$500/year subscription, with a two year commit out of the gate? DOA.
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.
Won’t this replace vision pro for a lot of you?
- Thread starter CrysisDeu
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think when the mainstream version of AVP is announced, the ecosystem is going be much more expansive than it is today.
I don’t see your claim (acknowledging it’s prefaced with a big “IF”) actually being the reality of how early adopters are primarily using the AVP.
Honestly if visor was even half as good as it claimed, and not $1000, I’d be interested in trying it out. I constantly need multiple screens everywhere for my job.
I just don’t see this or AVP being for me yet, but I do see them as two clearly distinct types of products as well.
It's not a third the price. It's $1,000 + $500/year. It's the same price over a 5 year depreciation period for a lot less functionality and a whole lot less confidence in the manufacturer.
I can't even find an "About the company" link anywhere on that page.
My expectation when the AVP was announced / released was that other companies would start putting forth a more serious effort in the AR / VR space, and that would inevitably cause better and better tech to start rolling out. The AVP (while absolutely nowhere near the first VR headset) was simply a catalyst to get the ball moving more in this field. IMHO, thats what I think we are seeing with this headset. This looks promising, albeit slightly annoying or sketchy with this membership thing (I just gave that a quick glance, so dont shoot me over that impression). Im hoping to see more upwards trajectory in this space, and I am willing to wait another 3-5 years before jumping into AR / VR so that the technology will get better due to competition.
The company is Qualcomm, they’re just not being forthcoming about it 😉
If it’s not standalone I refuse to purchase it, simple as that. Even when I played PCVR I would use an original quest headset because it had its own processing and wasn’t tethered to a computing device to function. I can live having to hold my AVP battery in my pocket, I’d rather carry a large headset and battery than a visor and a laptop.
This product is literally just the next generation of the components coming into production.
A poster in this thread was highlighting “better” screens than the AVP, without realizing that it’s just using the next version of the the microLED screens that AVP uses. Sony’s product roadmap makes that clear.
This is a Qualcomm hardware demo for their XR chipset. Everything else is literally off the shelf.
That’s not talking down on it, it’s interesting tech, but none of this has been developed by the “Imersion” company other than what seems to be a very thin OS to tie the standard components (latest gen) together.
No, but I can see it being at least 10 to 20x more popular than Vision Pro amongst developers and all forms of creative professionals. This is a potentially useful computer accessory, whereas Vision Pro is an overpriced toy.Most of the people I’ve heard using vision pro is for screen mirroring and focusing.
Won’t this product be a direct replacement that’s even lighter so you can wear all day?
Visor
With Visor, bring 4K OLED displays everywhere you go. No more physical monitors. Visor is portable, sleek, and lighter than a smartphone. It fits in the palm of your hand or in your bag. Compatible with Windows, Mac, and Linux. Pre-order today. Ships 2024.www.visor.com
AAAAND - The VP can display more than one from a Mac. Apple chose to limit it at launch but there are third party apps that enable more than one display from one Mac. Besides, the Visor can only physically connect to one device at a time, right? Which is the best way to connect and take advantage of that nVideo monster you have in your PC, yeah?
I don't trust the language used on their web site and instead choose to use the knowledge I have about how this stuff works. Don't think they can pack the processing power they would need in their glasses with current technologies.
Anyone else here thinking like I am that some people are trying to sell this thing to us and have a vested interest in the company? This thing doesn't pass the smell test.
Consider what they claim the display screen specs are. The cost alone of the Vision pro screens is $456. And as has been proven here, the "membership" costs are quite misleading. To have a warranty and access to feature updates, you have to have a subscription. Seems the min. membership is 1 year, let's look at that for a second with the "regular 4K" cost:
$399.99 you pay now for the 4K with silver stems and midnight shield. Then, you pay $39.99/mo for two years or $959.76 for a total of $1359.75.
Say you choose to go with the 1 year option. The monthly costs go up to $59.99. Total cost is then $719.88. You save some money there making your total $1119.87. But, what if you want to keep getting updates, warranty, etc. Well, go for another year and the total then becomes $1839.75. This is for the same thing. So choose wisely if you decide to go with this device. If - it ever comes
I seriously would love for a device to come out that can do everything they claim the Visor can do. It would be cool to have a glasses like device that gives you what we have with the VP today. That's probably where we are going to end up eventually. The tech isn't there yet.
Just look up the specs of the Snapdragon XR gen 2 and you’ll know what this device is capable of. This device is clearly a Qualcomm POC for their processor.
Snapdragon XR2 Gen 2 Platform
The Snapdragon® XR2 Gen 2 Platform unlocks breathtaking new worlds. This new premium tier, purpose-built platform powers thrilling virtual reality to high-fidelity mixed reality experiences. The Snapdragon XR2 Gen 2 single chip architecture is optimized for breathtaking visuals, intuitive...
There's a reason why Apple chose to build a new processor for the extraneous camera, eye tracking, etc. stuff. The M2 is a pretty strong processor. Looked up the XR get 2, doesn't seem like it's much better. At least they say it can do 12 ms passthrough like the AVP can.
Oh trust me, nobody is anywhere close to what Apple is doing, because they’ve been planning for the R1 sensor fusion and AR capabilities at the hardware level for well over a decade.
I’m just pointing out that this device is Qualcomm’s reference device stripped of tons of capability and repositioned as a screen peripherals rather than an actual attempt at spatial computing.
How much time have you spent on an AVP? Or for that matter with Immersion running on other platforms that they support (Quest 3 for example?) Or are you just guessing and hypothesizing? Seems like you are hypothesizing to me. In my experience using the 1 Mac Screen, it’s okay because I can make it large but as experiences and productivity goes, I do prefer multiple windows, one app per window. Much easier to use. I don’t have problems with the UI.
It’s not that I am against multiple screens. On my desktop system I run 3 monitors, 2 ASD (5k) and an LG 4k, but thats not the same as cramming all of them into a space that is at MOST 4k (and each screen less) I would suggest small screens of fixed dimensions and placement meant to simulate larger screens are going to look good in pictures, not so much in use. But I will find out as Immersion claims to be releasing their App soon for the AVP. It will be interesting to see how it works. I imagine they have some way of taking the one out of 5 screens you are looking at and expanding it to take advantage of the 4k. But at that point, to me, that looks like just running different desktops on a Mac. I might be wrong. I am also interested in seeing how they go from all the small screens to one large 3D screen for movie entertainment. Filling one of those small screens wont do it for me. Time will tell, but I am willing to bet we see an Immersive App on the AVP long before anyone reports on using a Visor, much less owning one.
And while on the topic for things to question, how well will Apple TV work on the Visor? It says it’s great for watching movies. Whats the source of movies? Because, I know this will shock you, right now I am in the Apple ecosystem, so to view my digital content I need Apple TV supported. Yes I have digitized some movie files I can transfer (ripped from DVD’s and blue ray), but eh, that’s a pain. And I do like to watch movies remotely. I can do that now on the AVP. Will I be able to on the Visor? Maybe.
Still would like to know more about battery life, how it interacts with my computer, what local apps it might have. The questions really do go on and on.
Right now their web site is mostly a marketing ploy with as many ‘ore-order now’ buttons as any real content. Just hard to get too excited about. But I am a person that puts his money where his mouth, I am willing to go out on a limb and buy their App when they release it. Not willing to pre-order the visor. Apparently you aren't either.
Replace? No. Totally different device. It seems to handle one of AVP's use cases pretty well, but offers nothing more. AVP is stuck as little more than a Mac Mirror because the software sucks, not because it can't do 800 more things hardware wise.
Would I mirror my mac if I could use AVP with anything but a Magic trackpad (which I don't own, and there's no way I'm buying a new lighting port powered device in 2024)? Barely.
Would there be come really simple, kick ass apps to make the AVP super useful if the OS allowed an app tracking data in
the shared space? Absolutely.
If we had access to the Thunderbolt port that is pinned out on the right audio strap and could input video or use external sotrage, etc, would the use cases expand exponentially overnight? Totally.
What if VisionOS figured out how to do the basic task of sharing an augmented space, leaving virtual notes, watching a film together, etc.?
Fix those limitations that are really only software, include the dev strap as standard, and Vision Pro might be the last computing and content device I buy. It would replace everything else!
It's always been obvious that there are much better HMDs for simple screen mirroring, VisionOS is meant to replace, not augment other devices, it's just not there yet. Is there an argument that VisionOS maybe should have launched on a smaller device with hardware that more aligned with its software limitations? Maybe, but I for one am here for VisionOS to grow in usefulness not shrink to being just a display tech for MacOS
Would I mirror my mac if I could use AVP with anything but a Magic trackpad (which I don't own, and there's no way I'm buying a new lighting port powered device in 2024)? Barely.
Would there be come really simple, kick ass apps to make the AVP super useful if the OS allowed an app tracking data in
the shared space? Absolutely.
If we had access to the Thunderbolt port that is pinned out on the right audio strap and could input video or use external sotrage, etc, would the use cases expand exponentially overnight? Totally.
What if VisionOS figured out how to do the basic task of sharing an augmented space, leaving virtual notes, watching a film together, etc.?
Fix those limitations that are really only software, include the dev strap as standard, and Vision Pro might be the last computing and content device I buy. It would replace everything else!
It's always been obvious that there are much better HMDs for simple screen mirroring, VisionOS is meant to replace, not augment other devices, it's just not there yet. Is there an argument that VisionOS maybe should have launched on a smaller device with hardware that more aligned with its software limitations? Maybe, but I for one am here for VisionOS to grow in usefulness not shrink to being just a display tech for MacOS
This doesn't exist yet. It's hard to say how useful it is before people can try it. There's more to a vision product than its weight-- yes they are advertising against one of the critical shortcomings of current headsets, but did they get the rest of the product right? Lighter but with more eyestrain may not be a tradeoff people want, for example.
People are falling for the headline price and ignoring the true cost of ownership.
Maybe they nailed it, but I'll remain skeptical.
Last edited:
I don't think so:
They're using Qualcomm parts, but the company doesn't appear to be a Qualcomm division. They also have support for AVP and Quest, this is just their in house attempt at hardware.
I think behind the scenes they’ve partnered with Qualcomm as a 3rd party trial balloon. This company doesn’t seem large enough to have the Capital Expense requirements to land the component deals for an extremely limited market (microLEDs).I don't think so:
They're using Qualcomm parts, but the company doesn't appear to be a Qualcomm division. They also have support for AVP and Quest, this is just their in house attempt at hardware.
Yeah my point of the post is this statement is true at this moment
If the software doesn’t evolve, or doesn’t evolve fast enough, then the first gen AVP might not be as useful (including the weight etc) as this product
That I'll believe-- but that's different than being Qualcomm. It's a small startup that got Qualcomm's interest as a demo platform. But they don't have Qualcomms resources, and they don't appear to have a background in manufacturing.
That was the point I was making-- I'll be shocked if this product, and a bit surprised if this company, are around in 5 years.
Oh I’m in the same boat. I just think that Qualcomm has granted them money or provided some sort of massive discount on chips as a showcase.
I don’t mean it’s literally a Qualcomm subsidiary. I just mean that this “product” is far too big an undertaking for this company to handle, so someone behind the scenes is making deals.
I think this is a trial balloon product. I don’t think immersion could possibly get the orders for these screens without something else happening in the background here.
Forget the cost, this is a different product with a different use case. One that actually has a chance of being popular.
Not for the current price point. Maybe for 100$ i can try it putMost of the people I’ve heard using vision pro is for screen mirroring and focusing.
Won’t this product be a direct replacement that’s even lighter so you can wear all day?Visor
With Visor, bring 4K OLED displays everywhere you go. No more physical monitors. Visor is portable, sleek, and lighter than a smartphone. It fits in the palm of your hand or in your bag. Compatible with Windows, Mac, and Linux. Pre-order today. Ships 2024.
Do you have much real-world experience using the AVP? Because the distinction you're hoping to make between windows and screens has been mostly meaningless in my experience. I frequently use the mirrored screen from my macbook pro AND several native apps in their own windows as well. I've even bought an app (SplitScreen) that allows me to mirror a 2nd screen from my Mac. BUT, I've rarely used it because the combination between 1 screen and multiple apps and windows does what I need.
I'm not only using my AVP for screen mirroring; but I use the screen mirroring. That's only 1 of many uses I have for the AVP. The product that Apple sold me, even more than the hardware, was VisionOS. Just as I buy into the Apple Eco System, I'm buying into VisionOS. All of you saying that the OS doesn't really matter are nowhere close to convincing me.
As others have said, there as so many details lacking on the site that I have a hard time believing this product is even close to launching. Next to no specs. Contradictory statements. Does it have eye tracking or doesn't it? How solid does it work? Good for them for trying to launch a product into the space, but absent a solid OS, with a company with a proven track record of building a solid OS, I have no way of judging this product.
And then, Price...this thing is $1400 with the hint that you need to keep paying subscriptions going forward or you lose out on basics like software updates, warranties, etc. Fine. If you want to finance the purchase of your product that way, go for it. But it's disingenuous to say this device costs "x" amount less, when 1) the hardware isn't nearly as robust, the OS is almost non-existent, and you'll need to keep paying in the future.
But then again, this discussion gets lost with Meta as well; Meta is selling the Quest at a loss because they hope to subsidize the hardware with services and data collection, making YOU the product. Everyone who says "the quest costs 7x times less!" is ignoring the fact that Meta is LOSING money just selling the device they are selling.
Same here. The cost of this device is dishonest. And hardware wise, it's not comparable to the AVP. And Software wise it's not comparable to the AVP. It is advertised to do 1 thing and one thing only: screen mirroring. As others have said, it's like comparing a monitor to a computer and saying "which one is better?!?" They are different devices.
So, we'll see. Or more likely, we won't.
As others have said, there as so many details lacking on the site that I have a hard time believing this product is even close to launching. Next to no specs. Contradictory statements. Does it have eye tracking or doesn't it? How solid does it work? Good for them for trying to launch a product into the space, but absent a solid OS, with a company with a proven track record of building a solid OS, I have no way of judging this product.
And then, Price...this thing is $1400 with the hint that you need to keep paying subscriptions going forward or you lose out on basics like software updates, warranties, etc. Fine. If you want to finance the purchase of your product that way, go for it. But it's disingenuous to say this device costs "x" amount less, when 1) the hardware isn't nearly as robust, the OS is almost non-existent, and you'll need to keep paying in the future.
But then again, this discussion gets lost with Meta as well; Meta is selling the Quest at a loss because they hope to subsidize the hardware with services and data collection, making YOU the product. Everyone who says "the quest costs 7x times less!" is ignoring the fact that Meta is LOSING money just selling the device they are selling.
Same here. The cost of this device is dishonest. And hardware wise, it's not comparable to the AVP. And Software wise it's not comparable to the AVP. It is advertised to do 1 thing and one thing only: screen mirroring. As others have said, it's like comparing a monitor to a computer and saying "which one is better?!?" They are different devices.
So, we'll see. Or more likely, we won't.
Last edited: