It’s an iPad you wear on your face, for doing iPad-scale computing. Personally, I believe in terms of utility-add it will be more like the original iPad, up till the introduction of the Pencil, than it will be like the iPad Pro. By that, I mean up until the iPad Pro, digital drawing was unquestionably better on a Mac with a Wacom tablet. Likewise for the Vision Pro, until it’s capable of being a proper tethered VR headset, it’s going to be worse at every task that actually has significant enablement from stereoscopic 3D proprioception. It’s 3D is going to be window dressing novelty for 2D computing tasks.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
At $3,500, will you buy a Vision Pro?
- Thread starter KPOM
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It’s an iPad you wear on your face, for doing iPad-scale computing. Personally, I believe in terms of utility-add it will be more like the original iPad, up till the introduction of the Pencil, than it will be like the iPad Pro. By that, I mean up until the iPad Pro, digital drawing was unquestionably better on a Mac with a Wacom tablet. Likewise for the Vision Pro, until it’s capable of being a proper tethered VR headset, it’s going to be worse at every task that actually has significant enablement from stereoscopic 3D proprioception. It’s 3D is going to be window dressing novelty for 2D computing tasks.
Of course the Vision Pro can be used as a display for the Mac if the user chooses to do so. Comparing using an iPad Pro as a display for the Mac is also a terrible example because a iPad Pro screen is small, and the Vision Pro doesn’t have the constraints the iPad has. Someone using the Vision Pro with a Mac can easily be more productive than someone using a iPad as a display for a Mac. You probably should rewatch the unveiling of this product to get a better understanding of its capabilities. Apple showed the visionOS running an app open side by side with a macOS app open seamlessly in the same viewscreen on the Vision Pro.
Last edited:
From the moment you called this an iPad that you wear on your face you lost all credibility and exposed your lack of understanding and imagination. Either you did not watch and understand the unveiling or YouTubers first hand impression on this device.
No, it can't. The Vision Pro provides a wireless VNC connection to a Mac, running individual apps as full screen to a space - ie it's like accessing your Mac from another Mac using Apple Remote Desktop, which if you've used it extensively, even over a wired connection is not the equivalent responsiveness to working at the local machine.
Got an app that uses two monitors?
Got an app, or a Mac that uses greater than 4k screen?
You're projecting scifi fantasies onto a device which is far more limited than you understand it to be.
Oh I watched the presentation - remembering of course that Apple is a company with a long history of outright faking its product demos, but unlike most people who seem to have an opinion of it, I've actually done serious large scale industrial design and fabrication work in VR systems that couldn't be done on 2D computers.
So I have a pretty good handle on what the limitations of this headset are likely to be.
It's a solution for iPad multitasking, which Apple has tried iteration over iteration of, and still never succeeded in making as efficient as it is on a Mac. It's using iPad-calibre hardware, which will do iPad-calibre tasks, That's the purpose of it.
My plan is to buy two with intention of reselling them [unopened] within 6 months (hopefully less). Yes, I understand there is a risk. I don’t care about the actual utility, I am only in it to turn a quick profit.
My fears are mostly being actually getting the units and that Apple doesn’t try to limit the resell market (like what Ford did with the GT)
My fears are mostly being actually getting the units and that Apple doesn’t try to limit the resell market (like what Ford did with the GT)
You know they have to be individually fitted to the user in-store, right? There's a process where a FaceID scan is used to get the sizing for the lightfast gasket that sits against your face, and there's no news so far I've seen that those are going to be sold as a separate variety pack.
I would expect every device to be individually keyed to an individual's iCloud account, based on its serial number, before the box is opened.
I was hoping/assuming that there would be some provision if you were buying it “as a gift”
It doesn’t matter what you think the type of connection the Vision Pro uses to connect to the Mac. The point is it can connect to the Mac and be used as a display, period. It was demoed by Apple with the Mac app running side by side with the Vision Pro app. You’re going off about responsiveness like you can tell there will be a huge lag, but in reality the lag would barely be noticeable or you won’t be able to tell there is a lag at all.
If older technology such as AirPlay and screen mirror and extended display from the Mac to Apple TV or iPad works so well wirelessly with virtually no lag you think this would work worse?
The Apple I’ve known and products I’ve purchased worked just as advertised. I’m not sure what you mean by Apple having a long history of faking demos, that simply is not true. Perhaps in the very distant past, but that certainly cannot be said of the Apple of today since the first iPhone dropped.
You’re reiterating that it uses iPad hardware and limited to iPad like experience, but the truth is it uses a laptop class processor and the experience will be limited to what developers create for it. It’s obviously going to be a somewhat controlled and familiar ecosystem to iOS or iPadOS because that’s how Apple design their products that do not run macOS, so it’s easy to use.
Sounds like you want full macOS on the Vision Pro and iPad. Apple knows that’s not what the majority of people would want. Most people that use Apple devices are consumers not prosumers or developers. It doesn’t seem like you understand Apple’s philosophy at all.
I don’t pretend to know what kind of line your work is, but you seem to think you know everything about the subject but you don’t know enough to realize your presumptions are wrong.
There is no requirement to have this individually fitted in store nor will it be tied to an individual Apple ID. That logically doesn’t make sense.
Apple presented a ton of things it thought might stick. Some were much larger than anticipated (health) and some were deprecated instead (sending heart rate and similar to other Watch users). At the end of the day, Apple hopes people find a use case for their products, but until they’re in the market they have no idea whether 1. It will sell and 2. What people will predominantly use it for.
The videos and short, mediated interactions from journalists/influencers shows no use case for me. They’re showing a ton of uses that are presently handled (in a likely superior fashion) by existing techniques and technologies as well as a bunch that don’t interest me. However, the device makes me dream and I can foresee it becoming not only useful but also a dominant computing paradigm for myself. Thus, I’m waiting to see whether my assumptions will be challenged (okay, I’m waiting to see how my assumptions are challenged) and what the device is actually capable of.
I’m cautiously optimistic.
Apple Vision Pro may require in-store appointments — and there's more bad news
In-person buyers of the $3,500 headset will be required to book an appointment to customize the experience
Apple's Vision Pro Headset Poised for January Debut, Custom Fitting in Stores - EconoTimes
According to a shady web tip from China, Apples Vision Pro headset will be released in the last week of January.Apples Vision Pro Will Reportedly Be Released In Last Week of JanuaryWall Street Insights, a Chinese...
It also requires prescription lenses, rather than being able to be worn over glasses, so scalpers will need to make sure they're not sellin to anyone who requires vision correction.
Have you not noticed that an iPad doesn't have multiple user switching? It's a single device, for a single person. Vision Pro is going to be MUCH more locked down than iPads, because its biometric eye-tracking is inherently more invasive, and it carries a rigged, textured facial model of its owner for generating the wearer's end of a facetime video call.
It can remote access a single, mirrored, 4k maximum resolution version of one screen on your Mac.
That is not anything like using a display plugged direct to a computer in terms of frame rates, and responsiveness. I have both ARD and Airplay displays running right here and now. It is not the equivalent of a directly connected display.
You can tell wireless remote mirroring isn't good enough for main use, because funnily enough, Apple uses cabled connections for its displays, and you cant make an Airplay display the only screen.
Virtually no lag is noticeable lag. It is simply dishonest to pretend that a VNC session from an M2 iPad, which is what the Vision Pro is, will provide an experience that is more like using a Mac directly, than it is like using a Mac via VNC.
I don't know if you've ever tried, for example, putting VLC full screen on an Airplay display, and then playing a video on it, but the experience is garbage.
The iPhone launch was almost entirely faked, with pre-recorded video and animations, every single interaction carefully sequenced, and multiple devices wired to a switched output going to the projection systems, passed off as live UI with a single device.
You don't seem to understand about how Apple constructs SOC devices - the M2 iPad Pro, M2 Macbook, and M2 Vision Pro are all more or less the same device, with different i/o options and support chipsets - a hinge sensor for the Mac, a touch sensor for the iPad, but it's the same processing, same ram etc, they just boot different OS variants.
Yes, I would prefer macOS... because it's a more productive & flexible environment. "Make it more like a Mac" has been the overwhelming demand from iPad users since day 1.
It's called Vision Pro - funny that there seem to be people claiming it will be a professional tool when it suits their argument, but when it's pointed out how it doesn't do things current professional headsets require, suddenly it's a consumer device?
Guess what - it's an iPad, it's an iPad you wear on your face. It's descended from the iPad paradigm of being a limited, locked-down computing experience, it features apps which are primarily single-screen contained, just like iPad apps, and it lets you VNC into a Mac to see a single screen from that Mac, just like an iPad.
I know about using three dimensional headset-based computing devices to do actual professional work that is inherently three dimensional. Apple's primary focus seems to be using a headset to do 2D iPad style computing in an environment that floats a bunch of iPad screens around you, to make multitasking easier, because multitasking has been a weakness of the iPad since day 1.
Perhaps the difference between us is that I have actual experience with this stuff, and you have seen a promotional video, and some youtube influencers.
I’m extremely optimistic that this product will be a huge success. Forget what it costs, Apple think the time is right to release this product and they’re right. Meta is on their 3rd or 4th device, other companies have devices. This has been a developing market for many years, but no developer managed to create the same big wave like what Apple has done with a number of their devices.
Apple believes they can create that big wave that will finally make mixed reality headsets take off and I think they’re right. This is no longer going to be a hobby, it will become a mainstream product.
This is the Vision Pro, so that means there will be a much cheaper version that is not pro. It probably won’t have the front screen, 4k resolution in each eye, spacial audio speakers, some of the sensors and cameras and microphones on the front probably will be reduced and of lessor quality, cheaper material overall, slower processors etc.
Google and Samsung are big competitors in the phone market, they’re not going to roll over and let Apple dominate this realm. We’re going to see a whole lot of new players in the future.
The Vision Pro will be spark to set this market in motion.
You’re referencing article that is purely speculating about going to the Apple Store to get custom fitted. It’s simply not logical and I’m not going to explain that. Really, just think about it.Apple Vision Pro may require in-store appointments — and there's more bad news
In-person buyers of the $3,500 headset will be required to book an appointment to customize the experiencewww.tomsguide.com
Apple's Vision Pro Headset Poised for January Debut, Custom Fitting in Stores - EconoTimes
According to a shady web tip from China, Apples Vision Pro headset will be released in the last week of January.Apples Vision Pro Will Reportedly Be Released In Last Week of JanuaryWall Street Insights, a Chinese...www.econotimes.com
It also requires prescription lenses, rather than being able to be worn over glasses, so scalpers will need to make sure they're not sellin to anyone who requires vision correction.
Have you not noticed that an iPad doesn't have multiple user switching? It's a single device, for a single person. Vision Pro is going to be MUCH more locked down than iPads, because its biometric eye-tracking is inherently more invasive, and it carries a rigged, textured facial model of its owner for generating the wearer's end of a facetime video call.
It can remote access a single, mirrored, 4k maximum resolution version of one screen on your Mac.
That is not anything like using a display plugged direct to a computer in terms of frame rates, and responsiveness. I have both ARD and Airplay displays running right here and now. It is not the equivalent of a directly connected display.
You can tell wireless remote mirroring isn't good enough for main use, because funnily enough, Apple uses cabled connections for its displays, and you cant make an Airplay display the only screen.
Virtually no lag is noticeable lag. It is simply dishonest to pretend that a VNC session from an M2 iPad, which is what the Vision Pro is, will provide an experience that is more like using a Mac directly, than it is like using a Mac via VNC.
I don't know if you've ever tried, for example, putting VLC full screen on an Airplay display, and then playing a video on it, but the experience is garbage.
The iPhone launch was almost entirely faked, with pre-recorded video and animations, every single interaction carefully sequenced, and multiple devices wired to a switched output going to the projection systems, passed off as live UI with a single device.
You don't seem to understand about how Apple constructs SOC devices - the M2 iPad Pro, M2 Macbook, and M2 Vision Pro are all more or less the same device, with different i/o options and support chipsets - a hinge sensor for the Mac, a touch sensor for the iPad, but it's the same processing, same ram etc, they just boot different OS variants.
Yes, I would prefer macOS... because it's a more productive & flexible environment. "Make it more like a Mac" has been the overwhelming demand from iPad users since day 1.
It's called Vision Pro - funny that there seem to be people claiming it will be a professional tool when it suits their argument, but when it's pointed out how it doesn't do things current professional headsets require, suddenly it's a consumer device?
Guess what - it's an iPad, it's an iPad you wear on your face. It's descended from the iPad paradigm of being a limited, locked-down computing experience, it features apps which are primarily single-screen contained, just like iPad apps, and it lets you VNC into a Mac to see a single screen from that Mac, just like an iPad.
I know about using three dimensional headset-based computing devices to do actual professional work that is inherently three dimensional. Apple's primary focus seems to be using a headset to do 2D iPad style computing in an environment that floats a bunch of iPad screens around you, to make multitasking easier, because multitasking has been a weakness of the iPad since day 1.
Perhaps the difference between us is that I have actual experience with this stuff, and you have seen a promotional video, and some youtube influencers.
Doesn’t matter how locked down the iPad is. Based on your previous comment it also isn’t logical for anyone to purchase an Apple device and it’s locked to their Apple ID, because they’re the one that purchased it. Again think about it.
So you’re upset that Apple uses prerecorded videos during their presentations? How is that being dishonest if what they did in their presentations can be done in the final product? Something’s in presentations are prerecorded because they want to get the presentation perfect! Hmm I gave that one away, should have told you to think about it.
The demand for iPad to be more like a Mac is so small. The demand literally comes from a small user base. So many people continue to buy iPad and iPhones despite its limitations, you know why… because most people don’t care about the limitations you or others speak about. Those things are so minor and comes from so small amount of people, taken into the larger account of how many Apple users there actually are. It’s barely a blip on Apple’s radar. I should have asked you to think about that one too.
So because it’s called Vision Pro that means it’s not a consumer device? My guy last time I checked they had the name pro in hmm let’s see… iPhone pro, AirPods Pro, iPad Pro, MacBook Pro. But wait, mostly consumers use these “pro” devices. Oops I gave that one away too.
Apple devices sells like freaking hot cakes year after year after year. And you’re trying to say their methods, their products are weak, inferior, not good enough, not productive enough, not enough like a Mac?
It really doesn’t matter what your job is or what you think you know about 3D. The fact is the Vision Pro can do 3D very well. You don’t like how Apple apps display 3D, and that’s okay. Doesn’t mean the device isn’t capable, because it totally is more than capable.
Like really think about what you’re saying before you post. Every point you’re complaining about has a logical and sound reason for it.
I will reiterate. You do not have to agree with Apple methodology, but there is a logical and sound reasoning behind why they do what they do. It is what makes them so successful.
Again, you know enough technical information to think you’re right about a subject, but not enough to know that you’re wrong.
I think you should explain it, rather than just saying "it's not logical" because that isn't actually an argument, or a validation of any opinion you've expressed.
We'll see what happens, but I think the Vision Pro is not going to be like other Apple devices in this respect. I don't think it's going to be an off-the-shelf sale, that someone like our esteemed scalper here can buy and then flip to resell unopened. I think Apple is going to require them to be sold with a fitted gasket, either fitted in-store, or as some have suggested, fitted via a FaceID iPhone that the purchaser already has, but they're not gong to sell selection packs, because it's not a device for multiple users to use.
The chain of custody for security and privacy on this device is gong to be significantly higher than other devices Apple sells for a number of reasons, and that's going to mean serial numbers tagged to AppleID's at purchase etc. I would predict that Gift purchasing considerations are less likely to be a consideration.
I don't think the experience of connecting a wireless VNC session to a remote Mac from the Vision Pro is going to be like using a Mac that is physically plugged into the display. I think it is going to be more like the experience of using ARD or VNC over wifi to connect to a remote Mac. If you don't know the qualitative difference between those, and therefore why it is a problem if Apple is presenting them as being indistinguishable, then I'm not going to waste my breath further, but it is still illegal to depict a device as having certain characteristics in marketing material, that it doesn't actually have in reality.
It's literally guided the entire development of the iPad.
Again, it's literally the entire history of the iPad - becoming more and more like the Mac (actually more and more like the Microsoft Surface).
That must be why Apple ignored everyone wanting the iPad to be more like a computer, except when they added Mouse & trackpad support, secondary displays, a user accessible local filesystem, mass storage suport, Thunderbolt, etc.
Merely commenting that there seems to be a lot of wanting to have, and eat cake with regards to this device. The high expense doesn't matter, because it's a "professional" device, yet being hobbled by being only an iPad-scale processor & GPU doesn't matter because it only needs "consumer" device performance and what professionals want it to do doesn't matter.
You know that using this sort of rhetorical device doesn't actually make you look smarter, or more informed.
Mac and iPad are both down 20-30% in unit sales year over year.
You've used it to do 3D tasks? I'm not talking about layering the flat UI in space, but actual high poly volumetric modelling in a proprioceptively valid stereoscopic workspace - working in 3D, on 3D. You've done that? You know from your direct experience what it can do?
Because I recall the last time Apple tried to claim they had "VR Capable" computers with the iMac Pro launch, it was my experience that the Apple-centric media were laughably misinformed about the medium in general, and about Apple's offerings relative to the rest of the industry.
When people like yourself say the M2 is "capable" of 3D, I think about the fact that an Nvidia 4090 is barely able to keep up with the leading edge 3D demands of tethered professional or high end prosumer headsets. The M2 is no 4090. If you're trying to pretend otherwise based on one of Apple's pitch charts, again, I'm going to save my breath.
I guess I will bow to your superior experience with the devices - please, tell us about how much time you've spent using VR/AR systems, what you've done with them. You certainly wouldn't just be bringing that attitude based only on having watched a few youtube videos and read a few William Gibson novels. Right?
There can be many reasons why it wouldn’t be a requirement to purchase in store, and why it cannot be tied so an Apple ID upon purchase. I’ll list a couple with first being many of a Apple items are purchased as gifts and this would be no different, secondly many people who use a Apple have disabilities and cannot make it to a store or it would very difficult to go to a store.
You keep going on about the type of connection it will use to a Mac but the truth is users don’t care. We care that it just works and works well, which it will.
Because the Mac played a role in developing the iPad, and over the years the iPhone and iPad gained features from the Mac, it doesn’t mean Apple is trying to make the iPad more like the Mac or any other computer. It’s a shame that your take away on the iPad becoming a more versatile device is that it’s becoming more like a Mac.
It is expected for Mac sales to go down year over year because house holds don’t buy new Mac’s every year like they do iPhones. For example in an extended family household, it’s more likely to have more iPhones than computers. Another reason is the Mac isn’t the daily device for most people like the iPhone is. Most people could and would leave home without their Mac but wouldn’t dare leave home without their phone.
Again back to the 3D, AR and VR space, I’m neither a professional on any of these matters. But when you speak of stereoscopic workspace and volumetric modeling it sounds like you’re saying if the Vision Pro doesn’t do one or the other or both the traditional way, or they way you know it to be, that it cannot do any of these things proper or better or just good enough the give the user a great experience. This device isn’t a concept. Whatever Apple says it can do, it surely can do it well.
In the year that had *zero* new iPads and one "new" Mac (15" Air), that is actually quite incredible that mac/iPad sales are so resilient. M3 Pro MBP's are counted in Q4 2023.
In my opinion I think the reason why the Vision Pro be priced so high other than Apple Products are usually high in price is that they want the developers and the hard core users to obtain it first not the tech junkies that just have to have the latest technology. There are three main reasons I will never buy a vision pro other than the high price.
- The Vision Pro needs to be adjust for eye sight. I wish it was more like photographer's camera with it would have a diopter adjustment instead. (I know I am going to catch flack with optometrists 🤣)
- I personally don't like something that is on my head for a long period of time and I don't specifically see it being useful for most people. I think it would be great for specialized areas like training doctors as an example?
- The last point probably could be possibly be consider an extension of number 2, but I don't think it is. I think it will become a glorified gaming device for most people along with Apples abysmal track record when it comes to video games makes it a non-starter for me.
Knowing Tim Cook if he can get enough people but it for $3500 the next will be $4000. This isn’t Steve Jobs we are talking about who would have captured the market at a low price point just to get you more into the Apple eco system. Cook only cares about the profits and shareholders.