Dear Linus: Let's talk about Apple Vision Pro Price

[Sauron]

I don't even really care whether the price could theoretically be justified in terms of hardware costs, because it just seems to be a bad product with barely any software support and few use cases.

 

Maybe future iterations will be good, possibly even worth the exorbitant price, but right now I'd rather light my money on fire for warmth.

[Uttamattamakin]

On 2/4/2024 at 6:54 AM, Needfuldoer said:

What, you don't want to have conference calls with the ghosts of your friends?

 

Just think of all the bandwidth that can be saved by only transmitting animation data instead of an entire video stream! It's The Future^TM!

Good point about transmitting animation data vs real data. 
 

On 2/4/2024 at 6:29 AM, Alex Atkin UK said:

Plus regardless of how impressive it is, I'm not sure I want to live in this dystopian future where nobody ever interacts in person any more, instead through their VR/AR headset.  Were already heading straight into a Ready Player One style future and this just seems yet another step towards that.

IF you have played Cyberpunk 2077 then you know what we are really headed towards.  The images that are shown during a phone call are clearly not video but a representation of them.  That representation mimics their facial expression, and the optical systems of the time project that into your eye.  That is the goal eventually is optical AR / MR.  While VR would be a deeper experience than that (Similar to the "brain dances" that exist in Cyberpunk.) 

In short I see AR/ MR being the future with VR never quite being more than a game you play from time to time.    

[RabbidEwok]

15 hours ago, HenrySalayne said:

Ok, but Apple's AR headset is not a replacement for decent monitors. The pixel count seems impressive, but it's covering the entire FoV. A virtual monitor on the headset has far less resolution than an monitor especially a high-DPI display like the Pro XDR.

Over time Apple will double the horizontal and vertical resolution making replacing actual monitors a viable solution, but we're not there yet.

You don’t need a decent monitor to look at an excel sheet

[ToboRobot]

10 minutes ago, RabbidEwok said:

You don’t need a decent monitor to look at an excel sheet

As someone that has spent days using massive excel sheets to generate millions of dollars in revenue, you don't need it but it sure is nice and improves productivity. 

[Erioch]

[Brian McKee]

2 hours ago, RabbidEwok said:

You don’t need a decent monitor to look at an excel sheet

Don't need 3500 dollar headgear either.

[ThousandBlade]

LOL

Looks like Apple charged too little for it.

 

If people can afford $3500 for a VR headset, they don't really care about how much it cost.

I bet if they charge 8K for it, they'd sell just as much.

[starsmine]

47 minutes ago, ThousandBlade said:

LOL

Looks like Apple charged too little for it.

 

If people can afford $3500 for a VR headset, they don't really care about how much it cost.

I bet if they charge 8K for it, they'd sell just as much.

I really doubt it. 3500 is not unobtanium for a piece of hardware, 8k is. Sales would fall off of a cliff. 

[JovanD]

Can we talk about how it's cheaper than a HoloLens 2?

I don't see the fuss about the price, it's in the name Apple Vision Pro

Although that word got used so much in consumer marketing that people got desensitized to it, but than again Apple's marketing material seem to indicate it's a consumer device.

I kinda don't blame them though since Microsoft already has sunk decently deep roots in commercial/industrial segment with HoloLens and Meta is dominating the gaming segment, so my guess is Apple just went with "Lifesytyle device".

My guess is during the long 16 year development somewhere in the beginning it was meant to be an commercial/enterprise device, but it got steered in many directions along the way, so we ended up with a device with commercial pricing and specs, but consumer marketing material.

[RabbidEwok]

4 hours ago, Brian McKee said:

Don't need 3500 dollar headgear either.

But from a productivity standpoint being able to have as many windows as you want visible without carting 10 displays everywhere is kinda neat. 

[ThousandBlade]

3 hours ago, starsmine said:

I really doubt it. 3500 is not unobtanium for a piece of hardware, 8k is. Sales would fall off of a cliff. 

Yes 3500 is not unobtanium. but a 3500 VR device is not comparable to a 3500 PC, or a 3500 phone, or even a 3500 mac.

A 3500 pc would be extremely powerful and extremely useful. 

A 3500 phone is a device that will be used every day.

A 3500 mac will act as a status symbol other than being somewhat useful.

 

A 3500 VR device is not any of that. it's just something cool to have for the sake of having it cuz it's popular.

the closest thing that it reminds me of is those secret garden coloring books, when it came out everyone had to have one. Most of the people that will buy it will be of similar mindset. It's useless shit that's cool to have. 

People that spend 3500 on useless cool shit will also pay 8000 for the same shit.

 

I understand that there will be people who purely want to tinker with it, buy it for gaming, for office use.

But those people are the very minority.

[Lunar River]

2 hours ago, RabbidEwok said:

But from a productivity standpoint being able to have as many windows as you want visible without carting 10 displays everywhere is kinda neat. 

That's not productivity, that's being disorganised and would be distracting as hell

[RabbidEwok]

3 hours ago, Lunar River said:

That's not productivity, that's being disorganised and would be distracting as hell

Really isn’t? You can have as many windows as you want open wherever you want rather than flicking through tabs upon tabs on a display. You could also take it to say, a hotel, and have the same setup as an office. Like at work I have 10 tabs on a browser open at once cross referencing. 

[Mark Kaine]

4 hours ago, ThousandBlade said:

Yes 3500 is not unobtanium. but a 3500 VR device is not comparable to a 3500 PC, or a 3500 phone, or even a 3500 mac.

A 3500 pc would be extremely powerful and extremely useful. 

A 3500 phone is a device that will be used every day.

A 3500 mac will act as a status symbol other than being somewhat useful.

 

A 3500 VR device is not any of that. it's just something cool to have for the sake of having it cuz it's popular.

the closest thing that it reminds me of is those secret garden coloring books, when it came out everyone had to have one. Most of the people that will buy it will be of similar mindset. It's useless shit that's cool to have. 

People that spend 3500 on useless cool shit will also pay 8000 for the same shit.

 

I understand that there will be people who purely want to tinker with it, buy it for gaming, for office use.

But those people are the very minority.

no, i think they really have a point... 3500 is a lot but its not that crazy compared to some other vr offerings...  8000 would be *crazy* and probably only billionaires would buy it, and that would be certainly less than who buy it now.

 

also the price seems to be somewhat reasonable for what it is,  but more is really asking for failure and apple doesn't want this to be a failure,  even if its just in early access stage.

 

 

[AngryBeaver]

I see the Apple Vision Pro as helping move the VR/AR/MR space forward. They are another huge name jumping into the space and maybe just maybe it will be enough to bring some of the AAA game makes into the space. If that happens then we will see the game change for VR and likely a big increase in adoption.

As far as specs vs price go... I don't personally find the Apple Vision Pro worth the huge price. Sure, the cameras are great and the displays used in it are pretty darn awesome... but with it being 7 times more expensive than a Quest 3 which does most of the same things (and more in the game aspect) althought not at the same level... I just don't see the value in one.

Now if you only care about the apple ecosystem and just want something for MR and digital content delivery then fine... maybe it makes sense. If you want to do any type of gaming or VR on it though currently that isn't going to come close to what the Quest 3 offers.

I just feel like we will see a Quest 3 Pro at some point that will bring better Cameras and Screens to the table with a sub 1k price. We also have the PICO, HTC, Valve, ETC offerings coming soon too. 

Anyways, I think Apple bringing this product will hopefully advance the space for everyone, but when it comes to the device itself I don't think it is a leap forward by any means... even less so for that price.