit
Those chip was going too fast. We should be leaking an eventual M2 just now not the M6.
I hope they'll learn from it.
ohanzee6@reddit
I’d love to have one if it was around $2k
imaginary_num6er@reddit
Thank you John Turnus