17 ms·

I don't understand why there is no AR or VR killer app for this thing. Their sales pitch was "it makes it amazing to read articles in safari"? https://www.you

I don't understand why there is no AR or VR killer app for this thing. Their sales pitch was "it makes it amazing to read articles in safari"? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYkq9Rgoj8E&t=5410s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYkq9Rgoj8E&t=5410s $3500 to... look at a floating web browser? Surely they can come up with something. Give me UV/IR vision, let me see the pipes under the ground, show me how to assemble the furniture I'm looking at, give me a template to paint by numbers of a real canvas -- why is this basic concept of "a $3500 novelty device should enable me to do something _new_" so hard for a 3 trillion dollar company to grasp? Are they just hoping someone comes up with all the above in the next 6 months? If they did, would anyone care? $3500 is relatively a lot of money if you're already giving them iPhone and Macbook money. The supermajority of the world doesn't make more then 60k a year, pre-tax. Actually, the supermajority makes vastly less than that. I guess I'll wait and watch and see if they prove me wrong, but I suspect no matter how good it is, it'll flop.

stocknoob 3y ago
You don’t make money targeting those without money to spend. By that logic, Tesla shouldn’t be the top selling car, why would you buy them instead of a 25k Corolla? Many are willing to pay a premium for a best-in class-experience, which is what this headset is. There’s a lot, lot of disposable income in the world, but not held by the supermajority.
- Demmme 3y ago
  Car prices like Tesla are a no brainer because the market was already here. With iphones you suddenly had a multipurpose device for relative little. With this, we know the market and it's not strong by any means
- diffeomorphism 3y ago
  That kinda misses the question. It might very well be the best in class headset (at that price it kinda needs to be). The question was: okay, the hardware is great, but what is need-to-have app? Other headsets highlighted gaming, metaverse, industrial/medical applications,....
easeout 3y ago
You can draw users with a killer app but you can also draw developers with a killer user base. I believe they're leaning on iPhone/iPad app compatibility and Mac screen display to launch it as a peripheral first with existing third party apps, then establish it as a place your customers are waiting for you. Early adopters first, of course. Maybe it really is too early? Depends on the response.
mschuster91 3y ago
Apple is IMO attempting to brute-force create a market here. Facebook/Meta couldn't do the job - for one, Zuck has no idea what he's doing other than chasing buzzwords, for other, they have destroyed a lot of user trust over the past years. And I'm not sure if the stock could take more billions sunk. Apple in contrast? They deliver a whole different game in terms of quality and capability, and now others will take up developing stuff for the platform, just like it happened with every new class of device Apple pushed out. And financially, Apple doesn't have to take care of anything, they have more cash on hand than the GDP of entire countries (165 billion $ [1], more than Kuwait, Ukraine or Venezuela [2]). And even if there don't appear any VR apps - movie addicts will love it. [1] https://www.cnbc.com/2023/04/05/how-markets-biggest-companies-manage-cash-and-investments.html https://www.cnbc.com/2023/04/05/how-markets-biggest-companie... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nomi...
- theodric 3y ago
  Yeah I can't wait to spend €11000 so my family can strap a screen to each of our faces and watch movies like that rather than staring at a dumb old TV like some kinda poor people
  - petesergeant 3y ago
    I mean I feel like this non-ironically. My wife is badgering me to order us both one as soon as possible
  - asimpletune 3y ago
    Probably, in person, for the foreseeable future you'll just watch a movie IRL when people are in the same room, and that's fine and I like that. What this will allow is for you to watch a movie with your friends remotely in a way that is compelling. My gf and I were long distance for a few months. It was really hard, but being able to video chat every day really helped. Unfortunately, anything beyond that was difficult, like watching a movie, because the experience was awful. The closest we were able to do was use a browser extension that would sync our streams, and then have a chat box. With this, remotely, you guys can watch the same movie, chat, see each other, hear each other, still hear the movie, etc... Will it replace watching am movie IRL? Of course not, and it doesn't have to. I don't think they're trying to replace physical interactions, but they're making a great case for how we can augment and extend our virtual ones.
hooch 3y ago
If you look more closely at the keynote such AR apps are demoed; a factory process visualisation, and a human heart, if I recall correctly.
cjlacz 3y ago
To me, it wasn't that I could use Safari that was killer app, but the fact I can use it as a monitor that impresses me. I don't think most VR setups allow you to read text as easily as on a monitor and that is what Apple is claiming. (First impressions seem to support). The second part is not requiring a controller. If I can control this with my eyes, hand and voice. That means I can use a keyboard with it. I assume they'll have some virtual version too. With those two things, a whole lot more use cases open up around it. I don't plan on getting one right away or anything, but an actual usable computer is far more interesting than something that plays games, moves some models around in space and does video conferencing with avatars.
- turingfeel 3y ago
  It doesn’t run any desktop apps yet though, only Safari and Photos and a few content apps. They also demoed mirroring only a single Mac display. I think people are overlooking this and expecting to get multi monitor displays for heavy workload apps like on the Meta Quest Pro, but Apple are committed as always to making this a standalone system.
  - TheOtherHobbes 3y ago
    It's not going to be successful unless Apple get this right. I expect a lot of people here spend a lot of their time looking at text in various development environments. with a smaller number working on content creation. I would love a huge virtual area with multiple screen so I can see far more of whatever I'm working on. That would be a game changer. But Safari, 3D movies, Avatar FaceTime, and maybe some games? And that's all? That's a tough sell, especially at this price.
    - turingfeel 3y ago
      I agree, and I’m pretty worried that really is all that’s being offered on day one.
elorant 3y ago
Because it requires greater integration. For VR the whole environment has to participate. At least if we’re talking about VR glasses that you can wear outside, every store, road, building block and what not should provide information. Who would create all that info, and for what purpose. Adoption is non-existent. There is no platform to submit your data. All we have is the interface. If you’re to wear them only inside then all you can do is the things you already do with a slightly modified UI. Which defies the purpose. I don’t want a virtual keyboard because I get no feedback from it. Virtual screens might be good if I’m in a hotel room, but then again I’ll have my laptop which has better interface. Text reading is an interesting use case but what happens with eye strain if you look at those screens for prolonged time periods. And by the way, what happens if you're wearing eyeglasses? Will they fit? Perhaps they can find application is e-commerce. Sites could start building virtual stores and you get a feeling that you’re browsing wardrobes. I don’t know if that’s a thing but it kind of makes sense as a use case.
- kaba0 3y ago
  I am also not too optimistic about vision pro’s success, but regarding your glasses question: you would order specific lenses for it. They may even do that inside app stores from what I’ve seen in the video? Hopefully it won’t add an extra charge as lenses are expensive.
username_my1 3y ago
actually what about immersive 3d experince design ? imagine being a game developer and having this in debth experince with your game visuals. same goes to vx effects in movies. what about designing App UI / UX where you're completely in the flow and don't want to be disturbed. how about complex data anylsis ? If the price was not an issue and apps are mature, I could defenitly imagine lots of use cases around immersive work tasks ...
ChildOfChaos 3y ago
I think 'killer app' is missing the point. Looking for a killer app you are looking at this to be a traditional VR or even AR device, that is not what this is. This is about having a screen anywhere, multiple screens and turning anything into a screen and any environment into one, hence the name Vision Pro, that is how Apple are trying to sell it. If you watched the keynote I think that was clear, everyone else seems to missing the point and comparing this to traditional headsets. The fact when they showed gaming, it wasn't a VR or AR game, it was a traditional game on an AR screen says it all.
- charcircuit 3y ago
  >This is about having a screen anywhere, multiple screens and turning anything into a screen and any environment into one Which is what traditional VR and AR devices offer. Being able to use apps in VR or AR isn't new.
  - Gareth321 3y ago
    Exactly. The Quest 2 has offered this for years and cost $300 at launch.
    - shawabawa3 3y ago
      Theoretically yes, you can have large multiple screens on the quest 2 In reality, they are worthless, it's like looking at a CRT from 1995 At a certain point higher resolution changes how you can use it
      - op00to 3y ago
        No, you’re still just displaying traditional apps on a headset. They just look better. You still have a big dumb headset on.
        malka 3y ago
        I dont care about about wearing a big headset. I just want to display fake screen, in HD, everywhere in my environment. The quest does not have high enough resolution for this.
Gareth321 3y ago
This was a reported rumour prior to the reveal yesterday: no significant use case. This is a significant departure from Apple's usual MO: find a USP and NAIL the implementation. They're using a scattergun approach here and it's risky. They better be sending these headsets free of charge to thousands of studios in the hopes that some of them develop THE killer app, because this is the only way I see this succeeding. Especially because this is a first gen product from Apple with a maximum of two hours of battery life, a wire hanging off the headset, and no controllers. I'd be much more confident about the future of this device if it weren't $3,500 + tax. At this price I don't understand who will be buying it.
- ttul 3y ago
  I will buy it for my entire team just for the video conferencing - assuming it is actually as good as promised, of course. Anything beyond that is gravy.
  - paul_grisham 3y ago
    Having to wear this for Zoom calls would be some kind of wagie humiliation ritual
    - ttul 3y ago
      If it doesn’t blow me away, I won’t do it. But I think it will blow me away. Apple rarely disappoints on the experience by the time they launch something, in my experience anyhow.
      - matsemann 3y ago
        If my company forced me to attend meetings in a glorified metaverse I'd probably resign.
        saltcured 3y ago
        It will need a virtual virtual avatar so you can disable the sensors and have options for how your avatar should be animated. Attentive, bored, marble statue...
King-Aaron 3y ago
What killer app did laptops have that made them the success they are today? Does new technology necessarily need a killer app if the ergonomics end up being more desirable to a broad range of users? I don't necessarily know the answer here, but my gut feeling is that defining this device based on a "killer app" is like trying to define the original iPhone as needing a "killer app". It didn't necessarily have such a thing but it did end up being pretty big.
- stevenwliao 3y ago
  Laptops' killer apps are arguably Word, web browsers, and Photoshop.
  - jayd16 3y ago
    An MR 3d sculpting app like Maya or ZBrush would be pretty sweet. Not sure it's as killer as Photoshop but id be excited none the less.
- m4rtink 3y ago
  Spreadsheets and word processors.
  - jryle70 3y ago
    Not when the first laptop came out. Imagine lugging around a heavy piece of computer, with crammed keyboard and not so nice monitor. Why should one be subjected to such a subpar experience?
    - p_l 3y ago
      By the time laptop form factor became somewhat common, yes, it was spreadsheets, word processing, and a communication suite (mail, file transfer, etc). Those were the critical features that fueled laptops for several years, taking money from people who found a reason to work on the go. It was a considerable jump up from super tiny (but still used!) computers like Epson HX-20 or super heavy (luggables). The people using them for spreadsheets and word processing joined the field engineering and military applications. Hell, laptops stopped being synonymous with "business executive" in popular vernacular only after 2000s.
contrarian1234 3y ago
Because no one will really do the stuff you suggest. All the things you describe just take too much effort to make Assembling furniture - 1d written description : 1 person half a day - 2d illustration : ~2 people and a 3 days - 3d animation : ~3 people and 2 weeks - 3d interactive thing : a small team and a month.. At least ? Is it really going to yield a ton more sales? You can see it in other media. Zillions of creative people write books, a lot fewer shoot movies, and fewer still make interactive narrative video games All the 3D experiences you end up having are quite simplistic bc no one wants to invest in it. Could you make an Avatar level narrative in VR? It'd be super tricky, but maybe with enough money you could. (arguably there aren't enough people at the moment who know how to make compelling 3d interactive experiences). Will it be worth the extra cost ? Unlikely. It's hard to imagine it being more than marginally better at best Maybe AI will somehow help speed up the process substantially (and lower the costs), but I'm a bit skeptical it'll help enough The only thing I can think of where VR would make a huge difference is maybe horror. I'm not into horror, but I could see VR being a huge step up in terms of spookyness
- causi 3y ago
  Yeah if only 3D scanning went through the same revolution digital photography did.
  - mrguyorama 3y ago
    3D scanning only gets you a mesh, it doesn't get you interactivity or functionality. If you just want to manhandle a bunch of meshes, modding H3 VR is easy, and there's a 3D modelling program for SteamVR that opens and edits meshes just fine. Hell, you can even interactively edit things in the Unreal IDE. But it's still a serious task.
    - causi 3y ago
      Sure, but it's a very useful first step. When you want to do something like, say, 3D printing a case for your bluetooth earbuds, there is no approach that isn't tedious.
- 3y ago
numpad0 3y ago
There's no killer app specific to this headset because this is just a supercomplicated me-too product, and also because there is no point in half baking a potential killer. But it's okay, I think. It has the browser, Unity integration, okay visual passthrough, etc. Ticks all boxes.
johlits 3y ago
Just give me lightsaber battles and I'm sold.
- hellweaver666 3y ago
  literally the only thing I use my Quest 2 for is Beat Saber
- jayd16 3y ago
  Even if they somehow nail the hand input, without controllers for haptics, I'm a bit disappointed.
- mrguyorama 3y ago
  It doesn't work, because you can't constrain the user's hand to match what's happening in the game, meaning it completely removes any immersion benefit you get from VR in the first place. Melee in VR feels awful. It feels like swatting flies. Shooting in VR is amazing. There are multiple games that let you play Star Wars battlefront knockoffs so you can cosplay the droid army.
wildpeaks 3y ago
Ironically we had floating web browsers 16 years ago already (and there have been AR versions over the years as well): https://techcrunch.com/2007/06/05/spacetime-3d-browser-eye-candy/ https://techcrunch.com/2007/06/05/spacetime-3d-browser-eye-c... At this point, floating pages and waypoints are the "Hello World" of AR platforms.
DonHopkins 3y ago
You can't see the killer app for the nurturing ecosystem.
- mrguyorama 3y ago
  What nurturing ecosystem? We've had ten years or so to find an actual use case that every average person is willing to spend hundreds of dollars on, and we have come up empty handed. There's nothing magical or so new in this headset. The people who have an actual use for VR, simulation game turbo nerds, have been mostly satisfied, nobody else cares about VR. Most people who try the "floating web browser and custom theater and infinite monitors" experience quickly realize how unergonomic it is. VR is still an experience that one in ten cannot adjust to. This is the same problem we saw with the metaverse. It's all hype and no substance. Their best ideas to put into the presentation were looking at web sites. Why would web sites be better to look at in VR?
qbasic_forever 3y ago
When they seriously started designing this thing 2+ years ago they probably assumed Facebook's metaverse play would be a smashing success and get VR (and apps like its horizon metaverse) into the mainstream. Oops.
- f6v 3y ago
  I bet it took them much more time to make it. Don’t think metaverse had anything to do with it.
  - qbasic_forever 3y ago
    Yeah it's why I said seriously started--I'm sure this idea was floating around and the tech worked on for a decade or more, but only in the last couple years did they decide it was viable to make a consumer product. I'm sure Facebook ramping up and betting big on metaverse helped Apple decide to keep going on shipping it.
ENGNR 3y ago
Two large screens in a hotel room - so sold (plus on a plane, if that's not socially annoying) Being able to stand side by side with people to work on something rather than broadcast my face into their face. It's just... so much more natural. All of the social cues like concentration, wandering away to think, nodding your head along with a group conversation you stumble upon and are now actively engaged in. If I can bring my data/apps in but keep them private - sold Interacting digitally with the environment - this is a new one but I think it's going to be huge. Anything involving maps or layouts, you can plan it prior, and then overlay it on the day when you get on site. AR on a phone is meh because you have to hold it up, but when it's just a gesture I think it's going to open up whole new use cases that were just out of reach (pun intended)
- 411111111111111 3y ago
  It's 4k per eye. That's great compared to current headsets, but please remember that the screen of your normal screen likely already has 4k, and that's just a rectangle a few cm of everything you see. The 4k per eye means that it's likely going to be <fullhd depending on just how gigantic you want to make the screens It could be great, but productivity will likely need over 4k per eye to be anything beyond a novelty. Depending on how the hardware develops, it could become something great for sure. most people calling it a novelty are taking about the device as it's been announced, not the theoretical future it could potentially have if it was different.
  - ENGNR 3y ago
    Personally I'd make the monitors the same size as real monitors. So... yeah maybe they'd be HD if they took up 2/3rds of peripheral vision, which would match my current monitors. But you could also have more of them, and handwave them away when you want the table back And when on the move would be better than... nothing, which is what it's competing against. Look at phones, they're absolutely abysmal for both input and output. But they're mobile. Laptops? They're not as good as desktops.... but they're mobile. Virtual displays? They're mobile, allowing more bandwidth in, it's going to be good
tinus_hn 3y ago
Certainly without the device, there’s never going to be a killer app for the device. It’s the first step, it’s not even in stores yet.
ttul 3y ago
The first iPhone was pretty crappy. No apps. 2G only. Poor battery life. Limited global distribution - not even Canada could get it. But it captivated people who didn’t own it yet, and it proved out some essential ideas like multitouch. And when the iPhone 3G came out, improving on some of the original device’s shortcomings, it was wildly popular. The rest is history. There is no doubt that AR will eventually get good enough that the devices are paper thin, weigh nothing, and have no external battery (of course). Everyone wants _that_ device, but you have to start somewhere. Apple can afford to be patient in this space and their considerable moat of intellectual property will allow them to carve out the high end of the AR market and then work down as they did with iPhone. It would not surprise me if they are earning 90% of the gross margins in the AR device space within three years.
- omeze 3y ago
  The first iphone let you have a real web browser anywhere you had cell coverage. This lets you have a web browser floating at home. Its not the same (and I love VR)
  - mcphage 3y ago
    And Visual Voice Mail—that was a huge step forward.
    - philistine 3y ago
      Believe it or not, my carrier finally got visual voicemail in 2022.
      - LadyCailin 3y ago
        Just in time for regular phone calls to be on their way out.
  - macNchz 3y ago
    I didn’t get one until the 3G came out, but I have a very clear memory of the “wow!” feeling: right after buying the phone, I went down the street to a coffee shop and started browsing the web while waiting in line. I was instantly cured of my prior skepticism that it could actually be a major improvement over my flip phone + iPod.
gehsty 3y ago
Safari was the killer app for the iPhone and iPad & it’s where people spend an awful lot of their time. This is a general purpose computing device, so seeing it have a great browser setup is a big deal.
- matsemann 3y ago
  Is it "general purpose", though? So far I've seen no mentions on how I or other developers can run our own stuff on it. Will it be a walled garden?
  - kalleboo 3y ago
    SDK coming later this month https://developer.apple.com/visionos/ https://developer.apple.com/visionos/
  - gehsty 3y ago
    General purpose like a laptop or a phone. It will have an App Store like the phone (this was in the keynote I think). I don’t think there will be side loading unless it is govt mandated requirement. It is aimed at general population and not developers.
    - matsemann 3y ago
      I want it "hackable", not because I myself is gonna do anything with it, but because I want that kind of innovation. Not the boring, polished, exec-vision thingy. Let other people invent new ways of doing stuff! If you only can do Apple-approved-stuff on it, it will be boring. Let people release half-baked demos and cool tech. Don't force everything to go through their "review" process.
      - gehsty 3y ago
        Boring like the iPhone? Sounds awful.
        3y ago
petesergeant 3y ago
Does it need one at launch? The Apple Watch wasn't specifically a health-tracker at launch, but that's what they've really leaned into now. When they launched the iPhone, one of the most vaunted features was "Visual Voicemail", which I'm not even sure still exists? It's a platform. It'll get cheaper, it'll get better, and developers and the market will do the rest. There's a lot of time between now and "early next year" for 3rd party devs to come up with a lot of apps and ideas. As someone else said, this is the first release of something that'll end up the size and weight as a pair of sunglasses; at that point, I think it will be as ubiquitous as iPhones are.
Alex3917 3y ago
> I don't understand why there is no AR or VR killer app for this thing. Because if you go outside wearing this you're going to get instantly mugged. If they were to release something like Pokemon Go before the price comes down, that would likely just result in a bunch of kids getting murdered on the subway or whatever. Much better to drive down the costs by first selling it to people who are excited to use it for coding or whatever.
dontlaugh 3y ago
Correct, it is pointless. It could have had a killer app: games. Most VR headsets suck in one way or another, Apple could make one that's actually nice to use. Sadly, for some bizarre reason Apple still don't understand games. They even have pretty good GPUs now and they're still not making an Apple TV Pro to compete with the PS5. Even just the Vision could've been announced along with a couple exclusives, but instead they have an offhand mention of Arcade.
- bobo_legos 3y ago
  What's strange to me is that they roll out Hideo Kojima to talk about some gaming thing for the Mac OS, yet when it came to the headset all they can give is some creepy demos of a fathers wearing this thing while their kinds play at home. Could they really not have given some units to some game devs and tell them to come up with some cool ideas? This thing just feels incredibly rushed. It's like Apple felt left out of the all the AI hype the last couple months, so they were forced to show this thing before it was really ready.
  - dontlaugh 3y ago
    Exactly! Even just a small Kojima game exclusive to the Vision Pro would've been interesting. Kojima is sufficiently famous and well liked to bootstrap a gaming ecosystem, though. They could've gone further and announced an Apple TV Pro, a decent controller, Vision non-Pro (cheaper headset that requires an M1 Mac or Apple TV Pro) and one full Kojima VR game as an exclusive. That could've been enough to start competing with Microsoft and Sony for console games.
    - mrguyorama 3y ago
      How many headsets did Valve sell with Half Life Alyx?
      - olddustytrail 3y ago
        103,000
Waterluvian 3y ago
If I had to live in a VR context for any reason, this really feels like the product I’d want to have to do it in. But I can’t think of a reason why I’d have to.
JohnAaronNelson 3y ago
The killer app will be porn and/or virtually undressing the people around you.
- ChuckNorris89 3y ago
  With $3500 you can go on an epic drug fueled sex party with high quality real live escorts that will make your mates jealous and will be an experience you remember for life. Spending $3500 just to wank at VR videos is crazy.
  - mensetmanusman 3y ago
    The hidden cost of a lifetime of STDs may be what this math is missing.
    - ChuckNorris89 3y ago
      Condoms are cheap
      - mensetmanusman 3y ago
        Statistics
  - HKH2 3y ago
    At some point the signals going to your brain won't be too different. VR + AI experiences have way more potential, and will greatly accelerate the trend of people mapping out their limbic systems.
    - ChuckNorris89 3y ago
      >At some point the signals going to your brain won't be too different Tell me you've never had sex. Sex and VR porn no matter how realistic are words apart.
      - 3y ago
analog31 3y ago
What lessons have we learned from the killer apps for smart phones? The killer app has to be addictive to children.
lijok 3y ago
This is what's concerning. A team that just spent years creating revolutionary hardware that is leaps and bounds ahead of the competition, who by far have the most context to come up with a killer app, could not come up with one. The best they could offer is reading articles in safari an enhancing the viewing experience of movies/shows/live sports. They should be bursting at the seams with out of this world ideas that this amazing hardware could support. And yet, nothing.
- WillAdams 3y ago
  I think that we need new tools --- I'd love to see a 3D sculpting tool which uses this to show the 3D object to me in real space --- it'd be great for furniture design.
plagiarist 3y ago
I am also waiting to see what the killer app is. I think it may be positioned more for professional use and then, "oh yeah, you can have a great movie and game experience, too."
jayd16 3y ago
Well, yes. This is the early adoption device they expect to bootstrap their app store with all the niche things you described.
Cthulhu_ 3y ago
Counterpoint, there's always been a desire to have a virtual environment as first shown in 80's sci-fi films like Hackers, Johnny Mnemonic, etc; immerse yourself in a system, have it become like a natural extension of yourself. There was someone on here some time ago who showed and talked about his setup, he had been doing his job as a software developer reclined in VR for years at that point. Here's the thing though: smartphones didn't have "a" killer app per sè I don't think, but they became part of everyone's daily lives in a really short timeframe. PCs and laptops didn't have "a" killer app, but pretty much everyone here has it as their day job. I don't think it's about whether it has a killer app or not, I think it's whether it can become normalized and mainstream, and be listed alongside the TV, PC, smartphone, the car, etc; something everyone will have in one way or another. That said, I'm cynical myself; modern-day VR and AR has been tried for a decade now or thereabouts; Google wasted billions on Google Glass, Facebook bet their whole company on the metaverse / AR / VR and has had to backtrack, Magic Leap was a mystery company that raised billions and failed to deliver, Oculus and Vive have their place now as a somewhat niche and pricey gaming implement - popular as arcade / events (I went to one for a birthday party this weekend) and middle class households that have the money and space for it. So there's a market, mostly in gaming, but it's not become as mainstream yet as e.g. the smartphone. I don't personally believe it will, but if anyone can take an existing concept, iterate on it and make it mainstream, it's Apple.
- alach11 3y ago
  The killer app for smartphones is being a phone.
  - HenriTEL 3y ago
    True. The Iphone is an Ipod Touch with a sim card.
    - ericpauley 3y ago
      The iPhone predates the iPod Touch.
tootie 3y ago
I worked for a digital creative agency that partnered with a few AR/VR companies including the big ones creating demos and POCs for conferences or events. We spent so much time brainstorming and testing with some really bright people and never really came up with more than diverting bits of motion art. We made one pretty decent mini game. Nothing substantive. And think about the mainstream industry. It's been years and the peak of AR is still Pokemon Go and VR is Beat Saber. Apple Vision looks to be twice as good as the Meta Quest for 10x the price.
AndyMcConachie 3y ago
Shopping. Walk into a physical store and stand in an aisle. How many products can you see in a 360 field of vision? Visit any webstore. How many products can you see on your screen at once? To me this is the completely obvious application for VR. But in order for it to be actually useful you would need an online shopping experience that worked with it. At the very least you would have to 3D model every product.
- mrguyorama 3y ago
  This is laughable. Walmart literally has a demo of an "AR experience" shopping experience and it is absurdism, on the same level as that pepsi logo design document. Nobody wants that. People shop online to avoid the annoyance of a physical location. I can shop for things while I squeeze out turds, why would I ever exchange that for strapping an overpriced screen to my face? The average person favors convenience and cheapness above all else, to a huge extent.
adamsmith143 3y ago
Isn't the actual killer app for Advertisers? "Glue this thing to peoples faces and you now have the most effective most intrusive way to slam ads in front of people ever created!" Don't see why any consumer would buy this for 3500 though.
rchaud 3y ago
The game console industry shows that even having a killer app isn't enough to avoid selling hardware at a loss and making it up with ecosystem rent. This has no killer app and is being sold at full price.
tambourine_man 3y ago
I think this will be one of those “iPod, less storage than a Nomad, lame” comments in a few years, but I guess we'll see. I'd love to work comfortably lying in a hammock, couch or bed. The monitor part is solved, it seems, I just need one of those split keyboards where each half attaches to one hand. I'd also love to feel like I'm in a colossal movie theater without all the viruses, noise and popcorn from other people. I'll pay good money for either.
mickdarling 3y ago
None of the Apple apps they showed for the VisionPro had any substantial photogrammetry mapping. They didn’t paste virtual TVs to the walls, or place furniture into an empty room. All the Apple apps were contained to virtual floating screens, even the keyboard (instead of placing in on a surface). They did show a few third party apps interacting with real world objects (the train moving on a table) but I wonder what amount of that was concept and what was real. Connecting the virtual objects to those in the real world I feel is a killer feature that will open up a huge set of opportunities. If this doesn’t have that yet, it’s still more VR than AR in my book.
bwb 3y ago
The killer app is replacing my giant monitor with this device. When I travel this is a game changer for me. Right now I lug a small second screen so I can work. I will happily drop $5k to fix this problem and just travel with this plus a small laptop.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
simonebrunozzi 3y ago
> Are they just hoping someone comes up with all the above in the next 6 months? Yes. > If they did, would anyone care? Also yes.

stocknoob 3y ago

You don’t make money targeting those without money to spend. By that logic, Tesla shouldn’t be the top selling car, why would you buy them instead of a 25k Corolla? Many are willing to pay a premium for a best-in class-experience, which is what this headset is. There’s a lot, lot of disposable income in the world, but not held by the supermajority.

Demmme 3y ago
Car prices like Tesla are a no brainer because the market was already here. With iphones you suddenly had a multipurpose device for relative little. With this, we know the market and it's not strong by any means
diffeomorphism 3y ago
That kinda misses the question. It might very well be the best in class headset (at that price it kinda needs to be). The question was: okay, the hardware is great, but what is need-to-have app? Other headsets highlighted gaming, metaverse, industrial/medical applications,....

easeout 3y ago

You can draw users with a killer app but you can also draw developers with a killer user base. I believe they're leaning on iPhone/iPad app compatibility and Mac screen display to launch it as a peripheral first with existing third party apps, then establish it as a place your customers are waiting for you. Early adopters first, of course. Maybe it really is too early? Depends on the response.

mschuster91 3y ago

Apple is IMO attempting to brute-force create a market here. Facebook/Meta couldn't do the job - for one, Zuck has no idea what he's doing other than chasing buzzwords, for other, they have destroyed a lot of user trust over the past years. And I'm not sure if the stock could take more billions sunk. Apple in contrast? They deliver a whole different game in terms of quality and capability, and now others will take up developing stuff for the platform, just like it happened with every new class of device Apple pushed out. And financially, Apple doesn't have to take care of anything, they have more cash on hand than the GDP of entire countries (165 billion $ [1], more than Kuwait, Ukraine or Venezuela [2]). And even if there don't appear any VR apps - movie addicts will love it. [1] https://www.cnbc.com/2023/04/05/how-markets-biggest-companies-manage-cash-and-investments.html https://www.cnbc.com/2023/04/05/how-markets-biggest-companie... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nomi...

theodric 3y ago
Yeah I can't wait to spend €11000 so my family can strap a screen to each of our faces and watch movies like that rather than staring at a dumb old TV like some kinda poor people
- petesergeant 3y ago
  I mean I feel like this non-ironically. My wife is badgering me to order us both one as soon as possible
- asimpletune 3y ago
  Probably, in person, for the foreseeable future you'll just watch a movie IRL when people are in the same room, and that's fine and I like that. What this will allow is for you to watch a movie with your friends remotely in a way that is compelling. My gf and I were long distance for a few months. It was really hard, but being able to video chat every day really helped. Unfortunately, anything beyond that was difficult, like watching a movie, because the experience was awful. The closest we were able to do was use a browser extension that would sync our streams, and then have a chat box. With this, remotely, you guys can watch the same movie, chat, see each other, hear each other, still hear the movie, etc... Will it replace watching am movie IRL? Of course not, and it doesn't have to. I don't think they're trying to replace physical interactions, but they're making a great case for how we can augment and extend our virtual ones.

hooch 3y ago

If you look more closely at the keynote such AR apps are demoed; a factory process visualisation, and a human heart, if I recall correctly.

cjlacz 3y ago

To me, it wasn't that I could use Safari that was killer app, but the fact I can use it as a monitor that impresses me. I don't think most VR setups allow you to read text as easily as on a monitor and that is what Apple is claiming. (First impressions seem to support). The second part is not requiring a controller. If I can control this with my eyes, hand and voice. That means I can use a keyboard with it. I assume they'll have some virtual version too. With those two things, a whole lot more use cases open up around it. I don't plan on getting one right away or anything, but an actual usable computer is far more interesting than something that plays games, moves some models around in space and does video conferencing with avatars.

turingfeel 3y ago
It doesn’t run any desktop apps yet though, only Safari and Photos and a few content apps. They also demoed mirroring only a single Mac display. I think people are overlooking this and expecting to get multi monitor displays for heavy workload apps like on the Meta Quest Pro, but Apple are committed as always to making this a standalone system.
- TheOtherHobbes 3y ago
  It's not going to be successful unless Apple get this right. I expect a lot of people here spend a lot of their time looking at text in various development environments. with a smaller number working on content creation. I would love a huge virtual area with multiple screen so I can see far more of whatever I'm working on. That would be a game changer. But Safari, 3D movies, Avatar FaceTime, and maybe some games? And that's all? That's a tough sell, especially at this price.
  - turingfeel 3y ago
    I agree, and I’m pretty worried that really is all that’s being offered on day one.

elorant 3y ago

Because it requires greater integration. For VR the whole environment has to participate. At least if we’re talking about VR glasses that you can wear outside, every store, road, building block and what not should provide information. Who would create all that info, and for what purpose. Adoption is non-existent. There is no platform to submit your data. All we have is the interface. If you’re to wear them only inside then all you can do is the things you already do with a slightly modified UI. Which defies the purpose. I don’t want a virtual keyboard because I get no feedback from it. Virtual screens might be good if I’m in a hotel room, but then again I’ll have my laptop which has better interface. Text reading is an interesting use case but what happens with eye strain if you look at those screens for prolonged time periods. And by the way, what happens if you're wearing eyeglasses? Will they fit? Perhaps they can find application is e-commerce. Sites could start building virtual stores and you get a feeling that you’re browsing wardrobes. I don’t know if that’s a thing but it kind of makes sense as a use case.

kaba0 3y ago
I am also not too optimistic about vision pro’s success, but regarding your glasses question: you would order specific lenses for it. They may even do that inside app stores from what I’ve seen in the video? Hopefully it won’t add an extra charge as lenses are expensive.

username_my1 3y ago

actually what about immersive 3d experince design ? imagine being a game developer and having this in debth experince with your game visuals. same goes to vx effects in movies. what about designing App UI / UX where you're completely in the flow and don't want to be disturbed. how about complex data anylsis ? If the price was not an issue and apps are mature, I could defenitly imagine lots of use cases around immersive work tasks ...

ChildOfChaos 3y ago

I think 'killer app' is missing the point. Looking for a killer app you are looking at this to be a traditional VR or even AR device, that is not what this is. This is about having a screen anywhere, multiple screens and turning anything into a screen and any environment into one, hence the name Vision Pro, that is how Apple are trying to sell it. If you watched the keynote I think that was clear, everyone else seems to missing the point and comparing this to traditional headsets. The fact when they showed gaming, it wasn't a VR or AR game, it was a traditional game on an AR screen says it all.

charcircuit 3y ago
>This is about having a screen anywhere, multiple screens and turning anything into a screen and any environment into one Which is what traditional VR and AR devices offer. Being able to use apps in VR or AR isn't new.
- Gareth321 3y ago
  Exactly. The Quest 2 has offered this for years and cost $300 at launch.
  - shawabawa3 3y ago
    Theoretically yes, you can have large multiple screens on the quest 2 In reality, they are worthless, it's like looking at a CRT from 1995 At a certain point higher resolution changes how you can use it
    - op00to 3y ago
      No, you’re still just displaying traditional apps on a headset. They just look better. You still have a big dumb headset on.
      - malka 3y ago
        I dont care about about wearing a big headset. I just want to display fake screen, in HD, everywhere in my environment. The quest does not have high enough resolution for this.

Gareth321 3y ago

This was a reported rumour prior to the reveal yesterday: no significant use case. This is a significant departure from Apple's usual MO: find a USP and NAIL the implementation. They're using a scattergun approach here and it's risky. They better be sending these headsets free of charge to thousands of studios in the hopes that some of them develop THE killer app, because this is the only way I see this succeeding. Especially because this is a first gen product from Apple with a maximum of two hours of battery life, a wire hanging off the headset, and no controllers. I'd be much more confident about the future of this device if it weren't $3,500 + tax. At this price I don't understand who will be buying it.

ttul 3y ago
I will buy it for my entire team just for the video conferencing - assuming it is actually as good as promised, of course. Anything beyond that is gravy.
- paul_grisham 3y ago
  Having to wear this for Zoom calls would be some kind of wagie humiliation ritual
  - ttul 3y ago
    If it doesn’t blow me away, I won’t do it. But I think it will blow me away. Apple rarely disappoints on the experience by the time they launch something, in my experience anyhow.
    - matsemann 3y ago
      If my company forced me to attend meetings in a glorified metaverse I'd probably resign.
      - saltcured 3y ago
        It will need a virtual virtual avatar so you can disable the sensors and have options for how your avatar should be animated. Attentive, bored, marble statue...

King-Aaron 3y ago

What killer app did laptops have that made them the success they are today? Does new technology necessarily need a killer app if the ergonomics end up being more desirable to a broad range of users? I don't necessarily know the answer here, but my gut feeling is that defining this device based on a "killer app" is like trying to define the original iPhone as needing a "killer app". It didn't necessarily have such a thing but it did end up being pretty big.

stevenwliao 3y ago
Laptops' killer apps are arguably Word, web browsers, and Photoshop.
- jayd16 3y ago
  An MR 3d sculpting app like Maya or ZBrush would be pretty sweet. Not sure it's as killer as Photoshop but id be excited none the less.
m4rtink 3y ago
Spreadsheets and word processors.
- jryle70 3y ago
  Not when the first laptop came out. Imagine lugging around a heavy piece of computer, with crammed keyboard and not so nice monitor. Why should one be subjected to such a subpar experience?
  - p_l 3y ago
    By the time laptop form factor became somewhat common, yes, it was spreadsheets, word processing, and a communication suite (mail, file transfer, etc). Those were the critical features that fueled laptops for several years, taking money from people who found a reason to work on the go. It was a considerable jump up from super tiny (but still used!) computers like Epson HX-20 or super heavy (luggables). The people using them for spreadsheets and word processing joined the field engineering and military applications. Hell, laptops stopped being synonymous with "business executive" in popular vernacular only after 2000s.

contrarian1234 3y ago

Because no one will really do the stuff you suggest. All the things you describe just take too much effort to make Assembling furniture - 1d written description : 1 person half a day - 2d illustration : ~2 people and a 3 days - 3d animation : ~3 people and 2 weeks - 3d interactive thing : a small team and a month.. At least ? Is it really going to yield a ton more sales? You can see it in other media. Zillions of creative people write books, a lot fewer shoot movies, and fewer still make interactive narrative video games All the 3D experiences you end up having are quite simplistic bc no one wants to invest in it. Could you make an Avatar level narrative in VR? It'd be super tricky, but maybe with enough money you could. (arguably there aren't enough people at the moment who know how to make compelling 3d interactive experiences). Will it be worth the extra cost ? Unlikely. It's hard to imagine it being more than marginally better at best Maybe AI will somehow help speed up the process substantially (and lower the costs), but I'm a bit skeptical it'll help enough The only thing I can think of where VR would make a huge difference is maybe horror. I'm not into horror, but I could see VR being a huge step up in terms of spookyness

causi 3y ago
Yeah if only 3D scanning went through the same revolution digital photography did.
- mrguyorama 3y ago
  3D scanning only gets you a mesh, it doesn't get you interactivity or functionality. If you just want to manhandle a bunch of meshes, modding H3 VR is easy, and there's a 3D modelling program for SteamVR that opens and edits meshes just fine. Hell, you can even interactively edit things in the Unreal IDE. But it's still a serious task.
  - causi 3y ago
    Sure, but it's a very useful first step. When you want to do something like, say, 3D printing a case for your bluetooth earbuds, there is no approach that isn't tedious.
3y ago

numpad0 3y ago

There's no killer app specific to this headset because this is just a supercomplicated me-too product, and also because there is no point in half baking a potential killer. But it's okay, I think. It has the browser, Unity integration, okay visual passthrough, etc. Ticks all boxes.

johlits 3y ago

Just give me lightsaber battles and I'm sold.

hellweaver666 3y ago
literally the only thing I use my Quest 2 for is Beat Saber
jayd16 3y ago
Even if they somehow nail the hand input, without controllers for haptics, I'm a bit disappointed.
mrguyorama 3y ago
It doesn't work, because you can't constrain the user's hand to match what's happening in the game, meaning it completely removes any immersion benefit you get from VR in the first place. Melee in VR feels awful. It feels like swatting flies. Shooting in VR is amazing. There are multiple games that let you play Star Wars battlefront knockoffs so you can cosplay the droid army.

wildpeaks 3y ago

Ironically we had floating web browsers 16 years ago already (and there have been AR versions over the years as well): https://techcrunch.com/2007/06/05/spacetime-3d-browser-eye-candy/ https://techcrunch.com/2007/06/05/spacetime-3d-browser-eye-c... At this point, floating pages and waypoints are the "Hello World" of AR platforms.

DonHopkins 3y ago

You can't see the killer app for the nurturing ecosystem.

mrguyorama 3y ago
What nurturing ecosystem? We've had ten years or so to find an actual use case that every average person is willing to spend hundreds of dollars on, and we have come up empty handed. There's nothing magical or so new in this headset. The people who have an actual use for VR, simulation game turbo nerds, have been mostly satisfied, nobody else cares about VR. Most people who try the "floating web browser and custom theater and infinite monitors" experience quickly realize how unergonomic it is. VR is still an experience that one in ten cannot adjust to. This is the same problem we saw with the metaverse. It's all hype and no substance. Their best ideas to put into the presentation were looking at web sites. Why would web sites be better to look at in VR?

qbasic_forever 3y ago

When they seriously started designing this thing 2+ years ago they probably assumed Facebook's metaverse play would be a smashing success and get VR (and apps like its horizon metaverse) into the mainstream. Oops.

f6v 3y ago
I bet it took them much more time to make it. Don’t think metaverse had anything to do with it.
- qbasic_forever 3y ago
  Yeah it's why I said seriously started--I'm sure this idea was floating around and the tech worked on for a decade or more, but only in the last couple years did they decide it was viable to make a consumer product. I'm sure Facebook ramping up and betting big on metaverse helped Apple decide to keep going on shipping it.

ENGNR 3y ago

Two large screens in a hotel room - so sold (plus on a plane, if that's not socially annoying) Being able to stand side by side with people to work on something rather than broadcast my face into their face. It's just... so much more natural. All of the social cues like concentration, wandering away to think, nodding your head along with a group conversation you stumble upon and are now actively engaged in. If I can bring my data/apps in but keep them private - sold Interacting digitally with the environment - this is a new one but I think it's going to be huge. Anything involving maps or layouts, you can plan it prior, and then overlay it on the day when you get on site. AR on a phone is meh because you have to hold it up, but when it's just a gesture I think it's going to open up whole new use cases that were just out of reach (pun intended)

411111111111111 3y ago
It's 4k per eye. That's great compared to current headsets, but please remember that the screen of your normal screen likely already has 4k, and that's just a rectangle a few cm of everything you see. The 4k per eye means that it's likely going to be <fullhd depending on just how gigantic you want to make the screens It could be great, but productivity will likely need over 4k per eye to be anything beyond a novelty. Depending on how the hardware develops, it could become something great for sure. most people calling it a novelty are taking about the device as it's been announced, not the theoretical future it could potentially have if it was different.
- ENGNR 3y ago
  Personally I'd make the monitors the same size as real monitors. So... yeah maybe they'd be HD if they took up 2/3rds of peripheral vision, which would match my current monitors. But you could also have more of them, and handwave them away when you want the table back And when on the move would be better than... nothing, which is what it's competing against. Look at phones, they're absolutely abysmal for both input and output. But they're mobile. Laptops? They're not as good as desktops.... but they're mobile. Virtual displays? They're mobile, allowing more bandwidth in, it's going to be good

tinus_hn 3y ago

Certainly without the device, there’s never going to be a killer app for the device. It’s the first step, it’s not even in stores yet.

ttul 3y ago

The first iPhone was pretty crappy. No apps. 2G only. Poor battery life. Limited global distribution - not even Canada could get it. But it captivated people who didn’t own it yet, and it proved out some essential ideas like multitouch. And when the iPhone 3G came out, improving on some of the original device’s shortcomings, it was wildly popular. The rest is history. There is no doubt that AR will eventually get good enough that the devices are paper thin, weigh nothing, and have no external battery (of course). Everyone wants _that_ device, but you have to start somewhere. Apple can afford to be patient in this space and their considerable moat of intellectual property will allow them to carve out the high end of the AR market and then work down as they did with iPhone. It would not surprise me if they are earning 90% of the gross margins in the AR device space within three years.

omeze 3y ago
The first iphone let you have a real web browser anywhere you had cell coverage. This lets you have a web browser floating at home. Its not the same (and I love VR)
- mcphage 3y ago
  And Visual Voice Mail—that was a huge step forward.
  - philistine 3y ago
    Believe it or not, my carrier finally got visual voicemail in 2022.
    - LadyCailin 3y ago
      Just in time for regular phone calls to be on their way out.
- macNchz 3y ago
  I didn’t get one until the 3G came out, but I have a very clear memory of the “wow!” feeling: right after buying the phone, I went down the street to a coffee shop and started browsing the web while waiting in line. I was instantly cured of my prior skepticism that it could actually be a major improvement over my flip phone + iPod.

gehsty 3y ago

Safari was the killer app for the iPhone and iPad & it’s where people spend an awful lot of their time. This is a general purpose computing device, so seeing it have a great browser setup is a big deal.

matsemann 3y ago
Is it "general purpose", though? So far I've seen no mentions on how I or other developers can run our own stuff on it. Will it be a walled garden?
- kalleboo 3y ago
  SDK coming later this month https://developer.apple.com/visionos/ https://developer.apple.com/visionos/
- gehsty 3y ago
  General purpose like a laptop or a phone. It will have an App Store like the phone (this was in the keynote I think). I don’t think there will be side loading unless it is govt mandated requirement. It is aimed at general population and not developers.
  - matsemann 3y ago
    I want it "hackable", not because I myself is gonna do anything with it, but because I want that kind of innovation. Not the boring, polished, exec-vision thingy. Let other people invent new ways of doing stuff! If you only can do Apple-approved-stuff on it, it will be boring. Let people release half-baked demos and cool tech. Don't force everything to go through their "review" process.
    - gehsty 3y ago
      Boring like the iPhone? Sounds awful.
      - 3y ago

petesergeant 3y ago

Does it need one at launch? The Apple Watch wasn't specifically a health-tracker at launch, but that's what they've really leaned into now. When they launched the iPhone, one of the most vaunted features was "Visual Voicemail", which I'm not even sure still exists? It's a platform. It'll get cheaper, it'll get better, and developers and the market will do the rest. There's a lot of time between now and "early next year" for 3rd party devs to come up with a lot of apps and ideas. As someone else said, this is the first release of something that'll end up the size and weight as a pair of sunglasses; at that point, I think it will be as ubiquitous as iPhones are.

Alex3917 3y ago

> I don't understand why there is no AR or VR killer app for this thing. Because if you go outside wearing this you're going to get instantly mugged. If they were to release something like Pokemon Go before the price comes down, that would likely just result in a bunch of kids getting murdered on the subway or whatever. Much better to drive down the costs by first selling it to people who are excited to use it for coding or whatever.

dontlaugh 3y ago

Correct, it is pointless. It could have had a killer app: games. Most VR headsets suck in one way or another, Apple could make one that's actually nice to use. Sadly, for some bizarre reason Apple still don't understand games. They even have pretty good GPUs now and they're still not making an Apple TV Pro to compete with the PS5. Even just the Vision could've been announced along with a couple exclusives, but instead they have an offhand mention of Arcade.

bobo_legos 3y ago
What's strange to me is that they roll out Hideo Kojima to talk about some gaming thing for the Mac OS, yet when it came to the headset all they can give is some creepy demos of a fathers wearing this thing while their kinds play at home. Could they really not have given some units to some game devs and tell them to come up with some cool ideas? This thing just feels incredibly rushed. It's like Apple felt left out of the all the AI hype the last couple months, so they were forced to show this thing before it was really ready.
- dontlaugh 3y ago
  Exactly! Even just a small Kojima game exclusive to the Vision Pro would've been interesting. Kojima is sufficiently famous and well liked to bootstrap a gaming ecosystem, though. They could've gone further and announced an Apple TV Pro, a decent controller, Vision non-Pro (cheaper headset that requires an M1 Mac or Apple TV Pro) and one full Kojima VR game as an exclusive. That could've been enough to start competing with Microsoft and Sony for console games.
  - mrguyorama 3y ago
    How many headsets did Valve sell with Half Life Alyx?
    - olddustytrail 3y ago
      103,000

Waterluvian 3y ago

If I had to live in a VR context for any reason, this really feels like the product I’d want to have to do it in. But I can’t think of a reason why I’d have to.

JohnAaronNelson 3y ago

The killer app will be porn and/or virtually undressing the people around you.

ChuckNorris89 3y ago
With $3500 you can go on an epic drug fueled sex party with high quality real live escorts that will make your mates jealous and will be an experience you remember for life. Spending $3500 just to wank at VR videos is crazy.
- mensetmanusman 3y ago
  The hidden cost of a lifetime of STDs may be what this math is missing.
  - ChuckNorris89 3y ago
    Condoms are cheap
    - mensetmanusman 3y ago
      Statistics
- HKH2 3y ago
  At some point the signals going to your brain won't be too different. VR + AI experiences have way more potential, and will greatly accelerate the trend of people mapping out their limbic systems.
  - ChuckNorris89 3y ago
    >At some point the signals going to your brain won't be too different Tell me you've never had sex. Sex and VR porn no matter how realistic are words apart.
    - 3y ago

analog31 3y ago

What lessons have we learned from the killer apps for smart phones? The killer app has to be addictive to children.

lijok 3y ago

This is what's concerning. A team that just spent years creating revolutionary hardware that is leaps and bounds ahead of the competition, who by far have the most context to come up with a killer app, could not come up with one. The best they could offer is reading articles in safari an enhancing the viewing experience of movies/shows/live sports. They should be bursting at the seams with out of this world ideas that this amazing hardware could support. And yet, nothing.

WillAdams 3y ago
I think that we need new tools --- I'd love to see a 3D sculpting tool which uses this to show the 3D object to me in real space --- it'd be great for furniture design.

plagiarist 3y ago

I am also waiting to see what the killer app is. I think it may be positioned more for professional use and then, "oh yeah, you can have a great movie and game experience, too."

jayd16 3y ago

Well, yes. This is the early adoption device they expect to bootstrap their app store with all the niche things you described.

Cthulhu_ 3y ago

Counterpoint, there's always been a desire to have a virtual environment as first shown in 80's sci-fi films like Hackers, Johnny Mnemonic, etc; immerse yourself in a system, have it become like a natural extension of yourself. There was someone on here some time ago who showed and talked about his setup, he had been doing his job as a software developer reclined in VR for years at that point. Here's the thing though: smartphones didn't have "a" killer app per sè I don't think, but they became part of everyone's daily lives in a really short timeframe. PCs and laptops didn't have "a" killer app, but pretty much everyone here has it as their day job. I don't think it's about whether it has a killer app or not, I think it's whether it can become normalized and mainstream, and be listed alongside the TV, PC, smartphone, the car, etc; something everyone will have in one way or another. That said, I'm cynical myself; modern-day VR and AR has been tried for a decade now or thereabouts; Google wasted billions on Google Glass, Facebook bet their whole company on the metaverse / AR / VR and has had to backtrack, Magic Leap was a mystery company that raised billions and failed to deliver, Oculus and Vive have their place now as a somewhat niche and pricey gaming implement - popular as arcade / events (I went to one for a birthday party this weekend) and middle class households that have the money and space for it. So there's a market, mostly in gaming, but it's not become as mainstream yet as e.g. the smartphone. I don't personally believe it will, but if anyone can take an existing concept, iterate on it and make it mainstream, it's Apple.

alach11 3y ago
The killer app for smartphones is being a phone.
- HenriTEL 3y ago
  True. The Iphone is an Ipod Touch with a sim card.
  - ericpauley 3y ago
    The iPhone predates the iPod Touch.

tootie 3y ago

I worked for a digital creative agency that partnered with a few AR/VR companies including the big ones creating demos and POCs for conferences or events. We spent so much time brainstorming and testing with some really bright people and never really came up with more than diverting bits of motion art. We made one pretty decent mini game. Nothing substantive. And think about the mainstream industry. It's been years and the peak of AR is still Pokemon Go and VR is Beat Saber. Apple Vision looks to be twice as good as the Meta Quest for 10x the price.

AndyMcConachie 3y ago

Shopping. Walk into a physical store and stand in an aisle. How many products can you see in a 360 field of vision? Visit any webstore. How many products can you see on your screen at once? To me this is the completely obvious application for VR. But in order for it to be actually useful you would need an online shopping experience that worked with it. At the very least you would have to 3D model every product.

mrguyorama 3y ago
This is laughable. Walmart literally has a demo of an "AR experience" shopping experience and it is absurdism, on the same level as that pepsi logo design document. Nobody wants that. People shop online to avoid the annoyance of a physical location. I can shop for things while I squeeze out turds, why would I ever exchange that for strapping an overpriced screen to my face? The average person favors convenience and cheapness above all else, to a huge extent.

adamsmith143 3y ago

Isn't the actual killer app for Advertisers? "Glue this thing to peoples faces and you now have the most effective most intrusive way to slam ads in front of people ever created!" Don't see why any consumer would buy this for 3500 though.

rchaud 3y ago

The game console industry shows that even having a killer app isn't enough to avoid selling hardware at a loss and making it up with ecosystem rent. This has no killer app and is being sold at full price.

tambourine_man 3y ago

I think this will be one of those “iPod, less storage than a Nomad, lame” comments in a few years, but I guess we'll see. I'd love to work comfortably lying in a hammock, couch or bed. The monitor part is solved, it seems, I just need one of those split keyboards where each half attaches to one hand. I'd also love to feel like I'm in a colossal movie theater without all the viruses, noise and popcorn from other people. I'll pay good money for either.

mickdarling 3y ago

None of the Apple apps they showed for the VisionPro had any substantial photogrammetry mapping. They didn’t paste virtual TVs to the walls, or place furniture into an empty room. All the Apple apps were contained to virtual floating screens, even the keyboard (instead of placing in on a surface). They did show a few third party apps interacting with real world objects (the train moving on a table) but I wonder what amount of that was concept and what was real. Connecting the virtual objects to those in the real world I feel is a killer feature that will open up a huge set of opportunities. If this doesn’t have that yet, it’s still more VR than AR in my book.

bwb 3y ago

The killer app is replacing my giant monitor with this device. When I travel this is a game changer for me. Right now I lug a small second screen so I can work. I will happily drop $5k to fix this problem and just travel with this plus a small laptop.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

simonebrunozzi 3y ago

> Are they just hoping someone comes up with all the above in the next 6 months? Yes. > If they did, would anyone care? Also yes.