Apple Vision Pro announced

[robcat2075]

It's the new VR headset, the device everyone wants until they have to use it.

NYT has an early try-out...

A First Try of Apple’s $3,500 Vision Pro Headset

 

One artist's reaction...

Optimize your dating life with our incredibly ugly and expensive headset

 

[Fuchur]

I think it depends and that guy really sees it as something it should not be seen as.
Why should you wear it all the time as the author indicates here?

I don't do that with my smartphone, I don't do that with my VR headset, my Laptop or my Computer and yes I wear a smartwatch "all the time" but I am not constantly looking at it. Even if I could do that, I would not want to do that, because I am already too involved with my smartphone which I can ignore if I do not want to listen or look at it right now. This once seems to be stressful by no longer giving me spare / free time if I would wear it all the time.

But I am a VR enthusiast for games, chat-room-worlds (RecRoom / VRChat) and things like that.
So a headset which I can wear playing and communicating long distance with other people? Yes, that isnt new for me (doing it several time a week since years) and totally fine and being able to "make it transparent" is a good thing because that can be troublesome sometimes.

Using it as an instruction guide helper while working? Very nice.
Learning something with it? Could be great.
Maybe video recording something with it while at the same time seeing the result in real life and the stream itself? Could be pretty nice too.

But wearing it all the time or if others are around me? I wouldn't want to do that and why I should I?
Even technically that can't be done: The battery life wouldn't let me do that anyway and nobody forces me neighter.

The only real problem I see is the price. That is just too expensive even for enthusiast like me and for a "normal" person even more.
And while it has a couple of nice features (scaning your head, etc.), it is not worth that, especially if I think about the hololens, which could do most of that a couple of years ago already and was in the same price range. (yes, newer technology, but not that different, that it still should cost that kind of money)

I think it is a nice headset, if you see it as a headset and it is a bad "all day" companion.

Best regards
*Fuchur*

[Roger]

Looks like a cool product, but it is easily 5x to 10x what the market will tolerate.   And we are officially in a recession.   I don't see this flying off the shelves, even with people who are very well off.  

[Wildsided]

At that price, I don't think they're positioning this one as a mass-market product. Specs wise its biggest competitor is the Varjo Xr3 which is twice as expensive (and requires an additional subscription on top of the base price) as the vision pro.

I do think this is what most future headsets will be compared to when they're announced which in theory should drive competitors to aim for comparable specs while finding ways to reduce cost. Which should lead to better, cheaper consumer-grade headsets a little ways up the road.

[robcat2075]

When Apple introduced the iPhone and the iPad, they both did more than anyone expected, at a great price.

These Vision Goggles maybe partially approach expectations, at a price most people won't consider paying.

I don't think this is a case of Steve Job's "How can people know what they want if they haven't seen it yet?"

People have "known" what VR is meant to be at least since the Star Trek "Holodeck" in the 80s. The apps that have been demonstrated for the Apple Vision don't com close to expectations and dont' seem to present any new "wow, I need that!" ideas.

Microsoft has recently scaled down its Hololens development, perhaps sensing that the market for this won't justify the dev costs.

[Maniac]

I have the Meta quest 2 {oculus quest 2}new meta quest 3 coming out in fall starts at 500$ you can use the headset for stand alone or  pc as well it is wireless the price tag is no were near Apple headset   It really cool to check out your A.M models in sketchfab you see how big things really are you see the scale size of the model 

 

 

[robcat2075]

On a related note, the voice assistant business is doing poorly. Although commanding your appliances by talking to them is a long-standing futuristic vision, few people want to have any conversations with their appliances that will make money for the smart appliance makers.

 

Amazon Alexa is a “colossal failure,” on pace to lose $10 billion this year
 

Quote

 

Alexa has been around for 10 years and has been a trailblazing voice assistant that was copied quite a bit by Google and Apple. Alexa never managed to create an ongoing revenue stream, though, so Alexa doesn't really make any money...

...the hope was that people would buy things on Amazon via their voice. Not many people want to trust an AI with spending their money or buying an item without seeing a picture or reading reviews. The report says that by year four of the Alexa experiment, "Alexa was getting a billion interactions a week, but most of those conversations were trivial commands to play music or ask about the weather." Those questions aren't monetizable.

 

 

Microsoft seems to have given up on Cortana for similar reasons.

[Fuchur]

2 hours ago, robcat2075 said:

When Apple introduced the iPhone and the iPad, they both did more than anyone expected, at a great price.

These Vision Goggles maybe partially approach expectations, at a price most people won't consider paying.

I don't think this is a case of Steve Job's "How can people know what they want if they haven't seen it yet?"

People have "known" what VR is meant to be at least since the Star Trek "Holodeck" in the 80s. The apps that have been demonstrated for the Apple Vision don't com close to expectations and dont' seem to present any new "wow, I need that!" ideas.

Microsoft has recently scaled down its Hololens development, perhaps sensing that the market for this won't justify the dev costs.

I do not think that everybody is expecting a Holodeck like technology. That would be like saying "nobody is going to use a plane because we want it to be the Enterprise and traveling should be beaming like, otherwise we are not going to use it and just be very upset with everything else.

Additionally to that: There are a lot of people today, who just did not watch Enterprise or Star Trek (not even the new movies)... they just do not know anymore.

But to be a break through, the price is very important, and 3500 Dollars is just too high for mainstream, no matter how cool the tech might be. That is a price that nobody will accept for a product they do not absolutely need. It might be different, if we are using those types to do work with them in future (for instance remotely controlling robots or something like that... I dont know), but till that is happning, it has to be much less expensive. 200-400 dollars, upwards 500 dollars it is enthusiasts only and 3500 is only people who make a living out of it.

But just out of curiosity: Why is VR not fun for you? Scary, not immersive enough, seems like out of touch with reality?

Best regards
*Fuchur*

[robcat2075]

I don't think the public expects the Holodeck, they know that's impossible. But these various VR goggles will have to present some experience nearly as compelling as that to lure the general public into making a habit of wearing these and paying a premium fee for it.

Planes were introduced and proved their use long before The Enterprise so they never had that comparison problem. Planes won market acceptance by offering a clearly faster alternative to something people were sick of... train and bus travel.

VR goggles are a superior replacement for... what? What essential activity?  I'm not sure what that is yet. None of the VR uses being demoed look like such a thing.

I can imagine valid uses for architects and car designers and military planners, etc., but that's not a mass market.

 

 

 

[Roger]

22 minutes ago, robcat2075 said:

I don't think the public expects the Holodeck, they know that's impossible. But these various VR goggles will have to present some experience nearly as compelling as that to lure the general public into making a habit of wearing these and paying a premium fee for it.

I'm reminded of a Dennis Miller bit:   "the day some retired iron worker can put on a headset and have a completely believable experience where he is banging Claudia Schiffer, is the day the human race goes extinct"  

Assuming they can get the price down to $300 or so, I imagine that if this provides a superior experience to other VR headsets, that people will get it even without fully immersive VR like the Star Trek Holodeck.  I've tired a few of the current headsets with a climbing type game, and the experience was close enough to "real" to give me a sensation of vertigo.

[robcat2075]

On 6/9/2023 at 7:06 PM, Roger said:

I'm reminded of a Dennis Miller bit:   "the day some retired iron worker can put on a headset and have a completely believable experience where he is banging Claudia Schiffer, is the day the human race goes extinct" 

 

I recall when I worked at Nortel they announced a device that would allow people to shake hands over the internet, like for shaking hands on a deal that has just been done. I'm sure it had other uses.

I don't know what became of it.

[Fuchur]

On 6/10/2023 at 1:34 AM, robcat2075 said:

I don't think the public expects the Holodeck, they know that's impossible. But these various VR goggles will have to present some experience nearly as compelling as that to lure the general public into making a habit of wearing these and paying a premium fee for it.

Planes were introduced and proved their use long before The Enterprise so they never had that comparison problem. Planes won market acceptance by offering a clearly faster alternative to something people were sick of... train and bus travel.

VR goggles are a superior replacement for... what? What essential activity?  I'm not sure what that is yet. None of the VR uses being demoed look like such a thing.

I can imagine valid uses for architects and car designers and military planners, etc., but that's not a mass market.

 

 

 

The fun thing is: An AR or VR experience in a HoloDeck version would get rid of the need of a plane for many people.
On of the essential things for me is communication in a close to real expierence or at least having fun together by playing games together in a "more" real way.
Again, I think the price is too high no matter what it does, that is out of question here... 3500 is just to much for most households to handle. The only moveable thing you might by in that price range is a car and that is of cause much more helpful.

But I have to say that most people really enjoyed having a head set while COVID was going on and already having a scan technology so your own character could have been used would have been a great addition to that.

It is fine to video chat, but after a while that is just talking and much less playing games or seeing and expierencing new things together.
VR can provide that to a certain extended. The better the technology gets the closer it can come to reality, the easier it would be to use it as a subsititute. It is not the same and will very likely never be, but it more fun than just talking to a computer screen.

I still use it for far away living friends (or to find new once) and even do a birthday party like thing each year so that people who can not visit my real one can still celebrate with me. Some can handle it better than others of cause. If they have played video games before (VR or not isnt important) they do get a long fast, if not, they are more reserved, but even my Dad (over 80 years old) can do VR and likes it for half of an hour to one hour from time to time.

If you didn't try it out with an open mind, you might want to. It can really be fun (and of cause bad too... like anything)

But again: 3500 Dollars kills it. It would kill anything that is more or less fun and not necessarily needed.

Best regards
*Fuchur*

[Fuchur]

On 6/10/2023 at 2:06 AM, Roger said:

I'm reminded of a Dennis Miller bit:   "the day some retired iron worker can put on a headset and have a completely believable experience where he is banging Claudia Schiffer, is the day the human race goes extinct"  

Assuming they can get the price down to $300 or so, I imagine that if this provides a superior experience to other VR headsets, that people will get it even without fully immersive VR like the Star Trek Holodeck.  I've tired a few of the current headsets with a climbing type game, and the experience was close enough to "real" to give me a sensation of vertigo.

Yes, some of those games even trigger my fear of heights ;).
See: "The climb" is one of those.

Best regards
*Fuchur*