14 ms·

I know a lot of people are rightfully concerned with the viability of this product, but I'm unbelievably excited! Definitely going to be pre-ordering one and pi

I know a lot of people are rightfully concerned with the viability of this product, but I'm unbelievably excited! Definitely going to be pre-ordering one and picking it up on release day if I can! I'm sure it won't be perfect or anything, but I'm mostly just stoked about the possibilities I see with this thing.

goosedragons 3y ago
What do you see with it? I see a better in some ways (display, cameras, maybe finger tracking) VR headset than an alternative like the Quest 3 but also with some serious downsides, no controllers, insanely high price and potential weight issues because of all the metal/glass.
- jmuguy 3y ago
  I'm excited about using it in the office as a replacement/enhancement to external monitors. Maybe it will suck for that - I don't know. But I never really cared about any of the use cases for VR or AR.
- wombat-man 3y ago
  What's interesting to me is that it seems to fully get rid of the screen door effect, and could actually be useable for work with virtual huge screens. I didn't really get into VR games, and maybe I should take another crack at them with something cheaper from meta before investing in the Vision Pro. Anyway, there's no way my work will buy me one, and I'm not buying one with my own dollars just to lock it to my corp account, so not sure I could even use it for my dream use case.
  - lobocinza 3y ago
    Have you checked BigScreen? https://www.bigscreenvr.com/ https://www.bigscreenvr.com/
  - andrepd 3y ago
    How do you know that it doesn't have the screen door effect?
    - nickthegreek 3y ago
      >Those displays enable the Vision Pro to eliminate something called the "screen-door effect." https://www.businessinsider.com/less-expensive-apple-vision-pro-model-could-arrive-2025-report-2023-6 https://www.businessinsider.com/less-expensive-apple-vision-...
  - Eisenstein 3y ago
    Screen door effect hasn't been a problem in VR for years.
    - 1oooqooq 3y ago
      You are right, but wrong. For 99% of the price point people will pay for VR, it is still there. ...and will be for Apple Vision (non-pro) and Apple VisionSE.
      - Eisenstein 3y ago
        The Quest 2 does not have screen door, which came out two years ago and was/is the majority of the VR market, so I am not sure what you mean.
        whynotminot 3y ago
        Uhh, Quest 2 has very obvious screen door effect. My vision is good, but it’s not even fantastic.
        1oooqooq 3y ago
        quest2 have it, AND it is not what 99% of the market will pay. You live in a bubble where $1200 for a phone is "normal".
  - the_gastropod 3y ago
    I don’t understand the huge screens thing. The Vision Pro has 4k resolution (if I remember correctly). Most decent monitors have the same. Isn’t this basically the same as moving your existing monitor closer to your head to make it a huge monitor?
    - alphabettsy 3y ago
      Maybe a little. If the existing monitor could also use your entire visual field for workspace and easily be used anywhere. I travel often and I’m looking forward to always having the ability to have a large high resolution display to work on. Also seems cool for entertainment. It’s returnable like anything else.
      - wombat-man 3y ago
        Yeah, like maybe instead of a desk with huge screens, you could just strap on the vision pro and work on that.
    - jwells89 3y ago
      Maybe the biggest difference is that you can place virtual screens and windows arbitrarily as needed, rather than being restricted to parts of your desk where a stand or VESA mount can fit. So one could for example have the benefits of multiple screens while lounging or in the middle of a flight. Even at a desk, window/screen placement would be more flexible than otherwise possible.
    - wombat-man 3y ago
      This occurred to me. I think I might actually just shell out for a nice monitor instead. The reviews are going to have to be pretty unbelievably positive for me to actually get a vision pro.
    - gampleman 3y ago
      Because a monitor only displays what's on it. A vision headset can show you different content depending on where you're looking. It's kind of like comparing a monitor that's locked to a single app with a monitor that has multiple spaces you can switch between. They both have the same resolution, but one of them can display much more stuff.
  - jwells89 3y ago
    Yeah, the high density displays are a big thing for me too. Also, the possibility of polished software that’s properly designed for the form factor (most AR/VR software that isn’t a game has felt kinda duct-tapey up until now). I also think that compared to say the Quest Pro/3 it has more potential to be host to the first few apps that kick off the “iPhone moment” for AR. The capable hardware is certainly a factor here, but the bigger one is that it has a massive, enthusiastic dev base who can write apps for it on day one. Furthermore, those with iOS apps already can dip their toes in the platform by getting an AR-optimized app by doing little more than checking a tickbox in Xcode.
    - seec 3y ago
      There is no iPhone moment possible. The iPhone replaced at least 2 existing devices at a digestible price. Indeed, if you bought an iPad Nano plus a good feature phone or one of the early smartphones you would be close to the iPhone price. In France, it was launched at 600€ (8GB version) with a contract; but just the year prior I had bought a Windows mobile smartphone that completely sucked for 250€ (LG, under contract as well), plus a 210€ iPhone Nano. All in all, you are not that far from the price for a device that was truly something else and had all the functionality of the previous combo and much more. The iPhone worked because it was priced pretty cheap considering everything it brought to the table. In fact, I am absolutely certain that people started buying iPhones because they intuitively understood that they would save money by staying ahead of the curve while bringing a lot of usefulness into their lives. It is extremely doubtful that something like that will happen with the Vision Pro, firstly because it doesn't really replace any existing device and its pricing is completely disconnected from ordinary people's reality. The iPhone was 5 years ahead of anything on the market, yet it did not cost 3 to 7 times the equivalent technology. Actually, as I said I'm pretty sure it worked because people figured out that while it lacked some features or had "not as good" specs on paper for certain things, it was a far more usable and useful device. If you looked at its competitors at that time a Nokia N95 8GB would go for 300€ under contract (700€ naked) and the most popular Samsung/LG big feature phones/smartphone were around that price. The iPhone was not expensive. This is a mythology created by Apple fanboys under Tim Cook that gaslighted everyone with "clever" diversification and an insane pricing ladder where he keeps selling old technology for twice the price of its competitors just because he benefits from the Apple brand halo. When you look at it the first iPhone was what is now called a "Pro" iPhone; it was the best Apple could sell, but it was also the best in the market overall, there wasn't any alternative with a better integrated package. Even if we make a charitable comparison and take for example the most expensive iPhone 3G at 700€ (16Go version) and ignore the Pro Max iPhone (which is an extreme outlier) and go for the "base" Pro iPhone at 1230€ ; you go from 68% of monthly minimum salary to 90%; a rather substantial 22% increase. For what is essentially the same thing relative to the overall market. If you were to just consider inflation, 700€ in 2009 would be around 890€ today. This is already 80€ more money than the "base" iPhone 15. This base iPhone is technologically underwhelming, its only redeeming quality is the fast silicon but it is largely unnecessary and as to make up for the lower amount of RAM (that nowadays is way more relevant to what you can do with your phones that pure benchmark speed). It is basically the same thing as a Samsung S23, expect sold at a 300€ premium. This is the reality that the Vision Pro is launching with, and as a "new" technology it was already bound to be expensive, but under the Tim Cook "leadership" it is bound to be a meme device considering the pricing placement. It is better technology than the competition, but not 3 times better and its potential use cases are not 3 times better than what exists. In fact, we already know from very similar existing devices that such things are uncomfortable enough that they could not be considered as a primary device. So even if someone finds a use for them, it's going to be very niche and time bound. Nothing that could warrant its asking price. But I find it very fitting to the Tim Cook era, it represents exactly what Apple has become with him: overpriced, overengineered, luxury show-off technology. Lots of posturing, enormous potential to display wealth; very little substance.
  - __alexs 3y ago
    > What's interesting to me is that it seems to fully get rid of the screen door effect, I heard that the Quest 3 already solved this too?
    - Miraste 3y ago
      People use "screen door effect" and "overly low resolution" interchangeably even though they aren't the same thing. The screen door effect--visible gaps between pixels--in the Quest 3 is minimal, but the resolution is still low enough individual pixels are obvious. It's not usable for a lot of the work-related cases Meta promotes.
- FumblingBear 3y ago
  Personally, I'm excited for the productivity aspects of it. I think my main use case will probably be relaxing in my comfy chair with a macbook on my lap projected into a much larger screen with some other floating windows like documentation, youtube tutorials, etc. off to the sides. I currently don't have any extra screens for the macbook, so being able to utilize some native apps for stuff like that seems quite helpful! That aside, I'd imagine I'll use it for watching movies and tv since I live alone currently and could enjoy the immersion without blocking other people out. I already have a PSVR 2 for gaming so I'm not too worried about the potential or lack thereof for games. One thing I'm going to try out though is game streaming services like Geforce Now. If I can play really high fidelity flat games using a M+KB / Controller on the headset that would be awesome!
  - Podgajski 3y ago
    Porn. Your going to use it for porn. Edit: geez, just don’t have a sense of humor here? Or is it the truth Then you’re downloading this because you’re embarrassed?
    - snarfy 3y ago
      It's a valid argument. We got VHS over Betamax because of porn. The VR headset that best supports it is going to win. Since this is Apple, probably not this.
      - Podgajski 3y ago
        When I was a computer technician for a very large company in the mid 90s, you would not believe how much porn I saw on peoples work computers and they were always complaining about needing a bigger hard drive.
      - npteljes 3y ago
        Last thing I listened to was Technology Connections, doing their long-format series on the format wars. According to him, porn haven't played a major role. He highlighted that the beta tapes of the time were shorter and the players a bit more expensive, than the VHS system. Because of this, VHS players sold more, so the market was bigger, so the catalogue, including porn, was bigger as well.
- scarface_74 3y ago
  I won’t buy it because I don’t have any use it for it. But $3500 for a gadget is not crazy. I look back at what some of my computer set ups cost over the years in non inflation adjusted terms - An Apple //e with a duo disk drive, a green screen monitor, and a dot matrix printer in 1986 was $3000 - A Mac LC II with 10 MB RAM, an 80MB hard drive, a laser printer a little 12 inch monitor, and a //e card with a separate drive - $4000 with an education discount. - A PowerMac 6100/60 with 24 MB RAM, 250MB hard drive and a 486 DOS Compatibility Card and a $500 13 inch monitor - $3300 in 1996. I won’t buy one because just like the 1st gen iPhone, iPad and Apple Watch, it usually doesn’t last as long as the second generation and Apple usually makes rapid advances between the two. But if Apple addresses all of your other (very valid) concerns, price wouldn’t hold me back from it if I could find a use for it.
  - Hehohei 3y ago
    I don't think people bought those just for playing around with it. They upgraded or started using those generic machines for generic things. You can't just buy this and use it as a replacement.
  - thomastjeffery 3y ago
    $3500 for a headset isn't crazy. $3500 for a headset that isn't allowed to do the overwhelming majority of VR things is. Even if it could, it's not even remotely a competitive price. 90s hardware cost what it cost because that's what was available. Today, there is plenty of competition for VR, and Apple is explicitly ignoring it.
    - seec 3y ago
      Pretty much. Under Tim Cook, Apple has become the greediest corporation ever, for products that are just about competitive with the overall technology market. But since they have fanboys that created some sort of cult they can get away with absurdity. I have been an Apple customer since the first iPod but nowadays their pricing makes absolutely no sense considering their products' positioning compared to the rest of the market. But somehow you cannot say that and you will be gaslighted about Apple pricing that always have been this way (even though it is demonstrably and factually not true). At least for the iPhone there was a good excuse: network operators were not very keen on letting a completely open device run on their network, and still today there are limitations on what you can do with a fully rooted Android device. It somewhat makes sense; the nefarious potential is pretty big. But for a headset? No reason at all to have it locked down from the get go.
- pdpi 3y ago
  For me, it's visionOS that I find interesting. I don't know if it's going to be any good, but I'm intrigued by the idea of a full-on general-purpose OS on a headset.
- Ancapistani 3y ago
  I see no indication that it's even usable as a PCVR device, like the Quest series. I'm picking up a Pimax Crystal for that purpose. I'll probably get an AVP, but don't expect to be able to use it for gaming. That's not its purpose. It's a MacBook Pro built into a headset.
  - goosedragons 3y ago
    But it can't do all the same stuff as a MacBook Pro. It has all the same limitations as an iOS device.
adolph 3y ago
I raise my cup to Apple for raising the bar in new HCI, even if I don't find the product particularly compelling.
FrozenSynapse 3y ago
[flagged]
oldpersonintx 3y ago
[dead]
rideontime 3y ago
Such as?
nottorp 3y ago
Concerned? No, I just don't see any use for it. At least not at that price. Too expensive for a gimmick. <Looks at his PlayStation Move gathering dust in a corner> At least I didn't buy a PSVR :) Also, as someone who wears glasses: 1. I trust my regular optometrist a lot more than Apple-made lenses. 2. Do I remember right that you can't swap prescription lenses, so you'd have to get one for each family member? Holy 2500 * N!
- unsupp0rted 3y ago
  I trust Apple-made lenses a lot more than any strip-mall optician. Apple lenses will be worse than the best but far better than the average.
  - nottorp 3y ago
    > I trust Apple-made lenses a lot more than any strip-mall optician. Who said anything about strip mall opticians? At least they let you swap the lenses. Will they do the unthinkable and let the iPad be multiuser as well?
    - unsupp0rted 3y ago
      There are lot more strip mall opticians than there are expert craftspeople of lenses. Apple's lenses will be fine... probably much better than fine.
      - sangnoir 3y ago
        You make it sound like opticians hand-hew lenses from blocks of glass with various levels of craftsmanship. AFAICT, they take measurements and send the prescriptions off to be made by specialist manufacturer. Glasses are regulated medical devices with real oversight, not some rinky-dink industry that Apple can waltz in and be the best manufacturer by default.
        unsupp0rted 3y ago
Hehohei 3y ago
Look, if i would have 3k to throw around, i would also try it out. I don't and don't think its reasonable at all. I do own a htc vice pro + wireless extention from intel + valve controllers, i like that, i do not use it often enough to even justifiy that setup but its 2k and i bought the wireless and the valve controllers one after the other.
tibbydudeza 3y ago
Would be interested in long term use replacing a laptop - headaches - eyestrain etc ....
- Podgajski 3y ago
  I’m going to say with the electromagnetic radiation blasting you in the forehead There’s going to be other problems.
  - Hehohei 3y ago
    What type of 'electromagnetic radiation' is now specially new to this device? And what health risks are you aware of, i'm not? You do know, that light is the same thing right? And you do know that even without a headset you do have radio waves and wifi around you constantly?
    - Podgajski 3y ago
      Light is not the same thing as anthropomorphically generated electromagnetic radiation. We evolved with sunlight we did not live with these anthropomorphic created electromagnetic polarized frequencies until very recently. And yes, I’m aware of the radio waves around me constantly and that’s a problem as well. So I was adding any more of it going to do anything to help us? http://pe.org.pl/articles/2020/9/35.pdf http://pe.org.pl/articles/2020/9/35.pdf
      - Miraste 3y ago
        Among other issues, that paper is about VR headsets that use 60GHz antennas, which are much higher energy than normal radios. The Vision Pro doesn't have one and the technology has been more or less phased out.
        Podgajski 3y ago
        Yes, See my problem? I can’t seem to find any testing on Apple VR headset regarding to SAR or any other type of radiation. That’s emitted from it. All I can find is, you’ll have an extremely strong Wi-Fi signal right next to your head probably for long period and you would use a cell phone that close to your head. I’ve had to find an SAR rating for it anywhere. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/apple-vision-pro-has-already-redefined-wifi-network-design-colins-ivxse https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/apple-vision-pro-has-already-...
andrepd 3y ago
You will pre-order a 3.5k device without even looking at what it is first? That's just inconceivable to me, maybe I'm just not rich enough?
- bombcar 3y ago
  In the view of a “hobby” it’s not that excessive- especially for the class of people likely to appear on HN. It’s the cost of a high end MacBook Pro, or a vacation to Paris, or about twelve days in an apartment in San Francisco :)
  - Podgajski 3y ago
    It’s 1.5 times more than I live on in a month.
  - bluetomcat 3y ago
    A high-end MBP is costly, but is generally seen as a workhorse that will serve you well for at least 3 years. Spending a similar amount of money for a gadget with a questionable purpose and quick obsolescence is certainly out of reach for the majority of people not living in the SF tech bubble.
    - bombcar 3y ago
      It's out of reach for the vast majority of the human race, sure, and perhaps it's a "bad idea" for even a majority of HN, but there are quite a few people who can and will drop the coin on it, for one reason or another. As mentioned elsewhere, the people who went to the Vision Labs are buying them on release day, so there must be something there.
  - staticman2 3y ago
    >In the view of a “hobby” it’s not that excessive It is however, a fairly expensive paperweight. And I have a bunch of gadgets I hardly ever use.
  - charlie0 3y ago
    Vacation to paris lol? Are you spending just a weekend there? No way it's 3500 for any decent period of time, at least not if you're flying from NA.
blashyrk 3y ago
I couldn't care less about the product itself, because I'm only interested in VR, but I'm hopeful it will drive engagement towards AR/VR. Then, hopefully, other companies will throw more significant amount of money towards R&D in VR and the technology will improve.
aubanel 3y ago
Don't forget Rule n°1 : no pre-orders!

goosedragons 3y ago

What do you see with it? I see a better in some ways (display, cameras, maybe finger tracking) VR headset than an alternative like the Quest 3 but also with some serious downsides, no controllers, insanely high price and potential weight issues because of all the metal/glass.

jmuguy 3y ago
I'm excited about using it in the office as a replacement/enhancement to external monitors. Maybe it will suck for that - I don't know. But I never really cared about any of the use cases for VR or AR.
wombat-man 3y ago
What's interesting to me is that it seems to fully get rid of the screen door effect, and could actually be useable for work with virtual huge screens. I didn't really get into VR games, and maybe I should take another crack at them with something cheaper from meta before investing in the Vision Pro. Anyway, there's no way my work will buy me one, and I'm not buying one with my own dollars just to lock it to my corp account, so not sure I could even use it for my dream use case.
- lobocinza 3y ago
  Have you checked BigScreen? https://www.bigscreenvr.com/ https://www.bigscreenvr.com/
- andrepd 3y ago
  How do you know that it doesn't have the screen door effect?
  - nickthegreek 3y ago
    >Those displays enable the Vision Pro to eliminate something called the "screen-door effect." https://www.businessinsider.com/less-expensive-apple-vision-pro-model-could-arrive-2025-report-2023-6 https://www.businessinsider.com/less-expensive-apple-vision-...
- Eisenstein 3y ago
  Screen door effect hasn't been a problem in VR for years.
  - 1oooqooq 3y ago
    You are right, but wrong. For 99% of the price point people will pay for VR, it is still there. ...and will be for Apple Vision (non-pro) and Apple VisionSE.
    - Eisenstein 3y ago
      The Quest 2 does not have screen door, which came out two years ago and was/is the majority of the VR market, so I am not sure what you mean.
      - whynotminot 3y ago
        Uhh, Quest 2 has very obvious screen door effect. My vision is good, but it’s not even fantastic.
      - 1oooqooq 3y ago
        quest2 have it, AND it is not what 99% of the market will pay. You live in a bubble where $1200 for a phone is "normal".
- the_gastropod 3y ago
  I don’t understand the huge screens thing. The Vision Pro has 4k resolution (if I remember correctly). Most decent monitors have the same. Isn’t this basically the same as moving your existing monitor closer to your head to make it a huge monitor?
  - alphabettsy 3y ago
    Maybe a little. If the existing monitor could also use your entire visual field for workspace and easily be used anywhere. I travel often and I’m looking forward to always having the ability to have a large high resolution display to work on. Also seems cool for entertainment. It’s returnable like anything else.
    - wombat-man 3y ago
      Yeah, like maybe instead of a desk with huge screens, you could just strap on the vision pro and work on that.
  - jwells89 3y ago
    Maybe the biggest difference is that you can place virtual screens and windows arbitrarily as needed, rather than being restricted to parts of your desk where a stand or VESA mount can fit. So one could for example have the benefits of multiple screens while lounging or in the middle of a flight. Even at a desk, window/screen placement would be more flexible than otherwise possible.
  - wombat-man 3y ago
    This occurred to me. I think I might actually just shell out for a nice monitor instead. The reviews are going to have to be pretty unbelievably positive for me to actually get a vision pro.
  - gampleman 3y ago
    Because a monitor only displays what's on it. A vision headset can show you different content depending on where you're looking. It's kind of like comparing a monitor that's locked to a single app with a monitor that has multiple spaces you can switch between. They both have the same resolution, but one of them can display much more stuff.
- jwells89 3y ago
  Yeah, the high density displays are a big thing for me too. Also, the possibility of polished software that’s properly designed for the form factor (most AR/VR software that isn’t a game has felt kinda duct-tapey up until now). I also think that compared to say the Quest Pro/3 it has more potential to be host to the first few apps that kick off the “iPhone moment” for AR. The capable hardware is certainly a factor here, but the bigger one is that it has a massive, enthusiastic dev base who can write apps for it on day one. Furthermore, those with iOS apps already can dip their toes in the platform by getting an AR-optimized app by doing little more than checking a tickbox in Xcode.
  - seec 3y ago
    There is no iPhone moment possible. The iPhone replaced at least 2 existing devices at a digestible price. Indeed, if you bought an iPad Nano plus a good feature phone or one of the early smartphones you would be close to the iPhone price. In France, it was launched at 600€ (8GB version) with a contract; but just the year prior I had bought a Windows mobile smartphone that completely sucked for 250€ (LG, under contract as well), plus a 210€ iPhone Nano. All in all, you are not that far from the price for a device that was truly something else and had all the functionality of the previous combo and much more. The iPhone worked because it was priced pretty cheap considering everything it brought to the table. In fact, I am absolutely certain that people started buying iPhones because they intuitively understood that they would save money by staying ahead of the curve while bringing a lot of usefulness into their lives. It is extremely doubtful that something like that will happen with the Vision Pro, firstly because it doesn't really replace any existing device and its pricing is completely disconnected from ordinary people's reality. The iPhone was 5 years ahead of anything on the market, yet it did not cost 3 to 7 times the equivalent technology. Actually, as I said I'm pretty sure it worked because people figured out that while it lacked some features or had "not as good" specs on paper for certain things, it was a far more usable and useful device. If you looked at its competitors at that time a Nokia N95 8GB would go for 300€ under contract (700€ naked) and the most popular Samsung/LG big feature phones/smartphone were around that price. The iPhone was not expensive. This is a mythology created by Apple fanboys under Tim Cook that gaslighted everyone with "clever" diversification and an insane pricing ladder where he keeps selling old technology for twice the price of its competitors just because he benefits from the Apple brand halo. When you look at it the first iPhone was what is now called a "Pro" iPhone; it was the best Apple could sell, but it was also the best in the market overall, there wasn't any alternative with a better integrated package. Even if we make a charitable comparison and take for example the most expensive iPhone 3G at 700€ (16Go version) and ignore the Pro Max iPhone (which is an extreme outlier) and go for the "base" Pro iPhone at 1230€ ; you go from 68% of monthly minimum salary to 90%; a rather substantial 22% increase. For what is essentially the same thing relative to the overall market. If you were to just consider inflation, 700€ in 2009 would be around 890€ today. This is already 80€ more money than the "base" iPhone 15. This base iPhone is technologically underwhelming, its only redeeming quality is the fast silicon but it is largely unnecessary and as to make up for the lower amount of RAM (that nowadays is way more relevant to what you can do with your phones that pure benchmark speed). It is basically the same thing as a Samsung S23, expect sold at a 300€ premium. This is the reality that the Vision Pro is launching with, and as a "new" technology it was already bound to be expensive, but under the Tim Cook "leadership" it is bound to be a meme device considering the pricing placement. It is better technology than the competition, but not 3 times better and its potential use cases are not 3 times better than what exists. In fact, we already know from very similar existing devices that such things are uncomfortable enough that they could not be considered as a primary device. So even if someone finds a use for them, it's going to be very niche and time bound. Nothing that could warrant its asking price. But I find it very fitting to the Tim Cook era, it represents exactly what Apple has become with him: overpriced, overengineered, luxury show-off technology. Lots of posturing, enormous potential to display wealth; very little substance.
- __alexs 3y ago
  > What's interesting to me is that it seems to fully get rid of the screen door effect, I heard that the Quest 3 already solved this too?
  - Miraste 3y ago
    People use "screen door effect" and "overly low resolution" interchangeably even though they aren't the same thing. The screen door effect--visible gaps between pixels--in the Quest 3 is minimal, but the resolution is still low enough individual pixels are obvious. It's not usable for a lot of the work-related cases Meta promotes.
FumblingBear 3y ago
Personally, I'm excited for the productivity aspects of it. I think my main use case will probably be relaxing in my comfy chair with a macbook on my lap projected into a much larger screen with some other floating windows like documentation, youtube tutorials, etc. off to the sides. I currently don't have any extra screens for the macbook, so being able to utilize some native apps for stuff like that seems quite helpful! That aside, I'd imagine I'll use it for watching movies and tv since I live alone currently and could enjoy the immersion without blocking other people out. I already have a PSVR 2 for gaming so I'm not too worried about the potential or lack thereof for games. One thing I'm going to try out though is game streaming services like Geforce Now. If I can play really high fidelity flat games using a M+KB / Controller on the headset that would be awesome!
- Podgajski 3y ago
  Porn. Your going to use it for porn. Edit: geez, just don’t have a sense of humor here? Or is it the truth Then you’re downloading this because you’re embarrassed?
  - snarfy 3y ago
    It's a valid argument. We got VHS over Betamax because of porn. The VR headset that best supports it is going to win. Since this is Apple, probably not this.
    - Podgajski 3y ago
      When I was a computer technician for a very large company in the mid 90s, you would not believe how much porn I saw on peoples work computers and they were always complaining about needing a bigger hard drive.
    - npteljes 3y ago
      Last thing I listened to was Technology Connections, doing their long-format series on the format wars. According to him, porn haven't played a major role. He highlighted that the beta tapes of the time were shorter and the players a bit more expensive, than the VHS system. Because of this, VHS players sold more, so the market was bigger, so the catalogue, including porn, was bigger as well.
scarface_74 3y ago
I won’t buy it because I don’t have any use it for it. But $3500 for a gadget is not crazy. I look back at what some of my computer set ups cost over the years in non inflation adjusted terms - An Apple //e with a duo disk drive, a green screen monitor, and a dot matrix printer in 1986 was $3000 - A Mac LC II with 10 MB RAM, an 80MB hard drive, a laser printer a little 12 inch monitor, and a //e card with a separate drive - $4000 with an education discount. - A PowerMac 6100/60 with 24 MB RAM, 250MB hard drive and a 486 DOS Compatibility Card and a $500 13 inch monitor - $3300 in 1996. I won’t buy one because just like the 1st gen iPhone, iPad and Apple Watch, it usually doesn’t last as long as the second generation and Apple usually makes rapid advances between the two. But if Apple addresses all of your other (very valid) concerns, price wouldn’t hold me back from it if I could find a use for it.
- Hehohei 3y ago
  I don't think people bought those just for playing around with it. They upgraded or started using those generic machines for generic things. You can't just buy this and use it as a replacement.
- thomastjeffery 3y ago
  $3500 for a headset isn't crazy. $3500 for a headset that isn't allowed to do the overwhelming majority of VR things is. Even if it could, it's not even remotely a competitive price. 90s hardware cost what it cost because that's what was available. Today, there is plenty of competition for VR, and Apple is explicitly ignoring it.
  - seec 3y ago
    Pretty much. Under Tim Cook, Apple has become the greediest corporation ever, for products that are just about competitive with the overall technology market. But since they have fanboys that created some sort of cult they can get away with absurdity. I have been an Apple customer since the first iPod but nowadays their pricing makes absolutely no sense considering their products' positioning compared to the rest of the market. But somehow you cannot say that and you will be gaslighted about Apple pricing that always have been this way (even though it is demonstrably and factually not true). At least for the iPhone there was a good excuse: network operators were not very keen on letting a completely open device run on their network, and still today there are limitations on what you can do with a fully rooted Android device. It somewhat makes sense; the nefarious potential is pretty big. But for a headset? No reason at all to have it locked down from the get go.
pdpi 3y ago
For me, it's visionOS that I find interesting. I don't know if it's going to be any good, but I'm intrigued by the idea of a full-on general-purpose OS on a headset.
Ancapistani 3y ago
I see no indication that it's even usable as a PCVR device, like the Quest series. I'm picking up a Pimax Crystal for that purpose. I'll probably get an AVP, but don't expect to be able to use it for gaming. That's not its purpose. It's a MacBook Pro built into a headset.
- goosedragons 3y ago
  But it can't do all the same stuff as a MacBook Pro. It has all the same limitations as an iOS device.

adolph 3y ago

I raise my cup to Apple for raising the bar in new HCI, even if I don't find the product particularly compelling.

FrozenSynapse 3y ago

[flagged]

oldpersonintx 3y ago

[dead]

rideontime 3y ago

Such as?

nottorp 3y ago

Concerned? No, I just don't see any use for it. At least not at that price. Too expensive for a gimmick. <Looks at his PlayStation Move gathering dust in a corner> At least I didn't buy a PSVR :) Also, as someone who wears glasses: 1. I trust my regular optometrist a lot more than Apple-made lenses. 2. Do I remember right that you can't swap prescription lenses, so you'd have to get one for each family member? Holy 2500 * N!

unsupp0rted 3y ago
I trust Apple-made lenses a lot more than any strip-mall optician. Apple lenses will be worse than the best but far better than the average.
- nottorp 3y ago
  > I trust Apple-made lenses a lot more than any strip-mall optician. Who said anything about strip mall opticians? At least they let you swap the lenses. Will they do the unthinkable and let the iPad be multiuser as well?
  - unsupp0rted 3y ago
    There are lot more strip mall opticians than there are expert craftspeople of lenses. Apple's lenses will be fine... probably much better than fine.
    - sangnoir 3y ago
      You make it sound like opticians hand-hew lenses from blocks of glass with various levels of craftsmanship. AFAICT, they take measurements and send the prescriptions off to be made by specialist manufacturer. Glasses are regulated medical devices with real oversight, not some rinky-dink industry that Apple can waltz in and be the best manufacturer by default.
      - unsupp0rted 3y ago

Hehohei 3y ago

Look, if i would have 3k to throw around, i would also try it out. I don't and don't think its reasonable at all. I do own a htc vice pro + wireless extention from intel + valve controllers, i like that, i do not use it often enough to even justifiy that setup but its 2k and i bought the wireless and the valve controllers one after the other.

tibbydudeza 3y ago

Would be interested in long term use replacing a laptop - headaches - eyestrain etc ....

Podgajski 3y ago
I’m going to say with the electromagnetic radiation blasting you in the forehead There’s going to be other problems.
- Hehohei 3y ago
  What type of 'electromagnetic radiation' is now specially new to this device? And what health risks are you aware of, i'm not? You do know, that light is the same thing right? And you do know that even without a headset you do have radio waves and wifi around you constantly?
  - Podgajski 3y ago
    Light is not the same thing as anthropomorphically generated electromagnetic radiation. We evolved with sunlight we did not live with these anthropomorphic created electromagnetic polarized frequencies until very recently. And yes, I’m aware of the radio waves around me constantly and that’s a problem as well. So I was adding any more of it going to do anything to help us? http://pe.org.pl/articles/2020/9/35.pdf http://pe.org.pl/articles/2020/9/35.pdf
    - Miraste 3y ago
      Among other issues, that paper is about VR headsets that use 60GHz antennas, which are much higher energy than normal radios. The Vision Pro doesn't have one and the technology has been more or less phased out.
      - Podgajski 3y ago
        Yes, See my problem? I can’t seem to find any testing on Apple VR headset regarding to SAR or any other type of radiation. That’s emitted from it. All I can find is, you’ll have an extremely strong Wi-Fi signal right next to your head probably for long period and you would use a cell phone that close to your head. I’ve had to find an SAR rating for it anywhere. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/apple-vision-pro-has-already-redefined-wifi-network-design-colins-ivxse https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/apple-vision-pro-has-already-...

andrepd 3y ago

You will pre-order a 3.5k device without even looking at what it is first? That's just inconceivable to me, maybe I'm just not rich enough?

bombcar 3y ago
In the view of a “hobby” it’s not that excessive- especially for the class of people likely to appear on HN. It’s the cost of a high end MacBook Pro, or a vacation to Paris, or about twelve days in an apartment in San Francisco :)
- Podgajski 3y ago
  It’s 1.5 times more than I live on in a month.
- bluetomcat 3y ago
  A high-end MBP is costly, but is generally seen as a workhorse that will serve you well for at least 3 years. Spending a similar amount of money for a gadget with a questionable purpose and quick obsolescence is certainly out of reach for the majority of people not living in the SF tech bubble.
  - bombcar 3y ago
    It's out of reach for the vast majority of the human race, sure, and perhaps it's a "bad idea" for even a majority of HN, but there are quite a few people who can and will drop the coin on it, for one reason or another. As mentioned elsewhere, the people who went to the Vision Labs are buying them on release day, so there must be something there.
- staticman2 3y ago
  >In the view of a “hobby” it’s not that excessive It is however, a fairly expensive paperweight. And I have a bunch of gadgets I hardly ever use.
- charlie0 3y ago
  Vacation to paris lol? Are you spending just a weekend there? No way it's 3500 for any decent period of time, at least not if you're flying from NA.

blashyrk 3y ago

I couldn't care less about the product itself, because I'm only interested in VR, but I'm hopeful it will drive engagement towards AR/VR. Then, hopefully, other companies will throw more significant amount of money towards R&D in VR and the technology will improve.

aubanel 3y ago

Don't forget Rule n°1 : no pre-orders!