back
18 comments
The iPhone, iPad, and Apple Watch all felt like they could be used as tools, which can make someone justify the cost.

The Vision Pro, even with Apple’s focus on using it for work, ends up seeming like more of a toy. I think it’s a lot harder for someone to justify a $3,500 toy.

I can see it being one of those things I get that seems really cool, and is really cool for a few days, but isn’t useful enough to make it worth the friction of choosing it over a phone, tablet, laptop, desktop, or TV. If I could rent one for the occasional weekend, I might do that to watch some 3D movies or something.

In 5-10 years, if they can provide a Vision Pro-like experience in a pair of Raybans, that equation may change. Right now it looks too finicky to be worth it.

I'm kind of excited by this. iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch were all bets, but pretty safe ones at their costs. Apple Vision Pro is a a much riskier bet that I'm glad someone is making, safe bets are kind of boring.

I'll reserve judgement until I try it, but given the way I currently use VR for fitness, it probably isn't for me (not without haptic feedback controls). Still, I'm glad Apple is moving ahead here and I doubt they will lose their shirt over it.

This is a reductionist view, but I believe that most people don't want to wear a computer that covers their eyes/face, and these headsets will always be a niche product.

I don't know if the big tech companies truly believe this market is likely to be highly lucrative, or if they are just pursuing it based on a lack of better ideas for what might be "the next thing."

>if they are just pursuing it based on a lack of better ideas for what might be "the next thing."

There is probably a lot of truth to this. Cook is not a technologist or product guy, he's a supply chain guy. He is probably terrified of people saying that Apple lost its magic under his leadership and that Apple can't innovate anymore without Steve Jobs. So he's looking for products that appear innovative. VR is the 1980s version of what an innovative product of the future is, so it seems like an obvious choice for someone who is trying to manufacture innovation. I assume this is why Zuckerberg was going after it as well. He got lucky with Facebook, and as it fades, he is grasping at straws for the next big thing.

That might be an overly harsh critique, and assumes quite a bit, but it seems like it's in the realm of reality. Now it seems ChatGPT has captured the world's attention and is taking the top spot on the priority list of most companies.

I don't like to carry a phone, but I already do. when AI can generate unlimited content in virtual space, we probably don't want to take our eyes away from it. People spend hours playing video games, I don't why these people won't wear VR headsets for it. I agree that the technology is not there, it will though. Is it a good time for Vision Pro, I don't know.
> I think it’s a lot harder for someone to justify a $3,500 toy.

People routinely justify hundred thousand dollar toys in the form of (fast depreciating) automobiles, though, as a counterpoint.

Interesting seeing Tim Cook wear it for the first time. Interesting strategy to gradually roll out media. First, carefully shot videos with models, then the reviewers, now carefully staged videos with Tim Cook in Vanity Fair. They're trying their hardest to Apple their way into social acceptance of this thing, let's see if it works!
This is just so expensive that it seems to me like something you just see people who get it for free or as a tax deductible try it on in YouTube.

I honestly don't know if it something you'd like to upgrade on coming from something like the quest 3 (which is actually affordable). So it might be trying to pave the way for something else in the future.

Thing is... VR is more fun than it is something you'd wanna be productive on? I just can't see myself wearing a screen up close on my face for so many hours a day. It seems like much more something I'd wanna do for maybe 2-3 hours.

Idk. Wish I was a tech youtuber so I could just give my advertisement piece and get this thing for free, that'd be cool.

> Thing is... VR is more fun than it is something you'd wanna be productive on?

For me it's opposite. It seems like any VR entertainment or games can only be a novelty that I would do for a week then get bored. But I feel like if the tech is good enough, I would definitely want it for productivity. I'm constantly annoyed by having to have so many screens and it still feels too few screens. Not to mention travel & coding.

And having some sort of notes around the house or w/e, things like that could be amazing.

But it just has to be comfortable and performant enough to allow for many screens and good productive input.

This is pretty much why I don't see this tech going anywhere except for certain specific use cases, of which gaming is clearly the largest one.

I just don't see how the advantages outweigh the disadvantages for most uses.

Big miss by Apple: not securing reviews from any senior citizen. By positioning the AVP to be the coolest possible means of work and play for the well-heeled technorati, Cook is missing a huge group, to wit, well-heeled boomers, seeking succor for their slowly diminishing mobility, new venues for communicating with family they can't visit easily, fresh means of medical consultation, and most of all, a high-tech way to stave off dementia. While not as glamorous as picturing its use with a sinuous model, draped over pricey furniture, the AVP is a natural fit for nearly all seniors, and will surely be a hit with them, once the marketers bother to lift their gaze from hyping yet another 3D rendering app.
That would kill Apple as an aspirational luxury brand by tying their product market to old people with dementia. They survive and thrive by being associated with youth, vitality and cool.

It's not clear that the complexity of UX involving coordinated and focused hand-eye interactions is really a "natural fit" for the elderly. Let's see if even younger generations can manage it first.

The biggest problem with the Vision Pro according to this reporter is that it's too amazing.

They are not even trying to hide that it's a puff piece.

> This was as far from a VR headset as a kid’s Schwinn bicycle is from a Gulfstream G800 private jet

this quote wont age well

Cook isn't a product guy. So we have no reason to think he would know a great product idea if he sees one. Apple's execution can hide problems. This thing could end up being a thing, but my gut just says no for whatever reason.
Counterpoint: the Watch. Completely new product, launched years after Steve was gone, started in a bad state (slow, useless) but now it's a great product that's selling very well.

It's not some world-changing revolution, but it's the most popular smartwatch by far. "Wearables" was 10% of last quarter's revenue, bigger than the iPad, bigger than the Mac. That category includes AirPods, but hey that's a new Tim Cook era product as well.

I'm not saying Cook can't launch a product. Just that he's not a product guy himself so his personal opinion isn't worth that much about what will be a good product. Apple has a good team, and most of the stuff that goes across his desk is going to be pretty good.

I have worn an Apple Watch most of the time since it's been out. It kinda sucks, but it's the best smartwatch. I miss when Apple launched world-changing revolution products like the iPhone. Jobs had some misses too, like the iPad. People buy them, the hardware is impressive from an engineering standpoint, but it's just not a useful device for most people.

Try it first before commenting.