Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
$3500 is too expensive and the external battery is a joke. Maybe they need to make a separate cable to support different types of battery such as V-mount battery. Until the price get lower to $1000, it will be very difficult to spread VR/AR devices.
 
2 hours of battery life with a battery pack. Only Apple can get away with this in 2023.

full
I complained about the battery as well, but things like the Quest have similar batter life.
 
This is a developer tech demo. Obviously in the future the battery will be inside the device. If you are going to buy this one day one, you will be developing for this or have a lot of money to spend on tech betas.

Make no mistake this is the future of personal computing. In 10 years nobody will own an iPhone or a Mac with a screen.

They made a point of saying the battery was separate to reduce the weight you’re wearing on your head. It will be a long time before they can reach a point where they could add in the battery and keep it comfortable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 75Batt
Anyone else find it ironic that they advertise an iPad health feature which measures the device-to-eye distance, yet their groundbreaking new product has 4K displays an inch away from your eyeballs? :confused:
Its not a 4k display.. its a display that feels like a 4k display. We do not know the exact resolution at this moment.
 
It seems to be an astoundingly high price for a device meant to singularly consume content. For $3500, you could buy an excellent home media system with a projector for many to enjoy. It just seems to be such a lonely product.
 
Everyone said the Mac was too expensive.
Everyone said the iPod was too expensive.
Everyone said the iPhone was too expensive.
Everyone said the Watch was too expensive.
Yet here we are.

This is an absolute game changer.
The biggest new product announcement since the iPhone.

It will absolutely change the way we enjoy entertainment, do work, and interact with the world around us.
16 years from now, we'll all be walking around wearing these wondering how we ever did life without our Vision devices.

Who needs a computer? Who needs a tv? So many possibilities.

And the people complaining about battery life... Get another battery. *sigh*


"So and so are already doing this!"
And when the iPhone launched the Palm Treo and Blackberry still existed.

*5,000 patents* That's a staggering number ya'll.

Personally figuring out how to sell a kidney so I can afford one.
 
It is beautiful, and I LOVE the style and concept. But, $3,500 and a 2-hour battery pack?

That's a non-starter, and crazy fundamental misunderstanding on how a lot of folks will use this - or want to use this.

You can't finish a lot of movies. It would be worthless for a lot of long plane rides. Even around the house in a remote work option, 2 hours sucks!

It needs an 8 hour battery pack and some price trimming to make it an in demand item, IMHO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wyrdness
"The Vision Pro is priced starting at $3,499."
"Given the high price point, there appears to be a single model..."

Apple never uses "starting at" if there is no upgrade option unless, in this case, they are referring to the optical inserts for eyeglass-wearers (which are a separate purchase).

This also means that non-eyeglass wearers interested in saving up for this device may wish to increase their carrot intake immediately. Because if you buy these and then you find out later you need glasses, those Zeiss lenses will cost you even more.
$3499 gets you the 720p version with mono sound and no batteries or power cord. If you want the 4K spacial audio model with batteries and power cable then pricing starts at $8999.
 
"The Vision Pro is priced starting at $3,499."
"Given the high price point, there appears to be a single model..."

Apple never uses "starting at" if there is no upgrade option unless, in this case, they are referring to the optical inserts for eyeglass-wearers (which are a separate purchase).

This also means that non-eyeglass wearers interested in saving up for this device may wish to increase their carrot intake immediately. Because if you buy these and then you find out later you need glasses, those Zeiss lenses will cost you even more.
Or stick to contact lenses or lasik.
 
First off, none of the models seemed to be able to pull off looking happy about wearing this thing. I'm sure they were told to smile and look happy but that just made it worse. Nobody wants to see what people actually look like when they're staring zombified into their monitor, either.

Aside from that, I think they did a great job of showing what it can do. The whole time I was thinking "I want it I want it I want it but..." and then they said $3500 and I said "and there it is."

I will absolutely be getting one of these in a few years when the release the Vision Air for $999 that does essentially everything that this one does that anyone used.
 
  • Like
Reactions: deific
The only thing I don't quite get is the battery life, I really hope they take the time to improve or offer more expensive power packs. Seems like an easy solution. I am sure there will be kickstarters or 3rd party solutions of power bundle packs or something to increase.
 
It's 2023, we're on the brink of a recession and Apple seems to think this is the right time to release a VR headset for $3.5k + TAX. Cook is smoking something...
You'd be surprised how many people out there have a ton of disposable income to spend... and how many people are fools that will just swipe a credit card without thinking lol... This thing will sell really well regardless.. I am sure Apple didn't just throw a dart at a wall and pick a price... A lot of research and thought went in to this pricing.. This is probably their biggest product since the iphone, they are not going to risk it flopping.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.