Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Vision Pro Priced Starting at $3499, Will Launch in Early 2024 in the U.S.

Who's going to be first to drive with these on!

It would be pretty cool though if it did AR for GPS directions and used something like Tesla cameras to show you all of your blindspots.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SFjohn and George Dawes
Tbh as they said in the keynote , if you factor in the cost of a big tv , decent av amp and surround speakers , this headset looks like good vfm

Plus it’s potential is quite literally mind blowing
 
Krizoitz said:
Might want to check that math next time.

4K TV = 3840 x 2160 pixels = 8,294,400 pixels.

Double that and you get 16,588,800. At 23 million (and change likely) the Vision Pro gives you 40% more viewable area.
Click to expand...
11.5 million pixels per eye. The square root of that is less than 3400. Maybe the panels aren't square, but the dimensions are in the ballpark of the width of a 4K monitor, so you won’t be able to see multiple 4K monitors at full resolution. A 5K monitor like the Apple Studio Display is 14.7 million pixels, so it's certainly less than that.
 
Last edited:
Does anyone else find it really funny that it's called "Vision?" That's the very thing that Tim Cook didn't have, according to Steve Jobs.

It's also amusing to me as it doesn't have a very clear "vision" for existing.
 
People have always been demanding more out of the batteries in Apple devices because they are fed up of having to constantly recharge their devices so naturally over the years Apple have improved the battery life of iphones, ipads and macbooks but along comes a brand new device that has a battery charge capacity that one would expect back in the 90's. Shame on you Apple for bringing out such an expensive device that only has a 2hr battery capacity.

Oh and yeah it is supposed to have an energy efficient M2 processor, a processor found in other Apple devices that have battery times lasting up to 4-5 hrs but yet in this new device, only 2hrs of battery time. Pathetic to be honest with you.
 
Last edited:
laptech said:
People have always been demanding more out of the batteries in Apple devices because they are fed up of having to constantly recharge their devices so naturally over the years Apple have improved the battery life of iphones, ipads and macbooks but along comes a brand new device that has a battery charge capacity that one would expect back in the 90's. Shame on you Apple for bringing out such an expensive device that only has a 2hr battery capacity.

Oh and yeah it is supposed to have an energy efficient M2 processor, a processor found in other Apple devices that have battery times lasting up to 4-5 hrs but yet in this new device, only 2hrs of battery time. Pathetic to be honest with you.
Click to expand...

The alternative is to have a bigger and bulkier battery pack that weighs you down even more. I think Apple was going for a size that the average user won’t “feel” too much, which happens to work out to about 2 hours of usage.

But from what I hear, it attaches and detached magnetically, so should be fairly straightforward to swap in a new battery when the old one runs out of juice.
 
joshcls said:
The iPhone wasn't ubiquitous when it launched.
Click to expand...

Obviously not but the phone market was already huge - everyone already had a mobile phone.

This isn't a comment on if it will be a success or not, i'm just happy to see Apple making expensive niche devices that aren't currently aimed at the mass market.
 
B4rbelith said:
In 10 years time this won't be their 0.1%
Click to expand...

Perhaps not, and what they are aiming at - if AR/VR fails in it's currently form is irrelvant. The point i'm making is right now they're willing to spend a lot or R&D and release an expensive niche device still and that should be applauded no matter if you like it or not, regardless of if you think it's stupid or the future, a failure or success.
 
  • Like
Reactions: arkitect
Abazigal said:
The alternative is to have a bigger and bulkier battery pack that weighs you down even more. I think Apple was going for a size that the average user won’t “feel” too much, which happens to work out to about 2 hours of usage.

But from what I hear, it attaches and detached magnetically, so should be fairly straightforward to swap in a new battery when the old one runs out of juice.
Click to expand...
So that would mean users having to take extra batteries with them then. For many years mac owners have complained of having to take multiple accessories with them just so they can do the things they need to do and thus have persistently asked Apple to improve things so they do not have to carry so much with them. If having to take extra batteries to compensate for the 2hr charge time of the headset battery it would just go to prove Apple has not listened to past issues from it's users, which is they do not want to have to carry extra stuff with them.
 
laptech said:
So that would mean users having to take extra batteries with them then. For many years mac owners have complained of having to take multiple accessories with them just so they can do the things they need to do and thus have persistently asked Apple to improve things so they do not have to carry so much with them. If having to take extra batteries to compensate for the 2hr charge time of the headset battery it would just go to prove Apple has not listened to past issues from it's users, which is they do not want to have to carry extra stuff with them.
Click to expand...
I am curious as to what you feel Apple should have done then.

An external battery pack was likely to avoid adding extra weight to the headset and weighing down the user. We may see Apple (or third parties) release battery packs of differing capacities depending on how much juice you need on the go, but a larger battery pack may not be any more convenient to bring around than 2 lighter packs.

If you are complaining about how power hungry the headset supposedly is, I believe Apple has done everything they can to minimise power consumption while preserving the user experience (this is the company that gave us AirPods after all).

Listening to users doesn't mean giving in to their demands at the expense of everything else. It just means their concerns have been noted. I believe that time will show that Apple made the right set of compromises.
 
I dunno though...$3500+ would buy me a very nice entertainment system. And I wouldn't have to wear that dorky headset to enjoy it. ;) And for me as a glasses wearer, it will cost more than the $3500 because I would have to order prescription lenses to use it.

MKBHD had it right though. This isn't for the masses yet. Definitely a first adopter sort of thing. It took me until the series 5 watch to finally give in and get one. So for some of us it will probably take a generation or two in order for the masses to try it out.

It will need some sort of killer app though. Something that will give you an immersive experience like attending a football game or a concert or something like that. Just like the original iPhone, there aren't many app's for it yet. So I am anxious to see where this goes.

Even though it is expensive, I am amazed at all the tech that is included in it. Just an amazing device -- am more impressed with it the more I hear/read about it. That said, it's basically in it's infancy. This is the only product really of it's kind on the market. At least until The Zuck puts one out to possibly compete with it. It will be interesting to see if VR catches on and where the tech goes from here.
 
Abazigal said:
And how are the headsets by Microsoft and Sony working out? From what I have heard, they have barely made a dent in their respective markets, and maybe that’s in part due to the way those technologies were implemented?
Click to expand...
Current sales figures indicate outselling the Vision Pro by a factor of 100,000%
 
transmaster said:
What I see is a device that once it is refined into something with more battery life and and smaller in size it will take off. The fact you can see through it normally is a real game changer. Your own personal heads up display,
Click to expand...
Its still passthrough video though and not a true HUD like Glass was. Any lag in that feed and it can quickly become uncomfortable
 
Let me put the price in perspective. My original Macintosh 128K cost $10,500 in today's dollars. Never had any regrets.
 
Last edited:
to the subject of who this is for -
its a product looking for an audience
not an audience looking for the product
at least for now
 
Ctrlos said:
Half the internal parts are supplied by Sony!
Click to expand...

I think products like this really showcase Apple doing what it does best - integrate hardware, software and services together. Even if a competitor gets the exact same parts, they don’t have the OS, or access to apple silicon, or the developer base, and it’s all of these coming together to make the headset work the way it does.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back