4 ms·

This was also posted on one of the best niche subs, r/cinematography. Here is that thread [0], with mostly professional takes. One interesting take-away: > I’

This was also posted on one of the best niche subs, r/cinematography. Here is that thread [0], with mostly professional takes. One interesting take-away: > I’ve pre-ordered one. Vision Pro sales will be around 1/2M at the one year mark, and there’s a total of about 3 hours of immersive content available on the headset across every app right now. > That’s a once in a lifetime content opportunity. [0] https://old.reddit.com/r/cinematography/comments/1hhvwfv/blackmagic_ursa_cine_immersive_is_available_to/ https://old.reddit.com/r/cinematography/comments/1hhvwfv/bla...

dangus 2y ago
Or it could be the next 3D video, a gimmick that peaks and fades away quickly among the mass market. If you ask me, the Vision Pro’s sales up to this point justify discontinuation. I think that Apple is only making investments in Vision Pro because they don’t really have another long play for “the next great device form factor,” and because Meta hasn’t thrown in the towel yet Apple presumably refuses to sit back while Meta dominates marketshare for a specific type of app platform. I think that Apple and everyone else is very aware that VR/AR is more likely than not be close to the maximum user base. Meta’s been doing everything it can to make the platform stay within impulse buy territory because they know it’s not really a purchase that potential customers are going to seriously believe that they’ll spend hours and hours every day using like a traditional game console or PC graphics card. Meta has to convince you to buy a device that they must certainly know from their own telemetry that users only interact with for a handful of hours every week. The only reason Apple is sticking with it is that it’s a long term play and they have unlimited money. Or maybe because they refuse to give up until Meta gives up. They can’t let Meta own a computing platform out of pure business ego.
- dannyw 2y ago
  There was the Newton, PDAs, and Symbian phones before the iPhone. The technology might need another decade (or two), but I think it’s very shortsighted to think VR/AR is close to its maximum user base.
  - curiouscavalier 2y ago
    Agreed. There’s a lot of variables (and I think price is a big one). But, while slow, adoption in enterprise is showing signs that the basic concept has some legs. Even if the tech today needs some time to marinate. That said I also don’t think we’re are a time-local maxima of users either.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - lupusreal 2y ago
    Back in the era of Palm Pilots and Blackberries, most people didn't have one, but the people who did have one tended to use them extensively every day. Today, most people don't have VR headsets, and most of the people who do are letting them collect dust on a shelf in their closet. In the first case you have a type of product that is evidently very useful but isn't ready for the general public. In the second case, you have a product that early adopters can't find a routine use for.
  - scherlock 2y ago
    There have been VR headsets since before there were PDAs. The first VR Headsets were made in the 80s by VPL (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VPL_Research https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VPL_Research). This no where near being a new idea, this is a forty year old idea that gets a resurgence every 5 to 10 years then everyone remembers why it never caught on the last item. It is a niche consumer peripheral, but it has a lot of applications in professions such as Architecture, Engineering, Medicine, Aerospace, and Training. But those industries can probably only support one or two small manufacturers.
- tbrownaw 2y ago
  > * think that Apple and everyone else is very aware that VR/AR is more likely than not be close to the maximum user base.* Maybe for current device clunkiness and capabilities. I expect that would change if it could do a good job of replacing desk screens, or let people spend their commute staring at a hud instead of staring at a phone.
  - wongarsu 2y ago
    Everyone is trying to do that, but the tech just isn't there yet. We would need to double the resolution of the best VR headsets to be able to properly simulate 1920p screens at any reasonable distance. But at the same time everyone knows that the tech will get there eventually. A lot of current VR products seem to mostly exist to position companies to be able to exploit the market once the tech gets good enough.
- gpm 2y ago
  Vision Pro, based on its name, its pricing, its marketing, the state of the OS/ecosystem at launch, and so on and so forth was never meant to "sell well". It is an early entrance and closer to a devkit than a typical apple consumer product. This was universally acknowledged (as far as anything is universally acknowledged) from the get go. It seems like that you could have made the conclusion that it should be discontinued before it went on the market if "poor sales" justifies that for this device.
  - 1oooqooq 2y ago
    you're reading too much. pro in apple parlance only means "the most expensive of this model line".
  - lupusreal 2y ago
    "Everybody" wanted the first generation of iphone despite it being grossly deficient in numerous ways (OS/ecosystem, hardware, price, etc), even compared to the extant smartphones / blackberries of it's time. People overlooked all of those deficiencies because the premise of a smartphone that was one big capacitive touch screen was extremely compelling. With the Vision Pro, that kind of enthusiasm just isn't there. If it was going to be the next big thing, there would be a lot of hype for it even though its rough around the edges. The general public isn't rejecting the Vision Pro because it costs too much and has no apps, they're rejecting it because wearing a computer on their face isn't something they're interested in.
    - theshackleford 2y ago
      Most people I know are in fact rejecting it due to cost, and have instead settled for a Q3. You can get a second hand car here for what they want for a Vision Pro. It’s too much even for the hardcore Apple fans I know for an unknown, hell, I’m into VR and have been for longer than I can remember now, I have the disposable income and it’s STILL to much, even for me.
      - lupusreal 2y ago
        > Most people I know are in fact rejecting it due to cost, and have instead settled for a Q3 I don't know who you know, but I'd be very surprised if most of them have either of those..
- consumer451 2y ago
  I believe that the cinematographer who I was quoting has much more short-term practical goals. What he might be thinking is that there are 400k to 500k people who have already spent $3500 on a device which currently has no content. If he got 10% of them to "spend" $2 on his short immersive video experience, that would cover the cost of the camera + shoot + profit, in his first successful attempt.
  - Fluorescence 2y ago
    You could also say those stats show there is no market. How many owners are even MAU anymore? Most VR headsets collect dust after the initial wow phase passes and you run out of content. How much are you spending on marketing to reach those users?
    - consumer451 2y ago
      Those are entirely good points. However, the reason that I put "spend" in scare quotes was that it might be the case the these indie immersive content creators get their content subsided, or bought outright, by either Apple or some content app maker. source: 100% supposition by someone who has never owned a VR headset.
  - jfengel 2y ago
    I hope he finds what he's looking for. We've been fumbling about to find a visual language that really clicks for VR storytelling. It feels like there ought to be one, and if he can find it, it can be as huge as moving pictures. As it is right now it feels like those early days of film, which seem incredibly awkward because they didn't know how to use it to tell a story. But they were clearly casting about for something they knew was there. It just took a while to find.
    - Nevermark 2y ago
      Dune 1 in 3D on Vision Pro is something. For high end cinemaphotography, 3D is not a gimmick. Market size of high end VR hardware/content does have a chicken and egg problem, regardless.
- dagmx 2y ago
  > the Vision Pro’s sales up to this point justify discontinuation What are you basing this on though? From all accounts they’re pretty close to selling the number of units they could manufacture.
  - dangus 2y ago
    I’m basing this on reports that it has not crossed the million unit sales number. Possibly just barely crossing the 500,000 mark right about now. These are sales that are on par with the Nintendo Virtual Boy. And if they can’t manufacture any more than that, they have an even bigger problem. It’s now been a year and a half since the first model was announced and there is no sign of a second model to move the product into a more mass appeal device. We saw critical follow-ups like the iPhone 3G and Apple Watch Series 1/2 come out as quick releases that were in retrospect very important to establishing a practical device that a regular person might consider buying. I think the fact that we haven’t seen one yet is a huge problem. If Apple couldn’t make another leap in a calendar year it’s clear that they will never catch up to Meta. Meta is out there selling a gazillion Quest 3S bundles to your local Costco impulse buyer.
    - dagmx 2y ago
      I suspect your expectations for sales are much loftier than Apple’s. The million sales mark was from one single report by Kuo. Kuo himself previously said they were limited to ~900K display units which is ~450K devices and other analysts have said the same. There is no other source saying 1M was the target that I know of that doesn’t trace back to Kuo. If they are at ~500K units then they’ve exceeded the initial sales target that Kuo himself laid out. For your second point about a follow up, you’re comparing product announcement to product launches. The product itself only launched 10months ago. You’re expecting a second iteration within 10 months, of an entirely new product class for them ? Meanwhile other more popular Apple products often go longer between releases. Even Meta are around two years between products within a device class. Your last point of comparing to a meta quest is misplaced too. They’re different classes of the same device category. There’s no way Apple are expecting to compete with a device a tenth of its price for total sales.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- dmix 2y ago
  Plenty of people made tons of money off 3D. Way more than 30k
  - Kwpolska 2y ago
    People made money off 3D thanks to 3D cinemas. 3D glasses are cheap, often disposable. VR headsets are expensive and clunky, I doubt we're going to see VR cinemas with comparable capacity.

dangus 2y ago

Or it could be the next 3D video, a gimmick that peaks and fades away quickly among the mass market. If you ask me, the Vision Pro’s sales up to this point justify discontinuation. I think that Apple is only making investments in Vision Pro because they don’t really have another long play for “the next great device form factor,” and because Meta hasn’t thrown in the towel yet Apple presumably refuses to sit back while Meta dominates marketshare for a specific type of app platform. I think that Apple and everyone else is very aware that VR/AR is more likely than not be close to the maximum user base. Meta’s been doing everything it can to make the platform stay within impulse buy territory because they know it’s not really a purchase that potential customers are going to seriously believe that they’ll spend hours and hours every day using like a traditional game console or PC graphics card. Meta has to convince you to buy a device that they must certainly know from their own telemetry that users only interact with for a handful of hours every week. The only reason Apple is sticking with it is that it’s a long term play and they have unlimited money. Or maybe because they refuse to give up until Meta gives up. They can’t let Meta own a computing platform out of pure business ego.

dannyw 2y ago
There was the Newton, PDAs, and Symbian phones before the iPhone. The technology might need another decade (or two), but I think it’s very shortsighted to think VR/AR is close to its maximum user base.
- curiouscavalier 2y ago
  Agreed. There’s a lot of variables (and I think price is a big one). But, while slow, adoption in enterprise is showing signs that the basic concept has some legs. Even if the tech today needs some time to marinate. That said I also don’t think we’re are a time-local maxima of users either.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- lupusreal 2y ago
  Back in the era of Palm Pilots and Blackberries, most people didn't have one, but the people who did have one tended to use them extensively every day. Today, most people don't have VR headsets, and most of the people who do are letting them collect dust on a shelf in their closet. In the first case you have a type of product that is evidently very useful but isn't ready for the general public. In the second case, you have a product that early adopters can't find a routine use for.
- scherlock 2y ago
  There have been VR headsets since before there were PDAs. The first VR Headsets were made in the 80s by VPL (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VPL_Research https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VPL_Research). This no where near being a new idea, this is a forty year old idea that gets a resurgence every 5 to 10 years then everyone remembers why it never caught on the last item. It is a niche consumer peripheral, but it has a lot of applications in professions such as Architecture, Engineering, Medicine, Aerospace, and Training. But those industries can probably only support one or two small manufacturers.
tbrownaw 2y ago
> * think that Apple and everyone else is very aware that VR/AR is more likely than not be close to the maximum user base.* Maybe for current device clunkiness and capabilities. I expect that would change if it could do a good job of replacing desk screens, or let people spend their commute staring at a hud instead of staring at a phone.
- wongarsu 2y ago
  Everyone is trying to do that, but the tech just isn't there yet. We would need to double the resolution of the best VR headsets to be able to properly simulate 1920p screens at any reasonable distance. But at the same time everyone knows that the tech will get there eventually. A lot of current VR products seem to mostly exist to position companies to be able to exploit the market once the tech gets good enough.
gpm 2y ago
Vision Pro, based on its name, its pricing, its marketing, the state of the OS/ecosystem at launch, and so on and so forth was never meant to "sell well". It is an early entrance and closer to a devkit than a typical apple consumer product. This was universally acknowledged (as far as anything is universally acknowledged) from the get go. It seems like that you could have made the conclusion that it should be discontinued before it went on the market if "poor sales" justifies that for this device.
- 1oooqooq 2y ago
  you're reading too much. pro in apple parlance only means "the most expensive of this model line".
- lupusreal 2y ago
  "Everybody" wanted the first generation of iphone despite it being grossly deficient in numerous ways (OS/ecosystem, hardware, price, etc), even compared to the extant smartphones / blackberries of it's time. People overlooked all of those deficiencies because the premise of a smartphone that was one big capacitive touch screen was extremely compelling. With the Vision Pro, that kind of enthusiasm just isn't there. If it was going to be the next big thing, there would be a lot of hype for it even though its rough around the edges. The general public isn't rejecting the Vision Pro because it costs too much and has no apps, they're rejecting it because wearing a computer on their face isn't something they're interested in.
  - theshackleford 2y ago
    Most people I know are in fact rejecting it due to cost, and have instead settled for a Q3. You can get a second hand car here for what they want for a Vision Pro. It’s too much even for the hardcore Apple fans I know for an unknown, hell, I’m into VR and have been for longer than I can remember now, I have the disposable income and it’s STILL to much, even for me.
    - lupusreal 2y ago
      > Most people I know are in fact rejecting it due to cost, and have instead settled for a Q3 I don't know who you know, but I'd be very surprised if most of them have either of those..
consumer451 2y ago
I believe that the cinematographer who I was quoting has much more short-term practical goals. What he might be thinking is that there are 400k to 500k people who have already spent $3500 on a device which currently has no content. If he got 10% of them to "spend" $2 on his short immersive video experience, that would cover the cost of the camera + shoot + profit, in his first successful attempt.
- Fluorescence 2y ago
  You could also say those stats show there is no market. How many owners are even MAU anymore? Most VR headsets collect dust after the initial wow phase passes and you run out of content. How much are you spending on marketing to reach those users?
  - consumer451 2y ago
    Those are entirely good points. However, the reason that I put "spend" in scare quotes was that it might be the case the these indie immersive content creators get their content subsided, or bought outright, by either Apple or some content app maker. source: 100% supposition by someone who has never owned a VR headset.
- jfengel 2y ago
  I hope he finds what he's looking for. We've been fumbling about to find a visual language that really clicks for VR storytelling. It feels like there ought to be one, and if he can find it, it can be as huge as moving pictures. As it is right now it feels like those early days of film, which seem incredibly awkward because they didn't know how to use it to tell a story. But they were clearly casting about for something they knew was there. It just took a while to find.
  - Nevermark 2y ago
    Dune 1 in 3D on Vision Pro is something. For high end cinemaphotography, 3D is not a gimmick. Market size of high end VR hardware/content does have a chicken and egg problem, regardless.
dagmx 2y ago
> the Vision Pro’s sales up to this point justify discontinuation What are you basing this on though? From all accounts they’re pretty close to selling the number of units they could manufacture.
- dangus 2y ago
  I’m basing this on reports that it has not crossed the million unit sales number. Possibly just barely crossing the 500,000 mark right about now. These are sales that are on par with the Nintendo Virtual Boy. And if they can’t manufacture any more than that, they have an even bigger problem. It’s now been a year and a half since the first model was announced and there is no sign of a second model to move the product into a more mass appeal device. We saw critical follow-ups like the iPhone 3G and Apple Watch Series 1/2 come out as quick releases that were in retrospect very important to establishing a practical device that a regular person might consider buying. I think the fact that we haven’t seen one yet is a huge problem. If Apple couldn’t make another leap in a calendar year it’s clear that they will never catch up to Meta. Meta is out there selling a gazillion Quest 3S bundles to your local Costco impulse buyer.
  - dagmx 2y ago
    I suspect your expectations for sales are much loftier than Apple’s. The million sales mark was from one single report by Kuo. Kuo himself previously said they were limited to ~900K display units which is ~450K devices and other analysts have said the same. There is no other source saying 1M was the target that I know of that doesn’t trace back to Kuo. If they are at ~500K units then they’ve exceeded the initial sales target that Kuo himself laid out. For your second point about a follow up, you’re comparing product announcement to product launches. The product itself only launched 10months ago. You’re expecting a second iteration within 10 months, of an entirely new product class for them ? Meanwhile other more popular Apple products often go longer between releases. Even Meta are around two years between products within a device class. Your last point of comparing to a meta quest is misplaced too. They’re different classes of the same device category. There’s no way Apple are expecting to compete with a device a tenth of its price for total sales.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
dmix 2y ago
Plenty of people made tons of money off 3D. Way more than 30k
- Kwpolska 2y ago
  People made money off 3D thanks to 3D cinemas. 3D glasses are cheap, often disposable. VR headsets are expensive and clunky, I doubt we're going to see VR cinemas with comparable capacity.