Apple Could Release $2,000 'Apple Vision' Headset Next Year (macrumors.com) 45
Apple is working on a more affordable $2,000 "Apple Vision" spatial computing headset that could be launched as early as next year, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman. MacRumors reports: The new headset would be a lower-end counterpart to the $3,500 Apple Vision Pro, which was released in February. Apple reportedly expects this more affordable model to sell at least twice as many units as the Vision Pro, though "that's not saying much," adds Gurman. Apple will struggle to hit 500,000 Vision Pro sales this year, according to market tracker IDC.
To achieve the lower price point, the Apple Vision would likely use a less powerful processor and cheaper materials than aluminum and glass. The device is also expected to omit certain inessential features, such as the EyeSight display that shows the user's eyes on the outside of the headset. Apple could also use larger, lower resolution displays for the more affordable version of the Vision Pro headset, according to previous reports. Gurman also notes that Apple is working on a second-generation Vision Pro, slated for release in 2026, and a separate smart glasses device to accompany the Vision headsets.
To achieve the lower price point, the Apple Vision would likely use a less powerful processor and cheaper materials than aluminum and glass. The device is also expected to omit certain inessential features, such as the EyeSight display that shows the user's eyes on the outside of the headset. Apple could also use larger, lower resolution displays for the more affordable version of the Vision Pro headset, according to previous reports. Gurman also notes that Apple is working on a second-generation Vision Pro, slated for release in 2026, and a separate smart glasses device to accompany the Vision headsets.
Too expensive (Score:3, Funny)
The Meta Quest 3S VR headset is priced at $299.99 for the 128 GB model and $399.99 for the 256 GB model. It is $200 Cheaper Than the last model, the Quest 3 and $1,700 cheaper than the Apple Vision.
Still, people like luxury tech so maybe Apple just needs to figure out the right number. I'm not buying it though. I am probably going to break down and buy one of those stupid Digital Notebooks too, so I love luxury tech.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe I'm a luddite, but I like reducing the amount of screens I have to deal with to as few as possible. I don't have hours in the day to spend time with a headset. Maybe the cool kits driving their Cybertrucks wearing the Vision Pros are a lot more common than I, but I rather spend money on stuff that might go for retirement than toys which become laughingstock items in a few years. I just don't have time for game consoles, VR headsets, and other distractions.
I know that trillions have been thrown at V
Re: (Score:1)
Meta advertises "~20" pixels per degree (ppd) for the Quest 3S. The Apple Vision Pro has about 34 ppd. Your fovea can handle about 60 ppd, so both will be a bit grainy -- but the Meta headset will be noticeably more so. The Quest 3 had about 25 ppd, so it was better than the 3S. Not surprisingly, you get what you pay for. The Quest 3 and 3S might be fine for video games, but probably not good for AR or productivity.
Re: (Score:2)
But what's the use of AR, specifically consumer headset AR.
not a snarky question, it rhetorical, but genuine. On and off I've been adjacent to AR since this uid was new, and I still can't answer the question, so I'm beginning to become skeptical.
The tech is all the latest ones is cool. Really solid.
We're maybe where smartphones were 20 years ago that the tech is expensive and not quite there and rather for enthusiasts only, except that none of the demos have gone beyond "oh cool ok anyway..."
Even longer ago
Re: (Score:2)
Minimally, a headset that still allows you to be aware of your surroundings while you're looking at virtual displays. I love my 8k-by-2k monitor, but it would be nice to have a portable equivalent.
Lots of businesses will have more sophisticated applications: overlays of what a machine is supposed to look like, or overlays of status or internal workings. Hyperspectral imaging or seeing other sensor data. Sure, some of these will need add-ons well beyond the basic AR headset, but it's not hard to think of po
Re: (Score:2)
Minimally, a headset that still allows you to be aware of your surroundings while you're looking at virtual displays. I love my 8k-by-2k monitor, but it would be nice to have a portable equivalent.
I guess... but that's something of a niche consumer use. It's also barely AR in the sense of augmenting reality: you don't need great quality feed through from the environment to be aware of surroundings, only low latency. It's more like VR with reality feed through.
Lots of businesses will have more sophisticated
Re: (Score:1)
The Meta Quest is not even in the same ballpark.
The Apple Vision is a full desktop computer equivalent. The Meta Quest is is equal to a Intel Core i7-5850HQ, basically a 9 year old computer.
People need to look beyond the "well this thing is cheaper." Yeah, and a windows Desktop with an i9-14900K that costs $5000 and a Chromebook with a N4020 that costs $200 are the same distance apart.
It is one thing to look at a device with a similar tier CPU and go "nah, the windows PC is a better value" and it's another
Re: (Score:2)
That "LCD" that shows the users eyes only matters in a corporate environment where people want to check if you are working or sleeping.
An obvious killer app would display your eyes on full alert while you're taking a snooze behind the mask.
Re: (Score:3)
The Apple Vision is a full desktop computer equivalent.
Just because Apple calls it a spatial computer doesn't make it so. Yes, Vision Pro has a powerful CPU, but try to actually use one in place of a desktop computer, and you'll find that it just doesn't make the grade.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. Even if it just had a full Mac OS that ran on a couple windows on within the headset like dual monitors it would be way more useful. Even if you were still at a desk so you could use a physical keyboard and mouse. They could do this by housing the actual computer with the battery you keep in your pocket. As is you need a Mac for it to connect to to achieve a single window within the AVP interface. I have two large monitors and a dock, so I bought a MacBook Pro instead. It was actually even more money, but I got access to way more powerful computer running a real OS. I do hope enough people buy the AVP for it to survive to at least version 3 or 4. That is usually when Apple products usually go beyond expensive toy to useful. But seriously, it needs a full OS if they actually expect people to throw down $3k for one.
The great thing will be if the courts continue forcing Apple to open up their platform, and maybe even push them to put back the hypervisor framework in iOS and, by extension Vision OS. But yeah, as it is right now, it's the world's most overpriced Apple Arcade headset and virtual desktop viewer. Not at all impressed.
Re: (Score:3)
You are mindlessly rattling of pointless technical specifications like this somehow makes it useful. What are the use cases that this thing solves that can't already be addressed by some existing crap VR headset an order of magnitude cheaper? Making something shiny and stuffing it full of newer more expensive components is not much of an accomplishment when there is no real application for it. I'm not going to spend $5k to I can edit spreadsheets in AR/VR.
Right now you'd get more utility out of those $700 M
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but with those Meta devices, don't you have to have or register for a FB account in order to activate and use them?
No thank you...
Re: (Score:2)
The comparable device is the Meta Orion, which even Meta admits isn't a product and won't be for years.
Cheaper materials? (Score:4, Insightful)
From TFS:
cheaper materials than aluminum and glass.
I don't think the price of aluminum and glass is the problem.
Re: (Score:3)
They have to give people some visual/tactile difference to make them feel like one is better than the other.
I don't see how they could compromise functionality to differentiate the lower-end models; there's not much function in these things to cut.
I'd be surprised if they hit even 500,000 sales. But I guess there must be a bunch of tech bros who could stand a bit more taxation.
Re: (Score:3)
The AVP has an outward-facing video screen to display the user's eyes to the people they interact with.
Most people don't want or need this feature.
It has been described as "creepy".
So that's an obvious feature that could be cut.
Re:Cheaper materials? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
They'll probably add a notch in rev 2...
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see how they could compromise functionality to differentiate the lower-end models; there's not much function in these things to cut.
Actually - what if they cut the resolution WAY, WAY DOWN to something like 20x50 and rebranded it as "Apple Vision: Minecraft Edition"?
Re: (Score:2)
They have to give people some visual/tactile difference to make them feel like one is better than the other.
If Apple made it out of space-grade titanium and bulletproof glass, it still would not justify a $3500 price tag.
They keep price points like that up, Apple shareholders are gonna feel something alright. Right in their iWallet.
Re: (Score:2)
"I'd be surprised if they hit even 500,000 sales."
Considering that they are supply constrained on lens manufacture, even Apple would be surprised if they sold more units than they could assemble.
Re: (Score:2)
The price of none of the components is the problem:
https://arstechnica.com/gadget... [arstechnica.com]
At a $2000 price point with this new device they're clearly still not going for the "Sell at a loss and corner the market"-strategy that Meta is (successfully) employing.
Then again, they have their own little garden of locked in faithful zealots, so even if the device ends up being overpriced and underwhelming they'll sell some. In any case them not giving up on VR yet helps the technology in the broader scene move forward,
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder how much it would cost if the sold it at whatever the manufacturing cost is.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: Cheaper materials? (Score:2)
Changing away from those would affect weight
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think the price of aluminum and glass is the problem.
No, but the weight sure is. If it's going to be strapped to my face and supported by my neck, make it out of plastic, please.
Nope (Score:2)
Still too expensive. Still little to no good viable use cases. Still going to be ugly. Still going to be uncomfortable. Still going to be a failure.
Re: (Score:2)
One of those matters more than the rest. Your second point, well if that wasn't the case, then for some there's reason to put up with the others. Unfortunately for AR no one has been able to really find a genuinely compelling use.
Too heavy (Score:2)
The need to figure out how to put the compute module and its fans and all that crap in a separate puck.
Re: (Score:2)
The need to figure out how to put the compute module and its fans and all that crap in a separate puck.
There's already a separate "puck" for the battery, so it would make sense to make it bigger and move the compute module there.
I'd much rather have an extra 100 grams in my pocket than attached to my face.
Re: (Score:2)
The need to figure out how to put the compute module and its fans and all that crap in a separate puck.
There's already a separate "puck" for the battery, so it would make sense to make it bigger and move the compute module there.
I'd much rather have an extra 100 grams in my pocket than attached to my face.
This. Though they would still need a detachable battery so you can switch batteries, because two hours of battery life just doesn't cut it. It's like using a mid-1990s PowerBook all over again. :-)
Fire the design leads. (Score:1)
Apple spent billions of dollars developing this thing and itâ(TM)s just a knockoff of the Meta Quest that costs much more and doesnâ(TM)t come with gaming controllers. The people running the design team screwed the pooch on this one and itâ(TM)s time for heads to roll and get someone in touch with reality to unfuck this project.
It's Apple (Score:2)
From the people who brought you the Mac Pro Wheels Kit: https://www.apple.com/shop/pro... [apple.com]
The headset can cost $300, but:
Apple Head Straps: $2500
Apple USB Cable: $1999
Apple HeadSet Stand: $1500
All wrapped up in a gluten-free, free ranged, 200% recycled cardboard box with a negative carbon footprint :|
Sales Quantity Estimates (Score:2)
Apple reportedly expects this more affordable model to sell at least twice as many units as the Vision Pro
So, twice as many sales, at least as many returns. All three remaining users will be very happy. Oh wait, no mention of ditching the tethered battery pack and/or increasing battery life... leaving two very happy users.
paupers can now rejoice (Score:1)
Next gen VR? (Score:2)
In a random conversation this morning a Home Depot employee told me he and his friend have figured out a way to do VR without a headset, which they're working on turning into a business. I didn't ask how they were doing it because I knew he wouldn't be able to reveal it, but I'm very tantalized. Looking forward to this new development and hoping it's real. Just so I can point back to this comment if it comes true, the guy's name happens to be the same as a well-known agro company.
struggling ? (Score:3)
Apple will struggle to hit 500,000 Vision Pro sales this year
I'd like to have that kind of struggle. A $3500 a piece, that's $ 1,750,000,000 - 1.75 billion in revenue. With Apple's typically high margins, that's a few hundred millions in profit. "struggling" my ass.
Re: (Score:2)
It's unlikely the Vision Pro commands the kind of high margins that Apple is known for in their phones and laptops. It's a breakout niche device for them designed to build market presence, they have always been priced competitively. Otherwise they could have just lowered the price they have right now.
Revenue alone doesn't tell you anything, especially when you not only don't include the cost of production but also ignore the cost of R&D. This has by every metrical including financial ones been a huge fa
Re: (Score:2)
The margin may be smaller than on an iPhone, but I would be surprised if it weren't still pretty nice.
Yes, R&D obviously is a part of the high price. Do you have any numbers that indicated 1.75 billion (revenue, profit unknown) doesn't cover the R&D ?
Who is designing it? (Score:2)
Dan Rico the man who spearheaded the Vision Pro development left Apple conveniently just after the Quest 3S launched. I do wonder if his replacement will course correct, at $2000 I'm not hopeful.
Cheaper (Score:2)
How do you get much cheaper than aluminum and glass?
Two product categories (Score:2)
I have been wanting a high resolution pair of VR goggles for a virtual display workstation setup.
The app Immersed finally delivers on the software side, but the Quest 3 is not quite high resolution enough to replace my 8K monitor setup.
I have not had a chance to test Immersed in a Apple Vision Pro, but I suspect it might just do the trick; the two downsides being price and weight.
A new more affordable Apple Vision Pro would be amazing, but reducing the resolution is the last cost cutting option I want.
I say