4 ms·

If all you care about is gaming, perhaps. But there’s a lot of areas where the Vision Pro is a better product to the point where the price difference is irrelev

by dagmx 2y ago

If all you care about is gaming, perhaps. But there’s a lot of areas where the Vision Pro is a better product to the point where the price difference is irrelevant. Much like professional cameras aren’t actually 10x the features of prosumer cameras, yet command a higher price because of what they enable at the high end. Industrial and medical use, creative platforms etc, Literally the only other headsets I can use for the lines of work I’m involved with are 4x the price of the Vision Pro (the Varjo XRs), yet by your metric wouldn’t be worthwhile. And this is the problem with people who don’t consider usecases beyond their own.

dangus 2y ago
So Apple, the company that doesn't sell an enterprise cloud computing platform and doesn't sell a business productivity suite wants to sell the Vision Pro to specialized industries? Excuse me for being very skeptical. I don't see a whole lot of Apple marketing material talking about the Vision Pro as a professional device. They have a grand total of one press release that highlights different uses for business. There's no landing page that says "contact sales" or anything like that you'd see for an enterprisey specialized solution. In my mind the more plausible explanation is that Apple misjudged the pricing strategy for the Vision Pro, a device that it considers to be primarily a consumer content device. If the Vision Pro was a $1000 product they would have potentially had a hit. But I think what's going to happen is that Apple is going to have a product like that in 2026 and when it comes out the response is going to be quite muted.
- Nevermark 2y ago
  As a daily user of Apple Vision Pro, I can see the value of creating a much cheaper non-pro version. But I could also see the value of a comparably priced or even higher priced version, with ultra versions of their M chips, going all in as a Mac or MacBook upgrade in terms of user interface. I use mine as a MacBook Pro screen upgrade. I would love to dispense with the MacBook, while retaining Mac level (as apposition to limited iOS style) applications.
- dagmx 2y ago
  Apple literally has Enterprise specific APis for it https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2024/10139 https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2024/10139 Also in terms of press releases, a quick google search shows these two https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2024/04/apple-vision-pro-brings-a-new-era-of-spatial-computing-to-business/ https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2024/04/apple-vision-pro-brin... https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2024/03/apple-vision-pro-unlocks-new-opportunities-for-health-app-developers/ https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2024/03/apple-vision-pro-unlo... Just because Apples consumer marketing pages don’t target enterprise, doesn’t mean they don’t target enterprise as a product. See the Mac Pro webpage that also doesn’t mention enterprise contacts https://www.apple.com/mac-pro/ https://www.apple.com/mac-pro/ but it’s clearly not targeted for just consumers either.
  - aprilthird2021 2y ago
    I'm sorry do any actual surgeons or airline techs use these apps? I would be very skeptical that it's used in any kind of sizable number (or that it's even allowed in surgery, frankly).
    - dagmx 2y ago
      Yes they are. Here are articles and videos for surgery use. Previously, the HoloLens was used for the surgery market and the Vision Pro has largely replaced it. https://time.com/7093536/surgeons-apple-vision-pro/ https://time.com/7093536/surgeons-apple-vision-pro/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39140319/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39140319/ https://youtu.be/tAmXzksBvpw?si=LX_VvqYjSUH43Pwd https://youtu.be/tAmXzksBvpw?si=LX_VvqYjSUH43Pwd https://youtu.be/3MoOB7Er-vw?feature=shared https://youtu.be/3MoOB7Er-vw?feature=shared
      - aprilthird2021 2y ago
        That's impressive, but it is currently not licensed for use in surgeries. The first article mentions that they can only use it through an IRB-approved study that all patients have the right to opt-out of. But yeah, if Apple can become a medical device company, it would unlock a huge revenue stream for them. Looks like these people are optimistic, I'll take them at their word for that. I personally don't know if Apple is willing to put the investment into the devices to make them viable as medical devices. There is a reason medical devices have huge costs, and that's largely because of the human effort involved to go multiple rounds with the FDA and other regulatory bodies to get a device approved for use in medical facilities outside of trials and studies.
aprilthird2021 2y ago
> Industrial and medical use, creative platforms etc, Literally the only other headsets I can use for the lines of work I’m involved with are 4x the price of the Vision Pro (the Varjo XRs), yet by your metric wouldn’t be worthwhile But the AVP cannot be used for any of these use cases, and as far as I know is not in serious use for professionals in such industries at scale, so why are you acting as if I was blind to the real reason people buy it? None of those are reasons people would buy it today. Also, you seem to not be aware that the Quest series actually have a professional / industrial business sales setup and do actually make large volumes of sales for business use cases, unlike AVP (https://forwork.meta.com/quest/business-subscription/ https://forwork.meta.com/quest/business-subscription/)
- dagmx 2y ago
  It is being used in those industries. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42480926 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42480926 for a bunch of links to early medical use. The reason I think you’re not counting those is because you claim equivalency of capability despite cost difference, but there’s clear areas that I know of where a Quest would not cut it. Your link to metas business use has no relation to my argument. I’m not saying the quest can’t be used for business cases, because I myself have set up professional environments around it. But that’s why I’m confident in saying the Vision Pro allows for a level of fidelity that the Quest cannot provide for today.

by dagmx 2y ago

dangus 2y ago

So Apple, the company that doesn't sell an enterprise cloud computing platform and doesn't sell a business productivity suite wants to sell the Vision Pro to specialized industries? Excuse me for being very skeptical. I don't see a whole lot of Apple marketing material talking about the Vision Pro as a professional device. They have a grand total of one press release that highlights different uses for business. There's no landing page that says "contact sales" or anything like that you'd see for an enterprisey specialized solution. In my mind the more plausible explanation is that Apple misjudged the pricing strategy for the Vision Pro, a device that it considers to be primarily a consumer content device. If the Vision Pro was a $1000 product they would have potentially had a hit. But I think what's going to happen is that Apple is going to have a product like that in 2026 and when it comes out the response is going to be quite muted.

Nevermark 2y ago
As a daily user of Apple Vision Pro, I can see the value of creating a much cheaper non-pro version. But I could also see the value of a comparably priced or even higher priced version, with ultra versions of their M chips, going all in as a Mac or MacBook upgrade in terms of user interface. I use mine as a MacBook Pro screen upgrade. I would love to dispense with the MacBook, while retaining Mac level (as apposition to limited iOS style) applications.
dagmx 2y ago
Apple literally has Enterprise specific APis for it https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2024/10139 https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2024/10139 Also in terms of press releases, a quick google search shows these two https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2024/04/apple-vision-pro-brings-a-new-era-of-spatial-computing-to-business/ https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2024/04/apple-vision-pro-brin... https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2024/03/apple-vision-pro-unlocks-new-opportunities-for-health-app-developers/ https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2024/03/apple-vision-pro-unlo... Just because Apples consumer marketing pages don’t target enterprise, doesn’t mean they don’t target enterprise as a product. See the Mac Pro webpage that also doesn’t mention enterprise contacts https://www.apple.com/mac-pro/ https://www.apple.com/mac-pro/ but it’s clearly not targeted for just consumers either.
- aprilthird2021 2y ago
  I'm sorry do any actual surgeons or airline techs use these apps? I would be very skeptical that it's used in any kind of sizable number (or that it's even allowed in surgery, frankly).
  - dagmx 2y ago
    Yes they are. Here are articles and videos for surgery use. Previously, the HoloLens was used for the surgery market and the Vision Pro has largely replaced it. https://time.com/7093536/surgeons-apple-vision-pro/ https://time.com/7093536/surgeons-apple-vision-pro/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39140319/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39140319/ https://youtu.be/tAmXzksBvpw?si=LX_VvqYjSUH43Pwd https://youtu.be/tAmXzksBvpw?si=LX_VvqYjSUH43Pwd https://youtu.be/3MoOB7Er-vw?feature=shared https://youtu.be/3MoOB7Er-vw?feature=shared
    - aprilthird2021 2y ago
      That's impressive, but it is currently not licensed for use in surgeries. The first article mentions that they can only use it through an IRB-approved study that all patients have the right to opt-out of. But yeah, if Apple can become a medical device company, it would unlock a huge revenue stream for them. Looks like these people are optimistic, I'll take them at their word for that. I personally don't know if Apple is willing to put the investment into the devices to make them viable as medical devices. There is a reason medical devices have huge costs, and that's largely because of the human effort involved to go multiple rounds with the FDA and other regulatory bodies to get a device approved for use in medical facilities outside of trials and studies.

aprilthird2021 2y ago

> Industrial and medical use, creative platforms etc, Literally the only other headsets I can use for the lines of work I’m involved with are 4x the price of the Vision Pro (the Varjo XRs), yet by your metric wouldn’t be worthwhile But the AVP cannot be used for any of these use cases, and as far as I know is not in serious use for professionals in such industries at scale, so why are you acting as if I was blind to the real reason people buy it? None of those are reasons people would buy it today. Also, you seem to not be aware that the Quest series actually have a professional / industrial business sales setup and do actually make large volumes of sales for business use cases, unlike AVP (https://forwork.meta.com/quest/business-subscription/ https://forwork.meta.com/quest/business-subscription/)

dagmx 2y ago
It is being used in those industries. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42480926 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42480926 for a bunch of links to early medical use. The reason I think you’re not counting those is because you claim equivalency of capability despite cost difference, but there’s clear areas that I know of where a Quest would not cut it. Your link to metas business use has no relation to my argument. I’m not saying the quest can’t be used for business cases, because I myself have set up professional environments around it. But that’s why I’m confident in saying the Vision Pro allows for a level of fidelity that the Quest cannot provide for today.