4 ms·

Lots of people would probably pay 2k for a much better headset too. There are multiple ways Apple can attack this.

empath-nirvana 3y ago
I think the main reason that they aren't going to focus on cost reduction is that it's not really good enough right now. The people that won't buy it at $3500 won't buy it at $2000, either. Anything north of $1,000, if you're not just selling it to ultra wealthy people who don't care about money, it's got to be a core part of their existence like a phone is, or their job is paying for it. And I don't think the product, as it is, is that. A lot of people wouldn't use it if you gave it to them _for free_.
- spacebanana7 3y ago
  Unless they can come up with financing options. A lot more people might be willing to pay $150 a month for a new VR headset every couple of years.
- posix_monad 3y ago
  If you have a small apartment but enough disposable income to drop $2000 on a TV-set (common situation) I can see it be compelling.
  - 65 3y ago
    Can't watch it with other people though. Still need to strap a heavy headset to your face instead of just clicking a button to turn the TV on. I'd still rather have a TV than Vision Pro.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
65 3y ago
I would pay $2,000 for great AR/VR glasses - not goggles like the Vision Pro or Quest. Something like the XReal Airs but higher resolution. Why Apple didn't work on this category - glasses - and instead worked on VR goggles, which for years have already been a niche for gaming (something Apple sucks at), is beyond me.
- apocalyptic0n3 3y ago
  The reports a year ago were that this was their true goal, but they had to postpone AR glasses due to "technical challenges". The Vision Pro was the fallback product that let them enter the market years ahead of where they otherwise would have been able to. 1: https://www.reuters.com/technology/apple-indefinitely-postpones-launch-ar-glasses-bloomberg-news-2023-01-18/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/apple-indefinitely-postpo... 2: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-01-18/apple-postpones-ar-glasses-plans-cheaper-mixed-reality-headset https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-01-18/apple-pos...
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- markus_zhang 3y ago
  A side note: it might still be valuable for developers to get one of these -- if we believe that Apple can eventually produce those glasses, I'd assume that experience in developing apps on Vision Pro is still valuable.
- empath-nirvana 3y ago
  > Why Apple didn't work on this category - glasses - and instead worked on VR goggles Probably because it's a fantasy that can't exist with current technology.
  - 65 3y ago
    It already exists: https://www.xreal.com/us/ https://www.xreal.com/us/

I think the main reason that they aren't going to focus on cost reduction is that it's not really good enough right now. The people that won't buy it at $3500 won't buy it at $2000, either. Anything north of $1,000, if you're not just selling it to ultra wealthy people who don't care about money, it's got to be a core part of their existence like a phone is, or their job is paying for it. And I don't think the product, as it is, is that. A lot of people wouldn't use it if you gave it to them _for free_.

spacebanana7 3y ago
Unless they can come up with financing options. A lot more people might be willing to pay $150 a month for a new VR headset every couple of years.
posix_monad 3y ago
If you have a small apartment but enough disposable income to drop $2000 on a TV-set (common situation) I can see it be compelling.
- 65 3y ago
  Can't watch it with other people though. Still need to strap a heavy headset to your face instead of just clicking a button to turn the TV on. I'd still rather have a TV than Vision Pro.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

65 3y ago

I would pay $2,000 for great AR/VR glasses - not goggles like the Vision Pro or Quest. Something like the XReal Airs but higher resolution. Why Apple didn't work on this category - glasses - and instead worked on VR goggles, which for years have already been a niche for gaming (something Apple sucks at), is beyond me.

apocalyptic0n3 3y ago
The reports a year ago were that this was their true goal, but they had to postpone AR glasses due to "technical challenges". The Vision Pro was the fallback product that let them enter the market years ahead of where they otherwise would have been able to. 1: https://www.reuters.com/technology/apple-indefinitely-postpones-launch-ar-glasses-bloomberg-news-2023-01-18/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/apple-indefinitely-postpo... 2: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-01-18/apple-postpones-ar-glasses-plans-cheaper-mixed-reality-headset https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-01-18/apple-pos...
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
markus_zhang 3y ago
A side note: it might still be valuable for developers to get one of these -- if we believe that Apple can eventually produce those glasses, I'd assume that experience in developing apps on Vision Pro is still valuable.
empath-nirvana 3y ago
> Why Apple didn't work on this category - glasses - and instead worked on VR goggles Probably because it's a fantasy that can't exist with current technology.
- 65 3y ago
  It already exists: https://www.xreal.com/us/ https://www.xreal.com/us/