[talldayo]

> The Vision Pro is literally mind blowing.

Mind-blowingly stupid? I used an Oculus Rift DK2 in 2014; the fact that Apple could brute-force a similar product with no market fit and slightly more "magic" in it hasn't impressed me the slightest. Add in the fact that it's slower than an iPad and costs as much as a used car and the thing is dead-on-arrival. Meta ate Apple's lunch with $500 headsets and Valve dominated the high-end with better controllers and software for years. The only way Apple can create market fit is by inventing a new price segment (read: Stupid Expensive) and leveraging their branding to do the heavy lifting.

Apple dodged Khronos standards for years, avoided OpenXR during it's development, and got cut off from SteamVR after Valve gave up engineering support. They have so many loose ends to tie up that it's kinda hilarious anyone thinks Apple is a competitor in this industry, at this point. Vision Pro isn't an iPhone moment, it's a Lisa moment. We'll count ourselves lucky for each one we're not burying in a landfill.

[pazimzadeh]

I think it's apt that you're comparing it to the developer kit, because it is essentially a developer kit. They should have marketed it that way, but I guess they wanted to capitalize on the big spike of initial interest/excess money in the metaverse fans. After using it, I think that the vision pro needs a better optional input device for precise input.

I think that hope that they are working on some kind of 'magic wand' that uses the same haptic feedback and gyroscope-type tech that is in the Apple Pencil.

Once the weight is reduced and the input UI is fixed, it will be truly useful.

> The only way Apple can create market fit is by inventing a new price segment (read: Stupid Expensive) and leveraging their branding to do the heavy lifting

Meh, sounds like something steve ballmer would say. The price will drop. By the way, have you actually tried it?

[talldayo]

> By the way, have you actually tried it?

Yes (albeit not at an Apple Store). For $3,500 it's not a competitive AR experience. It's not even cutting edge, either. Inside-out hand tracking has been a thing on standalone headsets since the first-gen Oculus Quest. Gaze tracking is more trouble than it's worth, the glowing eyes on the outside are like a cheap Halloween decoration, and the whole assembly feels like it will get bricked from a waist-height drop on the carpet.

Have you tried other, modern headsets? Bigscreen Beyond, Pimax Crystal, even the Valve Index? It's a blowout. Apple's price tag doesn't justify the lack of competitive features compared to their alternatives. They can't break into a market of "metaverse fans" because they don't support OpenXR or SteamVR - they are explicitly only targeting Apple fans. As someone who isn't part of the Apple ecosystem anymore, the Vision Pro is a fucking joke. What am I supposed to use it for, a $3,500 dedicated 360-degree porno machine? An overpriced streaming client for desktop VR? I have literally zero applications for it, I wouldn't have a reason to own Apple's headset if it was as cheap as an iPhone.

> Once the weight is reduced and the input UI is fixed, it will be truly useful.

Do you honestly believe that? After hundreds of failed attempts to make VR useful, you sincerely think Apple will be the one to do it?

This will only work if Apple can convince customers to go all-in on their ecosystem. And very clearly they won't; even the US Army doesn't have an interest in the headset where they have been applying Oculus Quest and Hololens operationally. Big businesses might care, but besides telecommunication applications I don't see where they're going to get applied. Consumers don't give a flying fuck, as evidenced by the lackluster sales and basically non-existent userbase entrenchment.

> The price will drop.

It certainly will. If the iPhone has taught us anything, it's that when prices drop, profit margins rise. The MSRP will only climb, especially as Apple gets more-and-more desperate for stupid and gaudy gimmecks like the eyeball passthrough.

[pazimzadeh]

> Yes (albeit not at an Apple Store) Who said anything about an apple store?

> What am I supposed to use it for, a $3,500 dedicated 360-degree porno machine? An overpriced streaming client for desktop VR? I have literally zero applications for it, I wouldn't have a reason to own Apple's headset if it was as cheap as an iPhone.

Like I said, I think right now it's a glorified dev kit. If you have one, you can get a head start on making apps/experiences so that when the mass market one comes out, you can be on the app store already. Many people including myself didn't buy an iPhone until the 4 one came out.

> For $3,500 it's not a competitive AR experience > If the iPhone has taught us anything, it's that when prices drop, profit margins rise

My whole point is not to use the current price as an indicator of anything. Apple cut the price of the first iPhone by 50% after 3 months due to poor sales.

>> Once the weight is reduced and the input UI is fixed, it will be truly useful. >Do you honestly believe that? After hundreds of failed attempts to make VR useful, you sincerely think Apple will be the one to do it?

I believe if the weight and input are addressed, then it's automatically a million times better. But it's not the only thing that needs to be fixed. It also needs a bigger field of view and battery life. But the MOST IMPORTANT thing is a better input method. It's obvious that for input methods, Apple has a huge head start compared to everyone else. (mouse, click-wheel, multi-touch, force touch, etc). They are probably keeping their cards close on input to the vest until the mass market version is ready in order to keep their head start. For now, gaze tracking is all we have.

> Gaze tracking is more trouble than it's worth I think gaze tracking is great, but shouldn't be required for input.

> Have you tried other, modern headsets? Bigscreen Beyond, Pimax Crystal, even the Valve Index? I've only tried the Quest2, which was super pixellated. The Vision Pro is very price competitive with varjo headsets, which are just about equivalent on specs.

> the glowing eyes on the outside are like a cheap Halloween decoration

The outside display feels unnecessary right now because the whole device is meant to be used at home. But the fact that they are building this tells us they are working on a more mobile version of it, where interacting with other people is actually important.

The thing is no one is forcing you to buy it. You can buy the competitors if you prefer. You have the opportunity to start developing apps on the apple system, for an up front cost. Or you can wait for the cheaper, better ones to come out and not have a head start on making apps. It's whatever.