Apple hopes to convince people to buy its $3,500 Vision Pro headset using free 25-minute in-store demos::undefined

    • stoy@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      46
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      11 months ago

      It is not meant for the end consumer at this stage, it is a tech demo and development kit.

      The real consumer variant will probably be released in a year or two.

      • Natanael@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        It should be marketed as a dev kit, but they’re marketing it for consumers

        • stoy@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          Well, why not capture some consumers at the same time?

            • stoy@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              So?

              They need to build hype, and if that means they are pushing a demo on walk-ins,then I don’t have an issue with it as long as they accept a “No thank you” from the customer.

      • Ephera@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        16
        ·
        11 months ago

        Did they say this or is this your pet theory? I don’t feel like that is necessarily the best strategy, since people won’t develop for it, when there’s no users and no users will appear when no one develops an ecosystem for this thing…

        • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          25
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          This isn’t really a “pet” theory — just economics. VR represents an entirely new product line, and with Apple’s expansion into services, a whole new way to value-add to those services and entire ecosystem; capturing more recurring revenue. This price point is based on new manufacturing costs at a much smaller scale than their other product lines.

          It’s Apple, so it’ll never be “cheap”, but it can’t remain at this price point and stave off competition for long. Within 3 years they’ll either drop the price and introduce a pro version, or release an SE version, that’ll still probably be around $2000-2500 — but bringing it within reach of the people who’d normally buy “pro” devices.

          • CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            11 months ago

            This is interesting because you’re correct that this is almost certainly a dev kit that they’re making people pay for.

            However: this is very unlike Apple to do if it’s true. We ask ourselves, “What is the enthusiast or middle class user able to afford for good VR?” And as we’ve seen, consumer headsets are aimed at less than $1000.

            So the plan is for Apple to put out an amazing headset with the best materials and best screen and eye tracking and all this, only for them to wait some years before releasing a worse version of this that still costs over $1000? I can’t see how Apple would get beneath this price point. And I can’t see how they’d justify themselves.

            So your average consumer isn’t using this anytime soon. Did they just make a weird toy line for the rich?

            • Natanael@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              11 months ago

              At best this may help scaling up production of the necessary components (in particular the displays)

            • agitatedpotato@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Did they just make a weird toy line for the rich?

              Well it is Apple, they sell status more than anything else.

        • fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          11 months ago

          You have to start somewhere. The iPhone was a game changer so it took of instantly. Something like an AR/VR headset is still pretty niche even today about 10 years after VR really became a thing.

      • Empricorn@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        So… I can’t buy it? If I can, you’re either lying, wrong, or have an agenda.

        • stoy@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          So… I can’t buy it?

          If you can afford it you can buy it, the purpose of a product does not need to affect availablility.

          you’re either lying

          Why go straight into calling me a liar? This just shows that you don’t want to have a proper discussion.

          wrong,

          This is quite possible, I have been wrong before, and I will be wrong in the future, it happens, and is not the end of the world unless you realy fuck up.

          or have an agenda.

          I can’t figure out any agenda that I would push regarding the Vision Pro.

          In the end, it is a theory, based on resonable data available to me.

    • Pennomi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I’d buy it if it was the kind of tool that earned me $5000… but it’s still really hard to justify the business use case for VR these days.

      • fluxion@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        11 months ago

        If I can lie on my couch while typing away on my custom virtual workspace it might be worth it but the resolution requirements make that unlikely any time soon

        • darth_helmet@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          11 months ago

          This thing is overpriced but there’s no way Apple ships it if they don’t have the pixel density to render text in a way that doesn’t make your eyes bleed. It’s being marketed as a work device, after all.

          • fluxion@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            Yah but my dream setup is something that mimic 2/3 monitors sitting on a desk (or some VR-optimized version of that). In the real world those monitors are each 1080p+ and sitting in full view so the whole “scene” you’re looking at has many more pixels than just what is on all the monitors combined. If you scale that scene down to 4K resolution then the text on those monitors would likely be blurry or unreadable.

            Obviously there are other ways to make a 4K resolution usable by zooming way in but that’s much less “screen” real estate than what a real workspace offers.

    • weirdo_from_space@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      11 months ago

      It also has basically no battery life and once that mostly useless battery becomes completely useless you are never unplugging that thing from the wall because you bet Apple made that battery impossible to replace!

      • fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        11 months ago

        Shit I’ve bought MacBooks for work that cost as much as that headset, and my current laptop costs about as much as this.

        $3500 is nothing for a computer, let alone a prosumery AR/VR heatset with a computer built in.

        • helenslunch@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          11 months ago

          $3500 is nothing for a computer, let alone a prosumery AR/VR heatset with a computer built in.

          It’s absolutely bonkers. The problem is you’ve been brainwashed by Apple into paying such high prices.

          • fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            My work PC costs twice that. There’s Apples influence has nothing to do with my Thinkpad.

            I’ve worked on workstations that cost as much as a nice car. Apples pricing only comes close because they charge so much for storage. When you’re working with triple digit gigabytes of ram machines it ain’t cheap.

            Apple makes by far the best laptop out there. No machine comes close when it comes to performance and battery life. Intel has a decent performance per watt under load, but under light non idle loads it’s not even close. My Thinkpad is incapable of getting decent battery life. Lenovos 10 hour battery life is a damn lie. I get 30 minutes to 3 hours at best. Our work MacBook pros easily get 10+ doing the exact same workload. AMD gets close, but they’re falling down the same trap Intel has been for the last 10 years.

            • helenslunch@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              11 months ago

              My work PC costs twice that. There’s Apples influence has nothing to do with my Thinkpad.

              Please show me your $7k Thinkpad.

              When you’re working with triple digit gigabytes of ram machines it ain’t cheap.

              It’s a lot cheaper if it’s not made by Apple. Even the 8GB models are insanely expensive.

              Apple makes by far the best laptop out there.

              That may be but they’re still not worth remotely what they’re charging, and the vast majority of people buying them don’t need them. They just buy into the ecosystem.

              Also cloud computing is a thing. If there’s ever anything I need a bunch of power for I run it remotely from my desktop at home or on a cloud VM. And my mediocre desktop will blow the M9 Super Max Ultra Megacruncher out of the water for most tasks.

    • Buelldozer@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      A lot of tech, including computers, commonly cost that much for a long time. It’s not a totally outrageous for consumer tech.

    • helenslunch@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      Only because it’s an Apple product. They could have made it stream wirelessly from your MacBook, and make it smaller and lighter, but then you wouldn’t have to pay another $3000 for the onboard processors.

      • lovesickoyster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        They could have made it stream wirelessly from your MacBook

        yeah, no. People really don’t understand how much bandwidth you actually need to stream even normal 4k 60hz video, let alone something like this. For reference, when I was figuring out how to dump my pc in the basement and have the monitor in my office, I had to run 12-strand fiber cables to do it.

        • helenslunch@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Yeah, no. Done it with WiFi 6, no problem. Meta has had Air Link for years. Works fine. You don’t understand how much bandwidth you actually need.

          • lovesickoyster@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            you need about 20 gigabits per second for 4k 60hz. Or more, for higher resolutions and refresh rate - which vision pro has, compared to ~6 gigabits per second, that you need for your quest pro’s resolution. That’s why they make these.

            And having compressed video streaming to a VR device sounds like my worst nightmare.

              • dustyData@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                And is nowhere in any consumer product today. How is it relevant to this discussion?

                • helenslunch@feddit.nl
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Vision Pro is also not a consumer product today.

                  WiFi 7 was all over the devices at CES though. It’s happening soon.

          • lovesickoyster@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            I’ve tried several remote desktop apps but the compression artefacts very quickly give me a headache. So I splurged for MTP cables and the display port dongles, and it works like a dream. Also, MTP connectors are pure fibre porn.