[Gemdation]

One of the commenters was thinking the same thing as me

> People are going to only read the headline and interpret it as “discontinue”. Like the article says, it just means they have enough inventory until they replace it with something cheaper. [https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/report-apple-may-stop-p...]

I wonder how Apple would go through with this, hopefully with a better form.

[rchaud]

Effectively, there's no real difference. The model is discontinued, the article says they've produced their last batch and are focused on making a cheaper one.

Apple is free to continue selling what they have in inventory.

[latexr]

> Effectively, there's no real difference. The model is discontinued.

There is a huge difference. My interpretation is that the GP is making the point that with just the headline people will think the product as a whole was discontinued, not just this first version.

[karmakaze]

Whether the 'product' is discontinued depends on what the next product is. If they drop the AR using VR (its distinguishing feature), then the Vision Pro as we know it is dead and lives on only in name--effectively becoming an Apple Quest. I would love competition in that space.

[latexr]

> If they drop the AR using VR

Apple has been pushing for AR for years and years. I remember seeing demos when presentations were still live in person.

The whole concept of Vision Pro is “spatial computing”. Backtracking to VR would be a huge shift in focus.

[threeseed]

The entire focus of the Vision Pro is mixed reality i.e. both.

Hence why they have the crown to seamless switch between AR and VR.

[koolala]

VR should include computing and everything. Reality can be anything. VR can even include Reality. I'd agree with you if Apple wasn't backtracking what the idea of Computing is to be a modern monopoly app store.

[karmakaze]

My point was that the Vision Pro implements AR using VR technology (plus some low-latency additions).

[rchaud]

Considering the number of people Apple marketing is able to reach, compared to the MacRumors website --- I really don't think it will have that kind of deleterious impact on people's interest in Apple VR.

That said, Apple marketing has been mostly dead silent since the product announcement 1.5 years ago.

[ghusto]

My prediction is that they will "continue" the product as a different product, maintaining the name. A bit like how the Macbook Air is still a product, whilst we all know it was discontinued some years ago.

[tiltowait]

I’m not sure I follow. It has a different form factor now, but it still follows the same design ethos as the original model. It’s not like, say, the Ford Ranger, which had a long gap of non-production before being “brought back” in a different product category from the original.

[omikun]

Do you mean the 12" MacBook? That was discontinued. Or do you mean the MacBook Air with Intel? Or the wedge shape MBA? Hard to define what makes a product a product when parts and design shift with each generation.

[lotsofpulp]

What? Is a Camry discontinued because they update it?

A 2015 MacBook Air was discontinued, but 2024 (or 2023, whatever the last update was) MacBook Airs are not.

It would be crazy to have different product names for fungible products that are at least as good as the previous one.

[karmakaze]

Acura dealerships started as fungible copies of Honda products via a loophole to add more dealerships while 'honoring' previous Honda agreements.

[ulfw]

It does say a lot about demand though. You don't discontinue production on something when you have no successor coming soon unless you vastly overestimated demand.

[tnel77]

The headline made me think Apple was giving up on the Vision product line which made me feel disappointed. Happy to hear that it lives on!

[bee_rider]

Without the bit of info that they are looking at how to make a cheaper one, some might take “discontinued” as a sign that they are giving up on the whole field. That’d be big news.

As to selling the rest of the inventory: of course they are free to sell whatever they want. But this is a device whose only real use is to be a sort of preview/testing ground for developers who want to get ahead on writing VR code. The pricing is ridiculous for a consumer device, and it is too goofy for Apple users to wear to coffee shops. Continuing to sell it without any note that it was pointless would be a massive betrayal to third party Apple devs if they aren’t planning on making a serious product.

[rbanffy]

> Apple is free to continue selling what they have in inventory.

Remember the Apple Lisa. Get yours while their prices are low.

[fckgw]

They have produced their last batch for now. They are free to resume production if needed. From TFA:

>Apple will still be able to resume Vision Pro production if sales pick up since the production lines are not yet due to be dismantled.

If the item is still on Apple's website it's not discontinued.

[SoftTalker]

Maybe they are finding that they're like the Segway, just too geeky for the mainstream market.

[valianteffort]

No they're just overspec'd and overpriced. If their goal was to ultimately release a consumer level device, they shouldn't have gone overboard with tech that has limited room for cost cutting.

It's typical of Apple's hubris, to throw in all these features they think people will want, meanwhile if the headset had no cameras and was just a display strapped to your head for $1000, it likely would have sold a lot better. But they didn't want a VR device for whatever reason.

At the same time you could blame discretionary spending being at some of the lowest levels in a decade.

[schmidtleonard]

> typical of Apple's hubris

> meanwhile if the headset had no cameras

I remember when apple got universally panned for putting cameras in laptops. Most people surely wanted the cost savings, while the small number of power users who needed video chat should have no trouble picking up a USB camera for $100 (more like $200 in present-day USD). Of course, what actually happened was that people (and apps!) in the mac world could suddenly assume that everyone else already had a camera set up, even if they weren't technical, and that was the real killer feature. The rest of the industry quietly memory-holed the snide commentary and followed suit.

Volume will drive price down once VR gets Good Enough. Right now it isn't, so I'm glad that Apple is playing to their strengths by taking swings at substantive challenges -- like the fact that VR makes the wearer look like a complete dope -- rather than becoming discount VR vendor #312.

[Xylakant]

Or when they release a phone with no keyboard, no apps, that couldn't even do 3G speeds. Followed by the iPhone funeral parade held by microsoft. Or when they release a tablet. Everyone was talking about how that was merely a content consumption device and no one would want it at that price point. Later everyone was concerned that Apple would cannibalize its laptop market.

Apple has a history of doing products that seem expensive and weirdly overspecced at the beginning, and then stick with it if they truly believe in it. OTOH, there are also clearly products that Apple killed because they didn't work out. But I believe it's still to early to tell where the Vision line is going.

[pjmlp]

They got lucky, many of us remeber a Apple that was about to send everyone home for the last time, and that only did not happen due to a set of lucky accidents that turned out great.

[dzhiurgis]

> I remember when apple got universally panned for putting cameras in laptops.

Damn you just reminded me there was time laptops didn't have cameras. Like phones!

[bee_rider]

Disagree, it needs to be better and different, not worse. Every other Apple product is sleek and fashionable, this is a big goofy VR headset. A VR “screen for your face” device would probably be a little better but only in the sense that it is better to not waste a bunch of money on R&D for a device that is not going to be bought.

For a real attempt, the UI needs to be augmented reality you can wear walking around, and the form factor needs to be a pair of normal glasses. It is certainly possible the tech doesn’t exist yet. But that won’t convince people to buy a silly version.

[spookie]

They need cameras for tracking your position and orientation. Also, tracking your eyes can be beneficial in many ways, i.e. enabling foveated rendering, not just for showing a blurred face on the external screen.

[steveBK123]

Arguably had this thing shipped during peak of COVID bubble spending, say summer 2021 - summer 2022 it might have absolutely killed.

[ulfw]

Well it's a device for people sitting at home alone. So yes I agree. But not just because of bubble spending.

Now that we are all more social again, the point of a device that shuts you out of the world is a bit... less useful.

[timeon]

I do not think the price is only issue. Problem with VR headsets is that you need to commit your self to use it.

Personal computing did not reach mainstream until smartphones. Even notebooks were too much of commitment for most people. Maybe AR [0] glasses could go in path of smartphones but VR headsets are polar opposites to smartphones.

[0]: Actual augmented reality that is projected on top of real vision - not recorder reality with camera like in case of this product.

[wooger]

They're smoking something if they think anyone is buying this for 3.5k when it has exactly zero game & app support - discretionary income is going to be spent on things that are fun for deep immersion in a hobby, or else something that can be shared and enjoyed with others.

[dmonitor]

I'd wager they overstuffed this thing with sensors and high quality tracking to gather good training data, and the next model will be as effective with fewer cheaper sensors.

[wkat4242]

You need cameras either way. If not for passthrough then for tracking. Or you use Lighthouse tech but its even more expensive.

[mimsee]

Isn't it part of the Apple way to release expensive and weird products at times to keep Apple in the minds of people as a luxury brand. Things like $400 wheels for Mac Pro or the $1000 stand for the external display.

I can see AVP as being half luxury and half tech-demo/devkit for a more budget friendly device.

[latexr]

> to keep Apple in the minds of people as a luxury brand. Things like $400 wheels for Mac Pro or the $1000 stand for the external display.

I have never seen anyone look at those two examples and think “luxury”. Even the most ardent proponents of Apple products laugh at those prices and think they are absurd. With good reason. Who ever is going to look at computer wheels and think they’re a sign of luxury¹?

¹ Yes yes, someone surely will, just like there’s someone for everything. I’m making a general point.

[ToucanLoucan]

Rich tech fetishists. I worked for one for several years and he had every fancy Apple gadget they ever made. On a positive note, I frequently got his castoffs when he got bored with them.

[latexr]

That was directly addressed by the footnote.

[alberth]

Probably more like "what would I use this for" is a basic question that can't be answered right now.

Time will tell if a "killer app" is found.

[steveBK123]

Yeah it really feels like a devkit they sold in hopes someone would come up with the killer app because they hadn't figured it out themselves yet.

It's a shame as it seems like they maxed out the tech specs, but given the state of the art it still ends up being too low resolution for true MacOS productivity replacement, while also being too heavy & tethered to a short lived battery pack.

Maybe a worse-is-better version that is cheaper/lighter will sell more for entertainment uses.

[bee_rider]

I guess if they just called it a devkit, nobody would have bought it. But, with the specs, price, and the ridiculous form factor, it was a devkit in all but name.

[mrguyorama]

Except there is so little investment in devs and the ecosystem that even as a devkit it falls flat. VR/AR is a teensy niche of simulation enthusiasts and a large group of people who essentially play 30 minutes of beat saber occasionally. That's not exactly a thriving market, and Apple explicitly eschewed that market entirely, because nobody sims on a mac anything, and there are no controllers to play beat saber with.

Where are the grants to devs to buy and develop something good for it? Apple just kind of expected everyone to do that work for free for them. Watching movies on an airplane is not a $3500 use case. Mirroring your desktop to a head mounted display that is too heavy and cumbersome to be a $3500 use case. Putting iPad apps into the air is not a $3500 use case.

Where's the killer app? What even IS a killer app for head mounted displays? They've been around for 30 years now. It has never been an insufficient hardware problem. The original oculus devkits were genuinely terrible, but VR IS a killer app for sim enthusiasts, so they rushed to implement it into everything they could straight away. Euro Truck Simulator was one of the earliest integrations. But that's not an Apple market and never will be.

If someone wants VR/AR to be some stupid ShadowRun heads up display for managing all the info you encounter in the world, that app should be built and iterated on first. How many average people even run an "organize and remember everything" app? What percentage of iPhone users even use the damn calendar?

[bee_rider]

I’d like Apple Maps to show up in my field of view. In that case I could even not have a phone at all. (But not like $3500 want). I agree that nobody has found a really good use case. I do wonder to what extent that is just because nobody has released an AR headset that you’d wear outside.

[dawnerd]

Exactly. They need to cut the price in half and focus on entertainment. Thats the only thing I hear friends talk about who still use theirs AVP. Wearing it longer than a movie becomes too strenuous.

[alberth]

> They need to cut the price in half

My guess, Apple knows this won't become mainstream/usage for 5+ years.

And as such, they need to bring technology from the future 5-years from now, to today ... and as such, that's why it's so expensive.

They aren't expecting people to pay $3,500 for this device when the killer app exists. But it needs to cost that in order for developers to "develop to where the puck is going" in 5-years time.

[m463]

I think segway was an interesting idea, but electric scooters seem to have stuck.

[dartos]

Segway had a slew of high profile injuries that damaged its brand. Then encouraging people to wear helmets on them made people look too geeky.

People love their electric scooters nowadays, and they’re just worse Segways.

Apples headset is expensive and has no compelling software for most people. It was DOA.

[prmoustache]

> People love their electric scooters nowadays, and they’re just worse Segways.

Not sure about that. The scooter is a >200year old design and there is a reason it subsist to this day. Segways are huge and not as easy to store/fold. Onewheeler are more elegant design and much more compact but awkward to operate when powered off in places you aren't allowed to use it and you cannot carry loads as easily. In that sense a scooter offer the speed of the segways/onewheelers, with the convenience of being able to push them easily anywhere with minimum effort while staying foldable, easy to hide away once reaching destination yet they can carry stuff.

[wooger]

I see noone mention the Segway flaw in real world use - if either wheel loses traction for a moment, the device will spin and dump the rider on the ground. They're laughably bad and uncomfortable to ride compared to a regular pushbike, let alone eBikes.

Scooters are a smaller form factor, but bikes should be the real personal transport winner.

[ngcc_hk]

Not to mention you can jump out easily in certain scenario.

[andrewla]

"high profile injuries" is a wonderful understatement. The most notable "injury" being the death of the president of the company while riding his Segway [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimi_Heselden

[TylerE]

That wasn’t until much, much later though. That was like 3 buyouts in.

[andrewla]

Maybe ... he bought it out in 2009, which was also when Paul Blart: Mall Cop came out, which served as a eulogy for any chances of dignity for the Segway

[TylerE]

Segway was introduced in 2001 and went on sale in 2002. By 2010 it was very much on a downslope.

[steveBK123]

Segway was in a sense ahead of its time and trying to create a new market segment.

The early problems were it was illegal to use them on sidewalks but also there weren't bike lanes like there are in big cities now.

It was also pretty big & heavy it didn't work for multi-modal like using it for the last mile to/from a train or bus.

So the e-mobility space got won decades later by worse, cheaper products that were smaller & lighter .. being used heavily for food delivery app drivers using them semi-legally in bike lanes. A use case that wasn't imagined in the Segway unveiling.

[jannes]

> helmets [...] made people look too geeky

That doesn't bode well for VR headsets, which also make you look geeky.

[jart]

Not when your VR headset costs as much as a Gucci handbag.

The middle class won't want to join a new untested alternate reality if it's full of working class people, and the working class will always want to go where the middle class is at. The only thing to stop them is the price. That's why it costs the same as a piece of designer clothing. Apple has to lock in a critical mass of affluent adopters first, before they can mass monetize the prestige.

[vessenes]

This. The hardware and R&D investment won’t go to waste. I’d love a much lower friction version of Vision OS that could successfully get a high res screen in AR. Probably a few more years. Or maybe 10. :) Anyway, I’m curious what Apple will do next, and I’m looking forward to trying those facebook glasses as well. I think there’s almost certainly some tipping point of usefulness and form factor where AR becomes something that’s an “obvious next step, in retrospect” — but I don’t think the bulk, (lack of) comfort and weirdness of not seeing the eyes are winners for the AVP in the long run. I still pack mine for flying though — love it on a plane.

[Molitor5901]

That's a good point but.. if they have enough inventory that almost points to a sign that inventory is not moving. They may stop producing them until they figure a way (an app) to spark a buying trend.

[isodev]

I really wish this wasn't yet another platform war. There are already countless Quest devices, apps and games out there. Also, it will be very hard for Apple to beat the Quest 3S price point, we just got 4 headsets so we can all play together.