Apple just killed Meta - Marketing Expert's Opinion

[@Utoko]

Meta killed Meta

[@PeteJudo1]

Truth

[@obsidian1710]

While I understand what you're saying... Meta will still be selling more Quest 3s than any other headset this year.

[@Aggie4life77]

@@obsidian1710 yes but that’s more of a gaming headset than anything else. That’s it’s focus even though it’s a mixed reality set. They themselves would need to come out with a Quest Pro 2 or something with much higher specs to come close to Apple experience.

[@obsidian1710]

​@@Aggie4life77 Yeah... I know. It's a silly comparison, I didn't make it. I was responding to the comment, and video title, that did.

[@ConservativeJuggaloPodcast]

@@obsidian1710 maybe. I think a LOT of people bought a Quest 2 cuz people saw a $299 sticker price for VR & wanted to try it, and most of them didn't hook it to a PC, and got poor graphics because of it, which is my theory on why 18 million Quest owners aren't using their headset and only 2 million are. The Quest 3 comes along at $500, might make Meta #2 in the industry behind Sony, which has a massive head start with 600,000 headsets sold in just 6 weeks. They're def at 1 million + by now, and that's with a soft launch. Sony has plans for exclusive content as well as more bundles with box art like the horizon bundle, I'm positive of it. They had a Doom bundle, a skyrim bundle, a Gran Turismo bundle, an iron man bundle, and theybsold 5 million headsets to an audience of only 118 million PS4 owners. Now Playstation VR has a base, plus curious new buyers & I think once Aliens & Low Fi drop things will heat up. No its not enough but I'm certain other games are in development for the coming years. A slow steady trickle is better then a massive dump of crap games and adds up over time. I also think Bigscreen will do well with the Beyond, especially since they're financing it at $32 a month for 36 months, and looks more compact then Ready Player One goggles

[@jamesjonnes]

I've seen some people who used the Vision talking, nobody mentioned anything about flickering. They said the experience is exactly like the promotional videos.

[@PeteJudo1]

I hope it’s true!

[@Sporkula1]

About the 3D recording… what if Apple is planning on making future iPhones with the ability to record in 3D? That would solve all the awkwardness. You could record on your iPhone and the footage could be transferred to your headset. The iPhone could easily have two cameras at eye-length apart, and use a LiDAR sensor.

[@PeteJudo1]

Yep. What I said too

[@fisherflush]

no you cant record 3d with iPhone the same way as with the Vision 3d cause cameras must be at at eye distance , iphone with such setup would look way ugly , basically you need to camers at far ends of an iphone and you can shoot only horizontally))

[@Sporkula1]

@@fisherflush You obviously didn’t read my full comment. At the end of my comment I explain how the iPhone could have two cameras at eye distance away. And no, they aren’t that far away. Put your phone up to your eyes and it wouldn’t be that far apart. That’s your subjective opinion that it would be ugly. Basically everything you’ve just said is wrong.

[@mitchell10394]

Also, you could just record without actually putting the headset on your head… I can’t believe no one has mentioned this.

[@themodifiedlife2774]

The whole point of having the 3d on the vison pro is to see it with ur eyes where it puts up back in the memory like ur still there. And it’s just the start of this new technology and of course right now it seems weird that no one will be walking around daily with this thing but guarantee it will be the normal in a few years and you’ll see everybody wearing them

[@Wolverine2222]

This is the first generation. Imagine 3 generations from now.

[@bradstewart7007]

I know. If all they did is make it cheaper year on year, this would still be a killer device with 2024 specs in 2030. I remember someone complaining about features missing from the iPhone 1 and said it's an awesome device and it's the worst iPhone Apple will ever make.

[@strengthbydesign]

Vision Pro looks like the nailed it, it’s nothing like the existing (toys) this is serious for leisure and productivity. I’m getting one, I’ve never ever seen a version 1 product be so amazing before, not even the iPhone, not the iPod, not even the mac

[@nickrog6759]

Meta is in its 3rd Stage of its vision come the launch & sale of the Quest 3 . Apple on the other hand has been acquiring engineers , IP , Companies & making patents since 2015 for its own project . Meta kills its own perception its own vision a little bit at a time but then grabs random handfuls back ! Apple is Apple , Elegant & Premium . Meta is Meta .

[@ahhcmon9604]

Yet the apple vision is a heartbreaking vomit inducing 96hz VR at 96hz is nauseating that's why people get sick from VR

[@gamers-xh3uc]

@@ahhcmon9604 it’s not Vr is AR so is really hard to get nausea from the Apple one cause it’s like having nothing on

[@NN-sp9tu]

@@ahhcmon9604 afaik there has been a study that showed 90hz is the threshold below which vr becomes nauseating, so maybe it's enough. Probably varies by individual. Are you speaking from experience?

[@NN-sp9tu]

@@gamers-xh3uc This doesn't make any sense.. Your eyes/brain don't care about the difference between AR and VR. You are still seeing the world in 90hz

[@mick7727]

lmao at premium.

[@stephen9462]

Interesting that all the Meta promos are simulated and Apples are the real deal

[@manart6506]

12:20 I don’t think filming with the vision pro isn’t really more awkward that the uncle with the huge VHS camera back then… or even the people with their arms in front of their face with their phones. We got used to that but is still unnatural if you think about it. While someone just walking around recording what they watch is closer to something normal.

[@TheDaniela3112]

It's what I keep saying too plus this is so much better BC the person behind the camera doesn't have to think about filming and miss out on the experience. They can just participate as usual while the headset does all the filming for them

[@manart6506]

@@TheDaniela3112 yeah. Currently I have the intention of recording the familiar events but recording with the iPhone takes me out of the experience a bit so I always hesitate. First Vision pro models will still have the awkward experience of taking out & putting the visor so to start filming but it’s a step closer to just enjoy life while also recording it seamlessly.

[@joy2000cyber]

Apple just made VR, AR, MR mainstream, that will help Meta, because they are aiming at different price markets.

[@GreenInvasion]

Yo mean "mainstream" inside the Apple fanbase?

[@jw8350]

@@JorgTheElderYeah just like Apple didn’t make personal computing mainstream with a $7000 computer decades ago lol

[@Kevin-it4fh]

​@@JorgTheElderthey're making the idea mainstream, and having the first gen that expensive will make the second gen look like a steal at 1k

[@richardbloemenkamp8532]

@@JorgTheElder In every few families there will be a first uncle who is an early adapter buying it. It used to be like that with audio, photo and film equipment, with computers, sports gear, bikes and motorbikes, etc. From there on cheaper products will be developed and those become mainsteam.

[@chunkyMunky329]

They just made everybody aware of their product. That alone doesn't make it mainstream. Everybody is aware of the meta verse, but it isn't mainstream.

[@VRplay86]

Like me not a lot of people have $3499 this is more for business. I'll stick with meta quest for $299 or meta quest 3 for $499

[@genjudah]

I'm so confused??? Is the need for multiple monitors really a thing??? You're telling me video games that everyone I know has is more niche than the need for multiple monitors???? Also I like to watch movies with people.....I must be in bizaro world

[@harrykatsaros]

The AR videos in the Apple demo were recorded using the cameras on the Vision Pro headset. The pass through video is actually that good.

[@ConservativeJuggaloPodcast]

Is there any VR capabilities or is it just advanced AR?

[@Sporkula1]

@@ConservativeJuggaloPodcast The dial at the top of the headset changes it from augmented reality to full virtual reality. So yes, depending on how you define VR.

[@harrykatsaros]

@@ConservativeJuggaloPodcast it’s mixed reality so it does both and you choose how immersive it is by sliding the dial on the headset, similar to an Apple Watch. Worth watching a 5 minute intro video on it. As a PSVR owner I can honestly say that this is totally next level. Nothing like this has ever been achieved before, the pass through AR video quality is nuts.

[@aeontars]

People who used it said the promotional videos were exactly how it is to use. A lot of times products like this have exaggerated or ‘perfected’ fake usages of the software in the ads, but apparently everything you saw in the ad was exactly what the headset does.

[@SeanoldBeasley]

@@aeontars where did they confirm this? I don’t think that it was anywhere in the presentation.

[@in2minutesorless64]

That was a very good analysis. Please do more VR stuff as the space matures. Thanks.

[@PopsGG]

I am skeptical. Having used VR and AR before I feel they take too much effort and are fatiguing to use. I have/can sit at a computer or on a couch Infront of a TV for 14 hours with little to no breaks. That is out of the question to do with a headset on.

[@ConservativeJuggaloPodcast]

With advancing tech it's becoming less fatiguing. Take a look at Bigscreen Beyond for example. And it's not just size, the lenses are getting better

[@KennethBostonian]

And who’s coming up with this Apple is killing Meta, who is behind that

[@paulwoll1748]

$3500 Before tax and before being forced to buy extended battery pack likely over $4k. Also only hand movements and no controllers limit use cases IMHO. Let alone comparisons should be with quest 3.

[@reinvestor1202]

You mentioned it in the video, but I’m sure that 3D photos will be a feature of the new iPhone coming this fall (although I hope it’s a software upgrade for older phones too). If you can take photos/video with your phone as you always have, but then have a more immersive playback experience through the Vision Pro that is a killer app!

[@Rokmononov]

You can’t get this kind of photo/video from any existing phone without a bit of software fakery that won’t look very good. The cameras need to be physically spaced about as far apart as your eyes. Future phone maybe.

[@cichlisuite2]

@@Rokmononov I'm surprised Pete did not appreciate, or at least address, the fact that you require stereo cameras spaced approx eye-width apart to get real 3d depth in the video. With a phone that would put a camera at the top and bottom of the phone. Is that likely? Of course they could allow you to shoot with the headset when it's not on your face but then you won't see what you're shooting. I think that's unlikely too. Yes, there were Google glass issues but I think the idea is that you're not filming strangers, which is where that became a problem. When filming friends and family it's not so different from using an old VHS camera right up in your face?

[@thevoxdeus]

The great innovation for me will be seeing a useful VR device from a company that I actually trust.

[@benjiebarker]

What are talking about…more people will buy quest 3 now…the only untethered vr headset

[@toobrown2toastgamesvr]

Apple didn't kill anything. They just improved the market that is all since the headset isn't a gaming a headset. Its a productivity XR headset not VR. I for one is very excited for Q3 since im a gamer and just want to play great VR games. Not interested in Mix reality. Good for them to level up the market. More eyes on A/R and VR since people may want to jump in

[@ConservativeJuggaloPodcast]

I was saying the same thing, it's advanced AR not VR, but word is no mans Sky and rec room will be on it so it might be capable......

[@wpoitras]

Yeah, it plays in the XR space much better. And as someone in another video pointed out, its WAY cheaper and supposedly at least as good if not better as its nearest competitor the Varjo XR-3

[@madmotorcyclist]

@@wpoitras Agreed. Watch Varjo drop its price fast to stay relevant. The thing is that Apple has a huge developer foundation that we will see soon after its release.

[@mitchell10394]

@@madmotorcyclist I think most of the customers for Viarjo’s high end device are using windows applications. For a lot of engineering work, windows is a must. I’m not saying it won’t have any affect on them, but I think it won’t the too detrimental in the near term.

[@steveA123]

really nice analysis. I remember many (many many) years ago (I think I saw them in a CompUSA), that Sony had a virtual monitor product that they sold that were effectively a pair of glasses. I don't remember the price, but they were out of my price range at the time, but i loved the concept.

[@giga_charge]

Apple basically took all that quirky tech and made it actually USABLE. That was what they did with iPhone basically. When i first used an iphone it just was so smooth and easy to use. Maybe the same will happen with this device in the future and it will become also more accesible to the masses

[@Miguel.Garcia]

This is the only answer that matters. Something complicated into something easy to use. That's the Apple way, that's the Steve Jobs way.

[@TaureanSmoke]

Except it's not usable nobody's going to buy that thing. Especially considering how it has eye tracking, privacy concerns and you can't do anything except for use the headset because it's constantly tracking your freaking hands. This is quite literally the stupidest product ever created user experience in the toilet. But you don't care. You're an Apple fan. Whatever they release you would buy. They would literally sell you the knife that you would use to kill your wife with and you would say it's the best knife you've ever used in your life.

[@supking403]

Meta won because they are a gaming headset where as apple is a pro headset

[@InteractiveDNA]

Are you crazy? Why you want to pay Apple over $3000.00 when the Quest 2 is just fine for most of the things. You are basically paying for more tuned VR and nothing more. If Meta VR3 improves what the VR2 does, no reason to upgrade to this super expensive Apple VR. I thought it would not cost over $600 but $3000 and more... just a nut will pay for that. For that price you can by 10 VR.

[@alibinary]

Actually they have not killed Meta, they empowered it tremendously!

[@r.m8146]

But that's completely dependent on what META's response will be from here. There are a lot of players out there, and, in comparison, now we know that META's product just sucks in every single category imaginable.

[@Refreshment01]

Exactly. Meta has the tools. So its about if they can coordinate a response. Do they just focus on gaming with quest 2/3. Do they focus on improving Quest pro now to have something similar to apple before vision pro? Or do they kill quest pro and release an improvement later than apples device?

[@tonyhawk123]

Definitely two ways to think about it (benefited or killed) but it also reflects on people's unrealistic expectations of Apple. Meta's effort launched at $1500 and yet people still expected Apple to launch at the same price, despite the the tech being leagues apart. Apple's raw parts came to $1500 alone, and that's not including R&D, manufacturing, support, services, profit margin. Admittedly it was disappointing that Apple couldn't hit a $2500 to $3000 price point.

[@perrykeshahwalker5321]

Nobody's going to spend $3,500 on that

[@TheShinorochi]

me

[@nunomollc]

As a quest pro user, I think Meta can improve a lot of features by software. I hope Meta put more effort for productivity with Pro.

[@PeteJudo1]

Me too

[@Chis56]

I also own a pro , I think Apple have given mark Z a lesson , software partners and developers must improve or the pro is doomed

[@nunomollc]

@@Chis56 yeah they should utilize features unique to Pro such as eye tracking!

[@Create-The-Imaginable]

Yes but Meta just laid most of their Metaverse and AR/VR people off. This is what happens when you put the Accountants in charge of the company! Anyone that knows anything about technology knows that Apple was going to come in with their A game! And Apple has not had any layoffs for this reason!

[@NextWorldVR]

​@Create The Imaginable BULL! They're not firing they're recycling. For every person they fire they hire or another 1 or 2. They're just getting rid of the easily offended people who don't work.

[@matthewschenker3170]

What a silly video. Even Apple is not putting this device out there as a competitor to Meta. Apple does not even call it a VR device, and it's clearly aimed towards computing and "watching content." But as always, Apple will do a masterful job convincing their zombie customers that they need something 10x the price. Showing your eyes through the front -- yeah that will be exciting for the first 2 minutes. Watching movies on a headset. Um, yes, as long as the movie is under 2 hours! Having a battery hanging off the device. Really? Using a headset instead of a computer/laptop? Why?

[@AverageRichAsian]

For me the selling point was when they told me it can record 3d videos and later we can re-live the situation by watching the clip, just like in the movie Winter Soldier when Tony Stark made B.A.R.F.

[@TarenGibson]

TDG #1 FULLSUPPORT FROM TDGODKING FREESTYLE GOAT FROM VINTON COUNTY ALLENSVILLE OHIO STATE USA EARTH 🇺🇸🦅 EVERYTHING ( PETE JUDO ) FOREVER AND ALWAYS BIG FAX

[@bisbee1678]

Apple didn't kill Meta. Meta killed Meta. The metaverse was incredibly ill-conceived, even more poorly executed, and somehow its marketing was even worse. Even if Meta had the entire market to itself for the next decade their horrible products wouldn't have taken off. That isn't to say that I don't think that the Apple Vision Pro isn't amazing (assuming it lives up to the hype), just that Meta has been its own worst enemy from day one.

[@KennethBostonian]

I have Apple products and trust me. I’m sticking by meta-

[@tintin.404]

😂

[@zentec010]

@@tintin.404 Why laugh do your research Apple did nothing special.

[@l0zerth]

You just totally pegged yourself as a total Apple fanboy with this video. You are one of the very, very few VR/XR users who actually use such headsets for straight content, and admitted yourself that the experience sucks physically and with software, further limiting the niche market for this use, but somehow Apple has this all figured out, despite having not seen it actually in use yet? You do a great job of explaining why Meta's version sucks, which it does, but give absolutely no reason why Apple's will be better other than Apple, and oh yeah, the only legitimate guarantee is that the Apple headset will pair easily with Mac computers, but good luck pairing it with anything else. As far as your use cases, they are literally almost zero. Office workers are simply not going to wear any such headset all day, it is far cheaper, easier, and more ergonomic to simply have two or three monitors than one headset that no one is going to wear all day. The ONLY near to mid term use case for VR/XR headsets is gaming, and despite your apparent complete ignorance of the maker and design space, 3D printing and design is a now a very affordable and accessible realm that is no longer seen as for geeks and engineers. From my view, you have literally everything about this space backwards.

[@erenbalatkan5945]

Yes because 3500$ headset is competitor to 1000$ headset right? Clickbait BS. Meta will release Quest Pro 2 by the time Apple gets Vision Pro ready with all the features it has and far more - for less than half the price. We will see who killed who then.

[@hanskarlsson3778]

Many good points but as a veteran in VR I find the presentation biased and based on your personal experience - and VR is very personal. Try to make your points without trashing the competition. Meta is commendable because they are sticking to their guns with a long term plan, and recognize this will take time. VR goes far beyond TV and typing in that vision, which your average person may not realise, nor your average stockholder. I do think Apple is making a huge contribution to public awareness. Not the market leader in ergonomics, though, far from it. Try Beyond in your next review and see if you will need to revise some of these claims :)

[@tedhu262]

It's a laptop replacement. If you have a Macbook now it uses less power with screen off and uses wifi Bluetooth LE to remote to vp to render which plugged in would be epic infinite desktop canvas experience. This can easily replace an iPad. Is it worth three iPad or an iPad and macbook? It can be. Depends on app store. So it's not as pricey as it looks. If anything it substitutes away swiss army knife style just like iPhone did with multiple devices and user experiences

[@laartwork]

I am willing to make a friendly wager (it isn't fair since I actually worked in marketing and sales for a VR headset (not Meta) and companies like Samsung and Microsoft) but it just made the Meta 3 look incredibly affordable. They changed the name of "metaverse" to "spatial computing". They gave the exact presentation as Meta but the only difference is no Zuckerberg (kill the messenger). When regular people who think this is amazing and find out they can do 95% of the same exact things on it for a 10th of the cost and THIS year! And play games. wow.. best adjacent marketing ever. What Apple did wrong: Too expensive Too heavy Too goofy looking No games Walled garden Focus on everyday productivity to people who are not early adopters. WAY WAY TOO EXPENSIVE I travel a lot and I have a Quest 2 and using Virtual desktop and my mouse and keyboard I am able to log into my home computer 800 miles away and open photoshop and get to work. I watch movies in a virtual cinema with friends in other states. AND I play lots of games with those friends. Mini golf, Real fishing and Demeo. No one realizes all this is possible because Meta has been focusing on productivity and everyday use. (sound familiar) Difference is Apple has an ability to put people in a trance and control the narrative. Remember Samsung battery catching on fire a few times? remember iPhones literally exploding and taking a woman's eye out and killing another the year prior? Yeah didn't think so. So Meta will sell 10 million headsets (again... oh not aware that Quest 2 sold that) within 4 months of release. (The VR headset I worked for had a laser like gaming focus on a niche market that spends lots of money despite little PCVR titles and are somehow able to survive despite being a mess of a company). I mean the Apple stock was rising... got to the Headset part of the presentation and immediately plunged. That is what regular folks think. You may want to argue or call me names or blame Obama. But this is my world.

[@bruxi78230]

@L. J. ----- As a fan of Obama, I definitely won't blame it on him. Would like to address a few of the issues you bring up: 1. As for "Too Expensive" - In year one Apple will sell every headset they can make. Specifically in year one the will sell from 1.5 million to 2 million. Two million results in revenue of around 7 billion and profits of 1.75 billion. Oh yeah, I made an actual forecast. Didn't see any number from you? 2. Next is "Walled Garden". This is the silliest bit of propaganda ever invented by Microsoft about Apple in the 1990s. Surprised someone in 2023 still uses this tired bit of nonsense. What has made Apple incredibly successful is the best ecosystem in tech. They have 1.2 billion active users who own 2 billion total devices. The Facebook hardware ecosystem barely exists. Apple publishes SDKs so that millions of third party companies can participate in the ecosystem. They make apps, cases, movies, TV shows, own sports leagues, make music. Apple will offer services that drive adoption which include 3D sports, 3D concerts (Taylor Swift already working on that), and they'll improve the content from Apple TV+ to work beautifully in those huge screens. The spacial audio already does work beautifully. 3. As for "No Games?" This was a weird one. Just because Apple didn't mention it in the presentation, doesn't mean a lot isn't going on in this area. First of all Apple is already the largest game selling company in the world. The App Store games category is the biggest in the App Store. The revenue they make from games dwarfs Xbox, Playstation and Meta. They need to create more AAA content, and now they have a compelling reason to do so. First, they will start their own studio and work with the most talented people in the games world just like they've done for movies and TV shows. In fact they've already been doing so for 2 years. Second they will expand Apple Arcade to show off these more in-depth games. Third, you probably haven't noticed that they've already eliminated the software infrastructure issues that game developers requested. Apple keeps their presentations simple to appeal to mainstream audiences but at the appropriate time they will communicate their games strategy. 4. Finally "Stock movement". ---- This is what I do all day long is keep track of several stocks and buy and sell options. Almost every presentation they've done since the early 2000s, Apple has declined during or slightly after the event. They reached an all-time price high during the event, also very typical for the stock to retreat after different milestones. Finally this particular run-up has gone on since Apple was at 147. Stocks don't go up forever, if it goes down now at some point in the future it will head north again. Anyway, I enjoyed speaking with you and wish you all the best.

[@BrandonToy]

I don’t know man. I think you’re underestimating the appeal of this product.

[@samiryahiaoui]

Absolutely

[@laartwork]

​@@BrandonToylooks like I was right. It wasn't a surprise.

[@infinite_playtime]

The reason people aren't using VR device for productivity is not because they have a small space. The reason why people aren't watching movies on VR devices it not because the app flickers. It's because people genuinely don't like having a heavy headset on their heads for a longer period of time. Why would I go through the pain of charging my headset to do a zoom call when I have a 4K curved monitor? VR games have some of the most stickiest experiences yet most of the Quest devices out there are collecting dust. All the things you've mentions that are good about Vision Pro are things that theoretically sounds good. When people are actually given a choice to work in their headsets for a long period of time or watch a movie, people don't choose to do it. Until the form factor reaches to a level of glasses, this will not be a mass adopted product.

[@pipiriripuriruri9804]

You're a marketing expert but you directly compare a $3500 headset to a $500 one. Did you get your degree from a box of cereal?

[@enterdata]

That is what I said when I saw the introduction of this device. Meta Quest 2, 3 or whatever are obsolete. Vision Pro offers so much more and is so much more.

[@stephendenagy3396]

This will not kill Met per se, it will in invigorate the whole field in the short run, as Apple has set the bar for function and quality. Your analysis is spot on. Meta still has a challenge. Apple doesn’t care whose content, just use their platform. Meta cares less about platform, as long as it keeps you INSIDE Meta. Meta is about productivity only as long as your use the “FaceBook” of VR. That seems unlikely, and why Meta is pushing the “Metaverse.” They NEED that space. To sell ads there. That’s why I think they will fail, Meta is mainly about Meta. Itself.

[@a_ricart]

Excellent explanation, thanks. I am no expert but got a sense that this is the beginning of a major shift in computing, like the iphone.

[@xyster7]

People who never build anything for XR have no credit to really know what they are talking about, just blah blah blah

[@V_050]

With Apple Vision Pro's eye pass-through, you'll be able to see the world through your own eyes, but projected onto the outside display. This means that you'll look like you have a giant pair of googly eyes on your face, which could be a bit off-putting in public. 😅

[@PeteJudo1]

Agree. Gonna look pretty goofy

[@harrykatsaros]

It's been designed so that it looks like what your eyes would look like if you were wearing ski goggles, rather than a high resolution image of your face. I think that taking this approach to intentionally make it look imperfect and not hiding from the fact that the user is in fact wearing what looks like goggles was a smart move and will go a long way toward making it look less ridiculous.

[@Aggie4life77]

In public as in maybe the Airport. No one is walking around with this lol. People like you are so confused with this and a Google glass type device. If I see you walking around with this in public with or with out the front panel, your getting slapped lol! This is a home device and the eyesight is for family members around you being able to look a your eyes while talking to you. Imagine how crazy it would look talking to your wife with a Quest 2 on your face.😂😂😂

[@nicholasleclerc1583]

5:56 But people with a small apartment don't have the money for an Apple Vision, now do they ? X D

[@CamX36]

I can buy 7 meta quest 3's for 3,500 thats 1 device for my family and my sisters

[@Sociology_Tube]

"Thought Leadership" OMG -- other than that I agree with you completely and great analysis, right on. (If you are suprisingly well known you dont have to say so)

[@Ded-Ede]

Before the Vision Pro debut by Apple, I was asking myself why would anybody want this thing, it will never fly. But then Apple show their vision of spatial computing and now you’ve completed the last mile of solidifying the use cases of the function for such a device. Great work. Better than lots of tech pundits.

[@markkram6497]

I think you nailed it. Multiple screens for productivity and video ( movie consumption) will be the key uses. Apple is very good at integrating their devices so I can see these 2 uses working very well. One big issue will be the weight of the device. You will be feeling discomfort from the device unless they can make it lighter. Also, prices will have to come down to get wide spread adoption.

[@HermanCulprit]

Devices on Amazon do this now lol for $99 quest does the same thing now for 7 times less. There was nothing revelatory with their announcement. Even the eyes front thing was taken from meta in 2021.

[@SenorShrimpVR]

⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠@@HermanCulprit Average VR users I talk to seem to feel incredibly disappointed with what apple will be releasing for said price. You can buy a quest 3 and a PCVR ready PC (maybe 2 sets if your smart) for apple visions asking price! I think JD nailed it, yet I see what I think are wild comments about apple killing “Meta”…. I play with a my kids, so splurging on multiple headsets gets expensive. I could buy 7 Quest 3’s for the price of one apple vision, which one sounds more likely to “get wide spread adoption”. We don’t say the M word in my house (it hurt to type it) LONG LIVE JOHN CARMACK!

[@brokensword2621]

when a apple fan try so hard to convince people and put a 3500$ headset to their eyes. 😆

[@dxexav09]

Meta feels like a toy apple feels like the future. Hands down apple killed them

[@Tigers.i]

I really like the points you made. I only disagree with the the usability of the 3D video capture. Although it may look weird to some if people are using it to record, content creators will create specific use cases in which how they look doesn’t matter because it’s for the shot. And once people get used to seeing others wear the headset it won’t be as awkward to wear in public or record a moment with them. Using your phone still puts you behind a screen and is limited in 3D video capture ability

[@Ballistichydrant]

I didn’t even know Facebook had a VR headset 🤷‍♀️

[@communitythemecreator]

Meta killed themselves, Apple just showed Meta how it should be done.

[@dankdc5_]

Apple aint killing shit at $4000 for a vr set w a ps vita menu

[@UnexpectedBooks]

Imagine how ergonomics will improve when you don’t have to position a desk and monitor to specific heights. One can sit in a comfortable chair, assume a good posture (as you wish), and that’s it!

[@Floxxoror]

Sitting in a chair with a keyboard on your lap is not quite a good posture. Desks haven't developed to be the working place of choice for a reason. Just try a wireless keyboard and plug it to your tv and try to work on the sofa. imo it's horrible.

[@DylanMayer-e3g]

I think you nailed it. Multiple screens for productivity and video ( movie consumption) will be the key uses. Apple is very good at integrating their devices so I can see these 2 uses working very well. One big issue will be the weight of the device. You will be feeling discomfort from the device unless they can make it lighter. Also, prices will have to come down to get wide spread adoption.

[@paulwoll1748]

Color pass through in quest 3 with color cameras is what should be compared with not quest pro's which was bad.

[@whkee]

buying one, can't wait!!!

[@RidgeXR_2]

This doesn't kill meta at all XD

[@thomashartmann5037]

I agree but also disagree in one area. When people discover the benefits of filming and taking photos in 3D with the Vision Pro, they will very quickly adapt to this new way of recording. Besides that I think you are right in your predictions. Great video!

[@lantinian]

I think you nailed it with your analysis. I just didn't see the point of mentioning the price as a downside if you later explain its because of it being a Pro product. I believe Apple goal with this first device isn't at all to appeal to average people but to the professionals who will want to create the content for those people. One thing, I think you missed to cover is this is apple 6th attempt at starting a brand new device category. Mac, iPad, iPhone, iPad and Apple Watch being the other 5. I believe, this time they have correctly assessed that to get it off the ground, they first need to target professionals that will create the content for the mass market device.

[@TaureanSmoke]

That's because his analysis is wrong and this isn't a pro product. This product is dead on arrival. It's bad for workers because they can't do anything other than have the VR headset on their head because it's literally tracking their hands and eyes meaning they quite literally can't do their job because the VR headset is just going to be doing all types of stupid stuff while they're actually doing their job. It just shows that Apple put no thought into this and real developers are bashing it just like they should be. Just like the rest of humanity. This product is a flop and trash. But go ahead and praise it. Apple fanboy.

[@lantinian]

@@TaureanSmoke Took a screenshot of your comment. Set a reminder for 1 year. This is going to be 🤩

[@RomanGuro]

Apple Vision Pro - useless. Its not good for everyday use, its useless for VR especially for VR gaming... its nothing compared to Quest 3 or Quest Pro. For watching content there are headsets for this, more compact, the same image quality, cheaper of couse

[@tonyhawk123]

What i'd like to know is why can Apple spend billions and Facebook spend billions, on the same project, yet they come up with very different tech in terms of capability? You'd think if any company spent billions then they'd always come up with something special.

[@TheDaniela3112]

This is what I don't get either. It's baffling. And by the looks of it, it seems like Meta has spent way more than Apple only to reach an unsatisfactory result

[@Chris-ey7zy]

Meta spent 10 billion I think. Apple has a system where all parts are synergy. Meta started from scratch. Plus who would people rather work for

[@bullsback23]

For $3500 apple didn't kill meta , apple is in another lane for that kind of money. Meta is more affordable so many people will get the option to experience vr whereas if you want the best vr experience and dont care about the cost because you're rich than get the apple version of vr.

[@andym.s.5231]

Mid end super luxury jet. Ever heard of that? No. Because no one wants them. People who are looking for “affordable” will get a 300-500 dollar set. Those with more will get a valve index or a nicer set from anything but data-stealing meta. Those with pablo-escobar-level balling money will go all out on Apple, because of course they will. You can say goodbye to the quest pro.

[@fimmyk]

I think there’s a reason they called it Vision Pro, I think there will be a none pro version which will be for the masses, just like regular iPhones and pro models.

[@bullsback23]

@BotsChampion they didn't even mention much about gaming if at all. Business and movies are great but what about fun?

[@fimmyk]

@@bullsback23 Apple have notoriously stayed away from gaming, it has never been their market. Gaming in the iPhone was just a byproduct of the iPhone and developers creating games for it, not Apple. Even with this it’ll be up to developers to create games for it, which will happen eventually. But gaming is not apples focus, it has never been.

[@michwashington]

You’re wrong 😑 12:08

[@JoeChip]

There’s no way this competes with the Nintendo Switch. They are wholly different markets. No parent is buying this thing for their kids.

[@hummersd]

Thanks for comparing with Meta's Quest Pro -- as many clips of it that are available, good to have the perspective of an actual user, and I was curious what the UX is actually like, but with Horizon World being still very rudimentary, a fully VR world just doesn't seem appealing that you'd want to be in there for long. Apple's device is definitely aimed towards the developers and early adopters, and especially if it sounds like it's one of the more complex devices ever made, it's a good walk-before-run with supply chain. I think I'm most impressed with the software leaps the Vision Pro seems to make with things like having multiple windows open, but set amongst furniture in a very thoughtful way. Also the fading in and out of people and immersive environments -- also well thought out rather than being jarring. All of the incremental parts and pieces of hardware have been used on previous devices -- I'm sure the years of LiDar helped this device, the years of camera improvements and example like Desk View using Continuity Camera all lent itself to the headset. It'll be interesting to see where this goes, and how quickly they can miniaturize the tech to get them down to looking like regular glasses. I hope the iPhone gets the ability to take the 3D videos, but not sure how many cameras on the Vision Pro (spacing, etc.) are needed to create that effect. It would be an amazing experience if movies or TV shows on Apple TV+ incorporated that tech to encourage adoption of the devices (eventually).

[@Spike-qh2bb]

Buy it £1500 max..

[@janhutter1949]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this! Super insightful. Wonder how this will change the workplace multi-monitor experience.

[@PeteJudo1]

Me too!

[@mack.attack]

Wowww, the VR people really still are off in la la land. Most people don't want this. I know you don't believe us. But we don't want it.

[@lucianoricardi9062]

Or gave it a future

[@PattisKarriereKarten]

I don‘t know if you heard already but you don‘t need to wear the headset in order to make fotos and videos in 3D 😉 As far as the price is concerned Apple only plans to sell some hundred thousand of these anyway. They KNOW that this is Only the beginning and not everyone will buy it at that Price point. The Plan here is not that this first gen device is an instant Hit! But it is a POWERFUL Statement that they are FAR MORE ahead than the competition. In my opinion they CRUSHED Meta with just one presentation. When I See how shitty the Meta stuff looks I‘m Not surprised that the interest in Those devices is mediocre. Also the product itself looks wayyyy better than anything the competition has come up with. I think it‘s just STUNNING what they did 😍 Also nearly every Tech review said yes there May be some problems with the Vision pro, but the experience is unlike everything they have seen thus far. And again: this is only the beginning and Apple nailed it already.

[@peters616]

Maybe i'm unusual but I like watching movies on the quest 2 and don't get eye strain. Don't do it everyday but when i want to watch 3d content it's pretty good. I'm sure the vision pro will blow that experience away.

[@helw7]

I think Meta could still benefit from this situation. Because if Vision Pro and Vision (non-Pro) are successful, many other people who can't pay as much may end up buying the much cheaper meta solution. Not because it's good, but because it's more than nothing.

[@qwertzuiop875]

They will probably also copy the UI and UX, like when the iPhone came out suddenly all touch devices had similar scrolling and all multi touch devices got stuff like pinch to zoom. So they will definitely benefit from the eye tracking and pinching approach for navigation.

[@PSy84]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/bHrLoH9mf8qJgpY Unless many companies even Apple Pay offers 5-year plan to pay it and others wait for 2nd hand. Buying Meta would be a waste of money then like many cheaper purchases is actually more expensive due to many negatives

[@Kraeuterbutter]

Apple not killed Meta, Apple helped Meta ! Apple pulled a lot of light from people outside the VR-tech-bubble on this topic, put VR-Headset in the spotlight. Now people see, what is possible. (many of the things are possible with Meta-Headses as well - but people are stunned, that you can now see a movie on a big screen and place many windows around you.. like immersed does for years now) so.. here is the spotlight.. BUT: people will think: "hmm. cool.. but 3500,- ??? is there something which is cheaper.. oh.. wait.. Meta Quest 3 - only 1/5 of the price and has many of the same possiblities so: in the end it will maybe even increase the sales for meta ont he long run

[@msandersen]

It’s a good point, that the next thing in the larger iPhones will be stereo cameras, something competitors are less likely to copy, as it integrated with Apple’s headset. Maybe Samsung will produce their own headset, who knows. The point is, everyone is already taking photos and filming on their phones, and if a future iPhone Max Stereo can produce 3D memories, that is far less intrusive and far more appealing to proud parents and pet owners, car enthusiasts or anyone wanting immersive imagery of something they love. It is a end run in the high-end phone camera wars. Plus it will make people finally film horizontally again. As for the price; Microsoft‘s headset cost the exact same, while their “industrial” version is far more expensive, because Business Expense. And it’s nowhere near as good. With the iOS app integration and mixed AR/VR, Apple killed not just Meta’s headset, but resigned Microsoft’s headset to Zune status. Microsoft might as well make a brown version now.

[@ConservativeJuggaloPodcast]

Until the non pro budget Apple Vision comes out in 2025 its not a Meta k!ller. Also we don't even know if Apple Vision is capable of VR, all I saw was AR gimmicks... Also Sony is the leader in VR since 90% of Quest users don't use them. It's been dry for VR but there are some good things on the horizon

[@SirSethery]

It’s 100% dependent on the developers. Right now I can’t see myself using VR/XR/AR headsets for anything other than gaming. Nothing in Apple’s presentation convinced me that I’d use it for anything else outside a few minutes of novelty. Whether I’d want to watch a full 2 hour movie with it or spend hours with it on for productivity all comes down to comfort. I’ve heard people say it’s a bit heavy but I guess we’ll see.

[@goobfilmcast4239]

Frequent Flyers will love it....I see Business Class seating with Vision Pro-compatible power receptacles coming to major Airlines pretty soon after launch....then eventually to all seating. Carriers will love quiet drones mesmerized .... watching who knows what.....

[@hankmiller990]

The Samsung Gear VR from EIGHT years ago had 3D 360 degree movies, video, games. 3D 360 degree multi-camera live concerts and sports events like the NBA and Soccer. I have watches dozens of movies in 3D 360 degree with friends that sat aside me in a virtual theater. We could even talk to each other. Watching this video is exactly like using the Gear VR. Exactly the same experience. The Gear VR even had some Metaverse apps. And now 8 years later Apple comes up with this and pretends it's a new revolution? Hahahhahahahahahahah Why is Apple always yeeeeeears behind companies like Samsung and pretend they are innovative. PEOPLE DON'T WANT GLASSES OR A HEADSET. That was de cause of death of 3D tv.

[@grissom3310]

Crazy enough....people WILL go to parties, and for a wedding planner/videographfer. This product is GOING TO BE THAT MARKET

[@NextWorldVR]

A $3500.00 is NOT affecting the market for a $500.00 Headset, except to increase awareness and acceptance. It can only help.

[@Davydd2009]

The $3,500 price is relative. Of course I don't like the price. Who does? Apple thinks it will be a game changer with that price. In 1984 the came out with the first Macintosh at $2,500. That is about $7,300 in today's dollars for comparison. What it was, was a WYSIWYG computer for the masses and enough mass bought it and Apple owned the computer world for consumers in graphics and word processing for nearly a decade with third party apps like Photoshop before competitor Microsoft came out with a WYSIWYG word processor. They have always been a game changer. If a repeat, a gamble in economics, the largest public valued company will only get larger, but once again the consumer will benefit much sooner from Apple's vision.

[@richardbloemenkamp8532]

You assume that the Apple Vision Pro has similar video quality as wide-screen TV's and similar resolution as multiple monitors and perfect responsiveness and color-see-through and seemless software and software-hardware integration. Then you pridict that it will be a huge success. Well, under those conditions, I think it is hard to disagree even if the pricetag is steep. Meta could not focus so heavily on video-content and productivity because they knew that the technology was not their yet. Besides Meta is more focussed on interaction between users over internet. This requires an internet connection with huge bandwidth, low latency, stability and great reliability. It remains to be seen how long that will take. Now that Covid is over most people have moved away from those tiring daily video-conferences full of connectivity hickups.

[@aanchaallllllll]

0:29: 👓 Apple announced their new virtual reality headset, the AppleVision Pro, and the speaker, who is well-known for their opinions on virtual reality, shares their thoughts on it. 2:28: 📺 Watching content on virtual reality headsets, like the Apple Vision Pro, can provide an immersive cinema-like experience. 4:33: 💡 Apple's virtual reality headset has a game-changing feature for productivity: a multi-monitor setup that can be used anywhere. 6:58: 🎮 The success of virtual reality headsets like the Meta Quest Pro will depend on their ability to replace laptops for productivity purposes rather than just gaming. 10:18: 😕 The speaker discusses the issues with using the Meta headset for productivity, such as flickering colors, virtual keyboard and hands not working well, and annoying notifications. 11:40: 💰 The new Apple headset has some strong use cases, but the high price tag may limit its appeal. 13:53: 💡 The Apple Vision Pro headset is priced at $3,500, but there may be a more affordable non-pro version in the future. Recap by Tammy AI

[@RIVERSIDEREVIEWS]

I don’t see how recording with the Apple headset would be any different than using a GoPro or camera glasses far as social acceptability goes. Everybody keeps acting like that’s weird that this thing can record your GoPro‘s have been around forever. Why do people keep making a deal out of that, as a Content creator, who does POV videos I don’t see the issue.

[@philipcolumbus3054]

Remember that the cost of an Apple II when introduced was $1700 which in today’s dollars was about $7500! The Apple II was over twice the cost of the Vision Pro. The question isn’t, “Why does it cost so much?” but rather, “How are they able to sell all of that high tech gear so inexpensively?”

[@viz8746]

Vision OS will destroy Android for Meta, since XROS is no more. Facebook just could not make its own Meta OS happen. - Android is JUNK whether 2d or VR/AR.

[@duskmare0000]

Forward disclosure: This comment is harsh. It's not directed toward Pete. I think Pete is great and pretty reasonable. However, I think his opinion on this is wildly off and I think many people, like him, will fall for the jargon and nonsense that Apple peddles. So yeah. No offence intended to Pete but boy am I going to get irritated at some parts of apple's advertising and just wanted to say that upfront. Nooooope. Nope nope nope. Not touching this with a 10 foot pole. The applications are "you can have a cinema at home" and "you can buy a £7000 headset to emulate having two monitors!" No offence but anyone that thinks this is a good idea is being stupid and getting taken in by marketing and tech words they don't understand. I tried to look up the resolution of these glasses and do you know what I found? "23 million pixels!" No, don't bother using the industry standard of X by X. A 4K TV is usually 3840x2160 or 4096x2160. People know what these mean. Can we easily compare these to the apple vision pro? No, and that's intentional. Why bother having easy to understand metrics when you can display a really big number that's too big for most people to mentally visualize? Oh, that's right, because a really big number just becomes "a really big number" mentally and therefore people will assume it's really good. It's the equivalent of people buying things just because they saw a sale sticker on it without actually checking prices. Now, in actual facts, the 4K resolutions I gave earlier work out to about 8-9 million pixels. So the apple eye pro thing IS impressively high definition. However, it's also going to cover a much bigger area of your vision than a standard 4K screen. So the definition is likely to be lower for the equivalent area. That being said, one screen for each eye could mean twice the resolution. So detail may or may not be an issue. A cinema example is the worst possible condition for detail though, since the whole idea is to fill your vision with a stretched-to-fit video file. Additionally, it's worth considering that even if the display can potentially show a high resolution the files themselves are unlikely to be more than 4K resolution. So you're unlikely to benefit from scaling the video up that much. It'd basically be like sitting closer to your monitor or TV. Plus each eye is only a bit more than 4K. So with pixel overlap likely being very common, since they have to overlap to give you a 3D vision, you're unlikely to actually get the full benefit from the 23 million pixels. This would be aided if they stagger the fps in each eye, which they probably do. Which brings me onto their frame rate apparently being 90fps, though it doesn't seem to say on their official page and I can't find any way of getting to actual specs instead of the PR jargon they feed the tech illiterate. It sounds impressive since 60fps is the industry standard these days but it's deceptive. It's likely 45fps per eye. I think that since if it were 90fps per eye they would be claiming 180fps, due to being able to stagger the frames on each eye. Though, either way I suppose 90fps is actually pretty good so I can't fault them on this, just the lack of clarity in conveying the device's actual stats. Some quick comments on their web-page and the stuff they write there because I honestly need an outlet to voice my disgust: Ugh, the PR bullshit of these things makes me sick. "3D knitted headband" Like, yeah, of course it is! Just like every other knitted thing ever since they also exist on a 3D plane! Stop with the BS and give me the stats! Oh and of course it comes with the ability to totally definitely understand hand gestures that it totally won't always misinterpret... While taking extremely high definition scans of your living space. You're not the future Apple... You're a cardboard box that has "time machine" written on it... Admittedly it's written in pristine cursive and aided by high quality artistic boarders, underlining, etc. but at the end of the day it's still just a fancy looking lie. "A pair of high-resolution cameras transmit over one billion pixels per second to the displays" when the displays are maxed out at 23 million... They're just peddling absolute shite. I'm not sure if this is supposed to be attached to an existing computer or to be the computer itself. It seems to imply that one of it's 'innovative two chip design' chips does all the graphics processing. I can't imagine it will be anywhere near powerful enough to match dedicated graphics cards. Though, I guess maybe that's why they're moving away from gaming. If they only have to simulate an environment in which they can play files from memory then the only taxing part is simulating the environment. All in all, sounds like a huge waste of £7000. It's not going to get much developer attention (mostly due to the price point and lack of demand so there won't be much of a customer base for vision exclusive apps) so there aren't going to be many apps for it. Any actually impressive 3D applications would require a lot more processing power. So you're either looking at buying a good computer that's compatible or apple's secretly been working on graphics cards made out of unicorn tears and narwhal horns... Though it really seems like they simply don't intend to do anything actually impressive. It seems like this is mostly a device designed to give you a virtual office or virtual parlor. At which point you might as well spend your 7000 on getting a good office or building a home theater. Or maybe even just buy a movie ticket every day for 2 years straight. It's just not feasible. Even for an online office a company would have to spend £7000 per team member, and they'd have to figure out how to get such expensive pieces to people and not have them stolen. The reason they show such niche use cases for these things is because there are no actual use cases that can be reasonably achieved with today's tech and a reasonable budget. (Not sure where you got $3500 from... Maybe that was an early estimated cost? Google searches at the moment say £7199 and $6999. (not sure why the dollar one is cheaper when pounds are worth more but maybe it's something to do with shipping, area taxes or whatever.))

[@morphos2]

I'm just gonna say this, and I'll leave: it is not because you say Apple should put 3D cameras on the iPhone that this will happen. It will definitely happen because it is already in Apple's plans. Just saying!

[@MrPcphn1]

$3500 glorified HoloLens which battery last for 2 FKIN hours. Big goggle you wear on your head to watch movies and do some extra. Just get some Rokid Air and Nreal for $500

[@contort69]

The reason the we will ALWAYS be limited to our 13" 15" over even 20 plus inch monitor ..when it comes to watching movies, is because someone else can watch the movie with us and we can interact with them flawlessly.

[@hiadrianbankhead]

but what if that other person you want to watch with lives in New York, and you live in San Francisco? Then watching together in virtual reality is a solution. Or if you want to watch with a group of people, all scattered all over the world, together in real time - either zoom or virtual reality. If you are physically together then of course reality > virtual. But if you are not physically together then virtual > reality.

[@KeljaSamiNation]

Those look terrible ! Too much gear strapped to your face! And that wire to the battery! 😂 4000$ for a product being rushed to market!? Apple please! 😠

[@JulienTJ]

This is actually cheap! You're comparing oranges to apples here (pun intended). It's not in the same territory as the Quests and other cheap headsets. The real competitor here is the pro market, and the king is the Varjo XR-3, which is $6.5K. Apple made a comparable product, twice as cheap.

[@tomluptowski]

I don't understand the obsession with the price, a base Mini M2 Pro with a base studio display would run just a little under the $3500. The vision pro is not just a head set it is a full blown M2 computing device with a state of the art AR/VR display. $3500 is a deal

[@HDBoyWonder]

The Apple Vision Pro costs the same as the original, 1984 Macintosh. It’s a next-generation computing platform. This first model really is for developers to create software and port content to the new platform. Look for less costly models in 2025.

[@TimpossibleOne]

Your opinion about people using the 3D camera is very wrong and short-sighted. That's how YOU feel about using it in public. We're all know that there are people who will gravitate towards using it for special occasions. It'll be a while before people are walking around with it because it's $3500 sitting on your face while you're partially distracted. It's a thief's dream.

[@gargamelandrudmila8078]

I would use it to record my game play for tennis or going BMX'ing or Skying the Vision Pro will make a great 3D video recorder of fun events. Very expensive if you break it but I assume this is a rich mans toy, so expect it be used on Yacht Cruses. Apple will sell out of production. Ps I can see the porn industry using this A LOT to create 3D content for the customers.

[@tmsmqwx]

You keep saying "no one is going to be walking around in public..." Funny I didn't see Apple advocating "walking around" anywhere with this device on. That being said, did anyone 10 years ago think that people would be walking around with little metal & glass slabs in their hands ignoring the world around them? You're gonna be surprised soon wearing this thing at birthday parties & Bar mitzvahs is gonna become OK.