this post was submitted on 15 Jan 2024
272 points (93.9% liked)

Technology

59997 readers
2848 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 58 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (22 children)

Oh. My. Goodness.

$3,500?!? HAHAHAHAHAHA

[–] [email protected] 37 points 11 months ago (12 children)

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.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] pennomi 16 points 11 months ago (2 children)

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 10 points 11 months ago (2 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (20 replies)
[–] [email protected] 41 points 11 months ago (7 children)

take a deep breath and realize; if you cannot afford this, you are not rich enough to be part of apples target audience.

no matter how much you want to tell yourself that you are.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I didn’t know apple target audiance was a total of 400.000 people which is the total amount the’ll make of these.

Seriously this is a proof of concept for rich kids children to be test users. I doubt it will visible move the needle on their profits.

You have some strange ideas, do android users enjoy being the “target audience” of google?

I am loyal to no brand, own a mix of devices and boycot some. Love tech, fuck capitalism.

[–] LazaroFilm 8 points 11 months ago

It certainly is a big beta test product. I see it like the Tesla Roadster.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 11 months ago

Isn't that kind of like saying that if you can't afford 2024 MB S63 AMG then you're not in Mercedes Benzs' target audience? I bet the profit Apple makes from selling iPhones dwarfs the earnings from selling these goggles even if they're successful.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] BrownianMotion 33 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Is 25 minutes a long enough in-store demo test time to have a $3500 wank?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 29 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Half of the US can't afford a $1000 emergency. $3500 for a toy seems steep in that context.

[–] meliaesc 38 points 11 months ago (1 children)

That's what credit card debt is for!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] abhibeckert 20 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Half of the US is over a hundred million people. The rumours are Apple has supply constraints that will limit global sales to about a million devices for now.

This can't possibly be a mass market device - it's just not possible right now to manufacture that many. The tiny screens are 3,400 DPI and 5000 nits (that's about 10x brighter than a typical TV or computer screen). It's going to be a while before tech like that can be mass produced.

They named it Vision "Pro" which in Apple marketing speak basically means "the really expensive one". Their "Pro" desktop PC tower has a baseline price of $7k and fully upgraded it comes in at almost $13k which is actually cheaper than they were when they used Intel Xeons a couple years ago (those could hit something like $80k).

There will probably be a non-pro equivalent one day, which will be far cheaper.

[–] kibiz0r 23 points 11 months ago (7 children)

Oh hey, it’s that time again. Copy-pasting from the last time around…

Because the price is always the main topic, I’m gonna drop a link to an AR/VR expert contextualizing the Vision Pro price within the current (well, 7 months ago) market:

Apple Just Beat the “BEST VR Headset In the WORLD”.. and did it cheaper.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Norm from Tested on yt had good things to say after his hands-on with the headset iirc a while back. This is just the price of a flagship VR device ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[–] HerrBeter 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

For $3500 it better be good. But I doubt the value is added linearly since you get a pretty decent vr headset for under $800

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Blackmist 13 points 11 months ago (1 children)

OK, but that doesn't make it affordable or relevant.

It's like comparing a Ferrari and a Lamborghini. It doesn't matter because the world runs on Toyota Corollas.

Additionally, VR lives and dies on software.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Etterra 20 points 11 months ago

Oh yeah like I wanna get head lice from the snot-nosed kid some mom dumped there so she could go get some Starbucks in peace.

[–] thorbot 19 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Honestly, I just want to experience it for 25 minutes and then I think I would be good. My Valve Index does enough for me for gaming, and I am not wearing a headset all day to work.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] crystalmerchant 14 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The price is always the joke, but this is aimed at commercial buyers right? Not consumers

[–] [email protected] 37 points 11 months ago

Oh boy, you've got a lot to learn about apple consumers

[–] erranto 13 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

I don't believe Apple made this product to sell. it might be just marketing ploy to keep people talking about Apple and how they are always ahead of the curve. they have a brand reputation to maintain.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Yewb 12 points 11 months ago (1 children)

If its amazing like revolutionary amazing it would change my mind, if it's just a vr headset nope.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ordellrb 11 points 11 months ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Is this VR or AR or both? And how robust is the actual software support?

[–] UnderpantsWeevil 16 points 11 months ago

It's whatever you need it to be, baby. Just hand over the cash and Apple will make your dreams come true.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 11 months ago

To give a non-snarky answer, it does AR with external cameras and an incredibly low lag such that those who have tried it have said makes it almost natural (the resolution apparently isn’t perfect, but there is no discernible input lag when looking around which happens on other similar devices). But you can dial up the opacity to wind up in a fully VR environment. So, it is in fact, both.

Your question about software is a big one. Apple is advertising 1M apps available at launch (good) but these are iPad apps, which can run on Vision OS without any modifications by the developers (not so good). That does not mean it will be a good experience. I was listening to a podcast today where a developer clearly stated that after getting a chance to try their app on device at a lab, they totally stopped development because they missed the mark completely with their imagination and the simulator on how it should work. You’ll still be able to run their iPad app, but until they get their hands on their own hardware to iterate more rapidly, they’re giving up.

All that to say it’s unclear how many apps will be natively designed to work with it on launch, and if these will be any good.

Thankfully I don’t live in the US so I am immune to this particular reality distortion field. For now…

[–] Mojojojo1993 9 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Id buy it right now if it was maybe $500.

Spatial computing is the future.

I don't need 3 screens. I need a pair of spectacles.

Screens have always been the bottleneck. The phone tablet monitor tv.

Glasses can do entire field of vision.

[–] fuckwit_mcbumcrumble 16 points 11 months ago (2 children)

It doesn't even do spatial computing well. It can simulate a single 4k display and that's it. You can have some other apps floating around you, but not much.

If I could simulate 8 4k displays all around me, or freely float my full blown Mac OS programs and resize them to infinity then I'd be cool with this. But I've got more screen in front of me right now than the vision could ever hope to do. And Apples "apps" are far too gimped to be useful. Notes and email are cool, but not much else.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] dustyData 8 points 11 months ago (11 children)

Careful there, that's about the amount of time it takes to realize that it's just a gimmick that has no use in your personal life, and very narrow industrial application. They might actually lose potential buyers rather than gain some.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 11 months ago (3 children)

I’d buy one if it were useful enough.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Can't wait to see people wearing those around the office. Thinking about it. if you remove the desk, monitors, keyboard, mouse and just sit down bunch of programmers next to each other with those goggles it can actually be cheaper for the company to run an office even at 3.5k per headset.

[–] nutsack 9 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (12 children)

a monitor keyboard and mouse costs more than 3500?

what the fuck are you going to do at work without a keyboard and mouse?

what

load more comments (12 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›