The Vision Pro is Apple's new 1984 Mac: costly, near useless, and absolutely at odds with how we use computers today. But it will change the world.
[dead]
Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine
131–140 of 213 posts
Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine
#132The fact that Apple is still using a difference of 256GB storage to jump the price $200 is really funny to me. This is already a wildly premium device, but they just can't resist trying to scrape a little bit more.
It is absurd that Apple is still charging laughable amounts of money for tiny, inexpensive components. It was somewhat justifiable before when their products were simply better than anything else. Now, everyone else has caught up on quality, and charge vastly less. Even worse, Apple no longer innovates and simply doesn't care about making things that work.
For example, I bought an OLED Windows laptop that was nearly $2000 less than an identically equipped Apple device. Side by side, the Windows unit has better screen and at least equivalent chassis, keyboard, sound, and it has a better touchpad.
I have an iphone, and its primary purpose after being a phone is nav in my cars. 75% failure rate the last 4 trips I tried to use it for. Failure as in black screen. This is on top of Apple's increasingly useless nav that has tried to take me out into the boonies more times than I can count.
Eventually, people are going to tire of being insulted with high prices and subpar products and switch. I'm already there. The days of me paying to fuel Tim Cook's yacht are over.
Apple's headset is so poorly done that it is clear there is deep rot at the top of Apple. When I first saw that absurd front screen, I physically laughed out loud. How anyone at Apple let that through to final product is beyond me. Anyone who brought that crap to Jobs would have been fired on the spot.
Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine
#133Most people are dreaming of currently-impossible lightweight AR glasses.
I think this is a product trap, trying to skip too many steps.
It is like trying to build a smartphone in the 70s.
They should go for a helmet.
And I don't mean even bulkier ski-goggles, but a real full face helmet, fighter-pilot or biker style. Full of high-tech hardware but balanced in a way that makes it useable for more than 20 minutes.
It is niche, but there is a market for that, the high-end simulation dudes are already forking good money into hardware. And that could also be useful as an actual tool.
From there, they could build the most important part: the software, and slowly improve the form factor.
Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine
#134Why on Earth can people return these for non-fault reasons?! It's the other customers who bear the cost to cover this - like indecisive ditzy clothes shoppers who order huge numbers of items knowing they'll return 90% of them.
Beyond the individual return you have to look at how many additional sales this generates (e.g. from the "gee it's nice but I'm not sure I want to bet $5,000 I'll like it 10 days from now" folks) vs the retention rate of these additional sales (e.g. "Well x% do decide to return it because they didn't like it) in combination with your per sale margin and restock costs. I.e. if you just look at the individual return it seems stupid, if you look at the overall sales picture it's often a way to generate more profit.
Or, another way to put it, if it's so certainly causing a loss other customers have to bear why would the company promote the return policy and lose out on that margin from paying customers?
Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
We’ve had consumer VR headsets on the market for 8 years now (Oculus Rift CV1). Why would apps suddenly start appearing now, what makes Apple so different?
People actually spend money on the App Store.
Not everything is going to be a repeat of the iPhone, lol.
Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
I genuinely think Apple wanted this to be relatively unpalatable to the typical consumer. They want to build something to prove their tech is the future, but don’t actually want anyone to buy this iteration. Why? Because they need developers to make worthwhile apps. Yes, the original iPhone shipped without an App Store, but it could also do regular phone stuff (calls, sms, etc). What’s the “regular” stuff you’d expec…
> I genuinely think Apple wanted this to be relatively unpalatable to the typical consumer. Based on what? Apple cultivates this myth that they wait to enter a market until they can produce the best device in the market. So, I disagree, I think Apple thinks this is the best device they could have built right now and it's for everyone with $3500 to drop on it.
There's a point where you can't further your product without getting it into the
hands of actual consumers. We saw it with the Apple Watch after the first version it became less a communication device, and more a health and fitness device.
I do think Apple thought this was the best device they could make that did this thing, but estimates are that they can make about 800k of these things. I think the price point intentionally pushes it away from the typical consumer. They want early adopters. Mostly they want developers.
Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine
#137This is not a regular product. It's a prototype. The goal is not to sell a lot of units nor compete with existing VR sets. They probably want: - Get feedback - See how the end consumer use it - See what programmers can built In other words, it's the Apple version of a MVP. Minimal Viable Product
https://www.apple.com/apple-vision-pro/
They don't market it as a "developer device" or a "prototype." They are selling this as a consumer product. Watch movies! Look at pics of your family! It's your new giant computer monitor! Facetime with your friends while you're cooking and packing your luggage!
Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine
#138> The other usefulness problem is visionOS’ iPad heritage. Maybe a completely locked-down computer for $1,000 is OK, but for a geek who likes to tinker, and at this price? It’s too much of a content consumption device at the moment. I love watching a movie or TV show, but I want to do stuff beyond the walled garden. > $5,013 Man does this really cut to the heart of it. It has a Mac chip, it costs as much as a high en…
I agree. Some folks really want this to succeed because we haven't had a breakthrough product for a while and this is beautifully constructed. However, I'm keep reminded of the trash can Mac Pro; it's a totally wrong form factor.
If they can make it less bulky, less heavy, similar to even Magic Leap 2, it would have a wider appeal.
Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
With thin laptops you can maybe justify that as a necessary compromise for the form factor, but there's no good reason the Mac Studio shouldn't have a hatch on the bottom with two or three M.2 2280 slots inside. You can put your own PCIe SSDs in the Mac Pro, but that's so wildly marked up compared to an equivalently specced Mac Studio that it probably cancels out any savings.
A PCIe/NVME adapter costs $10 on Amazon.
To USB you mean? The cheap ones only do 10gbps, not even a quarter of the speed a PCIe4 drive is capable of. 40gbps adapters are up in the ~$100 range.
Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine
#140>2.It’s not there yet >3.It’s not useful >4.It’s very expensive Are any of these surprising? I'm a AR/VR skeptic so maybe I have a more negative view than most but these things seem self evident to me.
It isn't surprising that the software isn't there yet. It is more unexpected that the hardware isn't. While not perfect, other VR headsets do work well for their intended use cases of gaming and video. The Vision has significantly higher resolution than any of them, but it turns out that it still isn't high enough for the use cases Apple had in mind, even after compromising FOV to improve PPD. People have gotten used to using iOS apps at retina quality, and having to either view them blown up or blurry with the Vision isn't a great experience.