They Paid $3,500 for Apple's Vision Pro. A Year Later, It Still Hurts

I'm the opposite. I backed the DK1 but it was unusable to me. Way too nauseating. The high persistence tablet display was horrible, the pixels were so massive.

Then when Facebook took them over they finally had the chance to buy first class custom made components instead of going for scraps from the mobile industry. I don't like Facebook/meta either but their cash was desperately needed.

I also really appreciated the gift of the Rift consumer version, they were under no obligation to do that.

There are definitely a few with UX problems, and there are a few apps completely missing - like ProtonMail - but overall bringing iOS and iPadOS apps into visionOS feels pretty natural.

If visionOS is to succeed, that's how it will do it. visionOS and iOS/iPadOS will continue to be developed in parallel, with new UX conventions slowly making their way to the traditional devices. Over time, apps built using Apple's platform will "just work" in visionOS as well.

In fact, while I hadn't thought about it until now, that's probably exactly why they're doing a visual refresh of iOS 19. Reporting seems to emphasize the "visionOS style" widgets, and it's apparent to me at least that that's going to lead to deeper and more complete integration between the platforms.

I don't think Apple is done with Spatial Computing. I wish the Vision Pro had done a bit better, especially its native software ecosystem, but I don't think it has been a failure at all. There were likely lots of reasons they launched it: to test the market's readiness for the product, to introduce new UX conventions, to get direct user feedback, to allow developers onto the platform, etc. They didn't have to make money on the Vision Pro (though, I think they did).

People here are always saying how hard it is to build a hardware startup; how just _shipping the product_ is a milestone that most of them never reach. Hardware is hard. I see the Vision Pro as Apple applying Agile to hardware. They shipped an MVP. It's not a "VR headset", it's a "Spatial Computing device". That lets them see how people actually use it, refine, and iterate.

The only reason you don't see this approach more often is that most companies have neither the capital nor the risk tolerance to do it. Apple spent $30B on R&D in FY2023.

The software library for the Quest is almost entirely games.

To Apple’s credit, nearly every iPad app works on it unless the developer specifically opts out.

I don’t think the issue is how Apple treats developers, it’s simply a matter of market share. Making apps for Vision Pro won’t be profitable until there are a lot more users.

I'm not saying it's a massive endorsement. I'm just pointing out that the niche exists.

It comes with two.

The single band is almost perfect if your light seal is fit well. The weight is distributed against your forehead and cheekbones, and you barely feel it. It feels more like wearing ski goggles than a VR headset.

The problem is that "if" is carrying a lot of weight there. If your light seal isn't quite right for you, it puts too much pressure against your face. If your sinuses are shaped wrong, or your nose is broken in just the wrong way, tightening the strap enough to press it against your face is uncomfortable.

The second strap is inferior in how comfortable and usable it can be, but is much more consistently usable by people regardless of anatomy and fitment. It takes longer to don and doff, and it isn't as "aesthetic", but the top strap pulls the weight up off your cheekbones and puts some of it on the crown of your head.

Overall, I'd suggest trying the single strap. It's super convenient and can work well. If it doesn't work for you, try the dual strap. If that's better, invest in a good third-party solution that strikes the right balance of comfort, security, and portability for you.

Maybe they'll sell that as a $400 upgrade, like that $1000 monitor stand...

Like let’s be real here. The first thing I did was fire up a massive browser and went straight to pornhub.

Nope. It's not the best device for that.

I'm not a big consumer of porn - not a value judgement, just context. Still, I've made it a point to go out to the big sites every couple of months just to see where the industry as a whole is with streaming VR content.

The company behind most of the VR-specific sites also appears to be behind DeoVR. It's finally getting to the point that it may be practical for a company to stream VR content smoothly at a resolution that's acceptable for things like "virtual coworking".

As for porn, if that's what you want the AVP isn't the right product for you. You want image quality and software support. Right now, that would probably be the Quest 3. There are others out there with better image quality (Pimax, Bigscreen, etc.) but streaming sites are built around Meta's platform first and foremost.

I have both, and don't see that changing. The Vision Pro just isn't as portable as the iPad Pro.

My current iPad is an 11" 3rd-gen iPad Pro. I bought it in January 2019. I got Apple's keyboard case for it - I don't recall the exact name of that one, but it's the one that has a trackpad and holds the device magnetically. I've carried that thing with me everywhere I've gone for the past 5 1/2 years. The keyboard case is beginning to delaminate on the edges now, but I expect it'll last me another year or two before I upgrade, and even then I'll pass this one down to a family member.

My Vision Pro, on the other hand... I carry it in a dedicated case that's about the size of a shoebox. To use it, I have to remove it from the case, remove the battery from its compartment, plug it in, put it on, wait for it to boot up, log in via eye scan, and only then get the home screen. But wait! I still don't have internet access unless I'm somewhere I've connected to WiFi before. Now I have to connect to my iPhone or iPad to get online.

The point I'm trying to make is simple: they are very different devices, and serve very different niches. I see almost no overlap.

I'd be far more apt to get rid of my iPhone than my iPad. The only reasons I have a phone at all these days are because I use it to fly a couple of drones and that Apple seems to assume that you have an iPhone for much of their ecosystem. I can't set up my kid's Apple Watch from an iPad or Vision Pro.

Well yes and no. It's much better with head tracking. Feels more like you're really in a cinema. A screen glued to your face is weird.

Well they had a little revival every few years. Like during the 320M macs, they paid a few developers to make Mac versions of eg call of duty. Also during the powerpc era they had such a phase. Always short-lived though.

They do have a sizable part of the mobile gaming market though it's not what serious gamers are looking for. But we're not a massive group either compared to the consumer that just wants to shoot a chicken at pigs once in a while.

Right but my question is rather if there's a big enough market to eg make something like the Bigscreen Beyond 2 much more affordable or the Pimax Crystal Light much lighter.

I'm not into VR stuff and it still seems like an extremely niche thing. I have friends who are into VR but they have spent way too much money into it considering a driving chair, steering wheel, pedals, high spec PC, etc.