Each unit uses 2 panels, one for each eye.I'm not a professional reporter, but I'm pretty sure that 900K is not "less than half a million".
Each unit uses 2 panels, one for each eye.I'm not a professional reporter, but I'm pretty sure that 900K is not "less than half a million".
Apple may as well scrap the product now if the use case is just existing iPad apps on a 2d plane. That's absolutely useless. They need developers to come up with actual 3D applications and development.
"Don't believe everything you read."So, this story is being refuted. Seems like this ought to get added to the OP.
I think those glasses that work as an external display for $300-500 is what they should have gone for.
Weren't some folks theorizing that this is just Apple putting out a product that uses their tech IP and patents etc. so they can have *something* out there with it while they take their time working on the "real" debut product? Like, making this was taking longer than expected but they couldn't go too long without releasing something so they just put this stop gap device out there?
I'm not so sure that's how IP licensing and patents etc. work so I'd love to hear what more informed people think happened here.
Apple putting out a product that uses their tech IP and patents etc. so they can have *something* out there with it while they take their time working on the "real" debut product? Like, making this was taking longer than expected but they couldn't go too long without releasing something so they just put this stop gap device out there?
I'm not so sure that's how IP licensing and patents etc. work
Nothing like that is required for patents. You have to publish to establish a copyright but that's not relevant here.
I think I am just misunderstanding the "use it or lose it" rule that I hear on the internet so much when it comes to that sort of thing.
The name of such a product is SO obvious:
iGlasses
I actually have a pair of what you describe. Works perfectly with my Mac, Steamdeck and iPad. Image quality is most likely quite a bit better than AVP. Field of view is obviously a lot more limited but for what you use them for that matters little.
I think you are closer to that than you think. 2k is a reasonable price for it to come down to. Vision OS is much better than iPad OS…. But it really needs the Mac as an app on it to be a computer replacement. Streaming a Mac display to it is one of the best features on it but I worry they know the Mac could be irrelevant if folded into it natively.If it could fully replace my computer I might have bought it (when it's 2k cheaper lol). But I already tried that with an iPad Pro on two occasions and finally realized that iOS is just too limited to be a main driver. Unshackle it.
Agreed.$1999 and a lot more people would bite, I think.
They'll get there eventually.
We are getting closer and closer to that form factor. TCL RayNeo x2 I think is a glimpse of the direction in think we will see companies go for in 5 yearsNo, you see, this isn't VR, this is "Spatial Computing"
I've said it a thousand times on here already, but the VR market is going nowhere so long as the formfactor is not literally just a pair of glasses. All other considerations and explanations for tepid adoption of the tech is superseded by that one singular design limitation.
We are getting closer and closer to that form factor. TCL RayNeo x2 I think is a glimpse of the direction in think we will see companies go for in 5 years
It has my app :(Its $3500 and it has no apps. Not surprised its struggling on sales. Get it under 1K and then we'll talk Apple. Its 6 years late compared to Vive and Oculus Rift and those are way cheaper.
$3500 is an absolutely insane price point for this. Should have been $999 at most.
The problem is to cut the price like that, Apple would have to cut out a lot of what makes the Vision Pro special.
The BOM of the 2 Micro-OLED panels alone is apparently $400. Add the M2 SOC and R1 SOC on top of that, the mostly metal construction, etc.
I wonder how many people actually want the metal & glass construction. Isn't that a big factor in why it's so heavy?
Partly, but it's just one of Apple's longstanding design philosophies. The airpods are plastic, a few accessories are plastic, but most of Apple's actual devices are primarily metal in construction, they think it makes them stand apart compared to like the Meta Quest 3 which is nearly all plastic.
Can you honestly say your app would be worth over 3000 Dollars?
One of the points that always stands out in people talking about the negative aspect of the Max though is the weight though due to the metal construction and how that impacts comfort when using it for an extended period of time. It is in fact why I crossed them off the list in consideration. Glad you like yours, but it is a valid point to what is considered as a drawback by many.
It's a PTSD related app for therapists and clients. Won't name (or confirm) it here due to wanting to retain my privacy on this forum. But it's basically available and optimised for every Apple platform. I think it's interesting how the unique aspects of Vision Pro might be beneficial to clients in this app.
It can be the cost of doing business for therapists who're interested in employing innovative technology to enhance their practice. It's certainly a very high quality app that, on Vision Pro, can open up new methods of treatment.Can you honestly say your app would be worth over 3000 Dollars?
The weight of them can become fatiguing after a few hours of usage (for me). I think the heat retention of the cups is the worst offender lol.
Heh, if you acknowledge the weight and heat issues associated with the metal construction, how is it still your favorite part of them?
Because neither things routinely impact my enjoyment of the product. I'll bump up against those two issues every so often when I'm on a laundry folding marathon. A quick break allows the heat to dissipate. The weight while noticeable after a few hours isn't unbearable.
I just really appreciate the tactile feel of the construction. They have a premium feel that I find enjoyable and satisfying.
It being iOS based certainly impacts my usability of it, but if you have a Mac then what are are speaking of does largely work. I can sit with a 5k display in front of me for my Mac desktop while safari, messages, discord, 3d models, and other apps surround my giant iMac screen. It really is a desk replacement in your backpack at times, or your desk in your bed. Or you desk on the couch.I've been dreaming about being able to move app windows anywhere using AR/VR since long before the Vision Pro was announced. As a software engineer who always has plenty of different apps/windows open, something like this would be amazing for productivity.
A big main window with the IDE in the middle of my desk, 1-2 browser windows to the left of it, a bunch of terminal windows floating above, and Teams/Outlook somewhere else.
But it would have to have full, unlimited support for all software that is already out there. An iOS-like OS with all of its restrictions, cumbersome UX and fucking App Review? Yeah, no thanks.