Apple Vision

[Rumpy]

Yeah, exactly. And there's a question there about wether they're even targeting the right market. At about 4K a piece, something like this is absurd, and you'd have to be rich to afford one, which I feel only reinforces the myths surrounding VR. If they were to to make something more affordable, then they'd inject some future into VR as a whole.

But maybe I'm overthinking it.

[Kurth]

I guess the only point I'm trying to make is that it is more expensive in no small part because it has so many cameras and displays, etc - with CPU and storage unlike any other VR/AR Headset.


Is there a market for something like that now - given what that, all put together, will cost? Not sure.

I would love to play with one, but it's built, engineered, and hence priced into a level of extravagance I can't justify to myself. yet.

All true. I really don't understand the perspective that the price of the Vision Pro is going to drop radically. This isn't a AR/VR headset - Apple has gone to great lengths to avoid calling it that. It's a laptop on your face, or, as Apple puts it, a foray into "spatial computing." Apple is trying some stuff out to see if there's a market for this type of product. This is not intended for Quest owners, at least, not primarily. My understanding is that it's intended for people that want to replace their MacBook Pros. The product isn't really there yet - the best use cases seem to be people using the Vision Pro in tandem with a MacBook Pro - but I think that's where Apple is going. So, if this is supposed to replace a $2K-3K laptop, why would be ever expect the price to drop below $1K?

That's not to say that Apple won't pivot and release a product that is more aligned to the AR/VR headset market, but I don't think that product will be a future version of the Vision Pro.

[RunningMn9]

If, as you say, I'm not the target audience then who is?

People a helluva lot younger than anyone here. Obviously Apple would be more than happy to sell you one, but they aren't sitting around trying to figure out what old Gen-Xer's+ are looking for in a VR/AR headset. You are what they call "gravy" if you were to buy one.

[RunningMn9]

If, as you say, I'm not the target audience then who is?

People a helluva lot younger than anyone here. Obviously Apple would be more than happy to sell you one, but they aren't sitting around trying to figure out what old Gen-Xer's+ are looking for in a VR/AR headset. You are what they call "gravy" if you were to buy one.

To be less snarky, the actual target demo for this is the people that will ultimately develop the software that helps sell Version 2.

[EvilHomer3k]

If, as you say, I'm not the target audience then who is?

People a helluva lot younger than anyone here. Obviously Apple would be more than happy to sell you one, but they aren't sitting around trying to figure out what old Gen-Xer's+ are looking for in a VR/AR headset. You are what they call "gravy" if you were to buy one.

To be less snarky, the actual target demo for this is the people that will ultimately develop the software that helps sell Version 2.

Are you saying it's a tech demo of hardware for young developers who can afford to spend $4,000 on a headset?

[Montag]

I would rather get 3 generations of PC hardware over 4 to 6 years than throw down this amount of money for a first generation set. Vive, Index, or a hell of a lot of Oculus Quest versions.

You got the money to blow, go for it.

[RunningMn9]

Are you saying it's a tech demo of hardware for young developers who can afford to spend $4,000 on a headset?

No, I'm saying it's not a product that's trying to appeal to the olds. And if you think that anyone under the age of 40 thinks of it as spending $4000 on a headset, that's the part you might not be getting. They all have Apple Cards, which means they can press a button and have an Apple Vision Pro show up at their house, and they will just make a car payment for 12 months with their 0% financing. And they can tell their friends they have an Apple Vision Pro. At no point are any of them thinking "this is $4000".

Apple knows that these younger folks don't think in those terms. I'm just saying that the feature set, and what they are trying to pitch, it isn't about capturing that sweet 50+ male market.

[Rumpy]

Realistically, I don't know any young people who'd have the money to blow on this either. Are we talking college kids who are already struggling financially due to tuitions? That'd be quite an expense.

[RunningMn9]

Realistically, I don't know any young people who'd have the money to blow on this either. Are we talking college kids who are already struggling financially due to tuitions? That'd be quite an expense.

So you think Apple was going for old people with this thing?

21 to 35, that’s the target for the technology. Anyone that buys it outside of that is a bonus. They aren’t trying to appeal to the AARP crowd.

[Smoove_B]

Hey guys, hey there. Why aren't my friends on OO waving back?

[Holman]

The trick is to make it valuable for college students whose parents can afford it. Then (a year later) market a version that can be rented through universities on a semester schedule.

[Rumpy]

Realistically, I don't know any young people who'd have the money to blow on this either. Are we talking college kids who are already struggling financially due to tuitions? That'd be quite an expense.

So you think Apple was going for old people with this thing?

21 to 35, that’s the target for the technology. Anyone that buys it outside of that is a bonus. They aren’t trying to appeal to the AARP crowd.

No, not old people. You said it, not me. It just feels like an unachievable target is what I'm saying, no matter the age group.

[YellowKing]

They're getting it out there to establish a foothold in the product space. They've already sold an estimated 160,000-200,000 units, so they've already accomplished step 1 - get it into the hands of Apple loyalists. They don't need this particular model to be mass-adopted, nor do I think they expect it to be. I read that the expectation was to produce half a million units - compare that to Quest who has sold approximately 20 million. Clearly they're not trying to be the Quest killer.

I consider it a little like when Microsoft bought their way into the console space. They knew the first Xbox was going to get crushed by Sony, but by getting it out there they established themselves as a player and were able to learn what worked and what didn't. Where the analogy falters is that like I said, I don't think Apple is directly competing with Quest. Their risk lies more in the uncharted waters of VR adoption in general.

I do think the prospect of adoption in the business/education/healthcare is certainly worth considering. When the iPad came out our hospital bought a ton of them to facilitate remote patient visits. $3500 is a lot for us, but for a hospital to buy 10 or 20 of these things for medical training is nothing. And again, once Apple gets that foothold, well then they can worry about making the cheaper/faster/better model that gets more widely adopted.

It will be interesting to see how it plays out. Even Quest, which is arguably VR's biggest success story, can't get consumers to stick with VR. Nobody has been able to crack the code yet to true mass adoption, so I'm always interested to see someone come in and try. If Apple can't make VR cool, I'm not sure anyone can.

[Zaxxon]

I’m with RM9 and YK. Mostly. This iteration of the product exists because you have to start somewhere. The tech to do what Apple is trying to do does not yet exist, and the marketplace of apps for spatial computing also does not yet exist.

This initial product by all observations does some groundbreaking things amazingly well, and has some very obvious shortcomings.

Apple is proving out an idea, while seeding development interest and maturing their design and production capabilities for the chips and other components that go into this thing. The M2 chip in the Vision Pro is already old news at Apple, and I imagine the R1 chip that’s also in here is in a similar boat. The Vision line will evolve, and I think the pace will be quick in the next few years.

There’s a reason this is the first Apple product to begin with a Pro in the name—you can bet your ass that the next iteration (or perhaps the one following that) will come in both a Pro and non-Pro iteration. The Pro will IMO likely continue in this approximate price point (maybe $2999) and keep pushing the boundaries, while the non-Pro will eventually be the mass-market version at a significantly cheaper price (but not $500 cheap—this is Apple). And we’ll quickly see the weight drop, the FOV grow, the battery situation improve, etc.

And to those commenting that Apple marketing may not know what’s up—lol. If there’s one thing Apple doesn’t fail at, it’s marketing.

I’m not the target for this one, but I peg the odds of a Vision product existing in my household in mid-2026 as reasonably high.

[Malificent]

Wait but Why's thoughts. Long but worthwhile.

https://waitbutwhy.com/2024/02/vision-pro.html

His point that everyone will be copying the interface feels like a salient point. And that we all tend to forget how amazing the first iPhone felt even if it managed to be thrilling and boring at the same time.

[raydude]

Looking at it from a business perspective, its adoption will mean there's even less compelling argument to commute to work. Especially if they manage to get remote meetings to feel more and more like in person meetings with the avatars. On the other hand, if I were a pointy headed boss I'd still make them come to work with their AVPs only now I don't need to have a nice office building with windows. It can be solid walled, no windows, and no decorations on the inside since AVPs will let the workers put up whatever virtual decorations they want. That's kind of depressing to be honest.

[edited it's to its]

[Rumpy]

Yeah, you can bet that if these become popular, that there will be workplace rules about when and where they can be used. A benefit would be someone working from home needing to link up to the office, or multiple offices in different locations. But I don't think they should rule out everyday in-person interactions.

Frankly though, I think the article only underlines many of the issues with headsets like these, ie such as the isolation factor.

[EvilHomer3k]

MKBHD has released another video on the Vision and some things he'd like to see in Gen 2. It's entertaining, especially the intro.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOi8s2w ... esBrownlee

One thing I hadn't considered is the walled garden. The video doesn't really touch on that but honestly, it would be bad for Apple to succeed in the VR space simply because it's not widely adopted yet and Apple getting into it is very likely to split the small amount of people using VR. They'll push hardware development which is good but split the user base which I think is bad for a user base that's not all that big to begin with. Sure they may bring a few more people into it but they're also going to put up walls for some who either can't afford or don't want to move to the Apple ecosystem. Overall I think that's bad for VR.

[Victoria Raverna]

Is there an existing ecosystem for all VR hardware before Apple Vision?

[gbasden]

Is there an existing ecosystem for all VR hardware before Apple Vision?

The Meta Quest headsets have a pretty thriving ecosystem, actually.

[EvilHomer3k]

Is there an existing ecosystem for all VR hardware before Apple Vision?

The Meta Quest headsets have a pretty thriving ecosystem, actually.

There's also general PCVR and STEAM. All are available on Quest but PCVR/Steam are available to any platform that can connect to PC. Currently it's somewhat open. The Quest marketplace is only available to Quest owners but the Quest hardware and virtual desktop works well with PC, Mac, or even Linux. Vision only works with Mac.

[Rumpy]

Hmm, didn't realize it was Mac only, which narrows the niche considerably. I assume they'll eventually make it available for PC, but none of the buzz I've seen mentions this.

[rittchard]

(Going to abbreviate Apple Vision Pro using AVP)

I've been meaning to post my impressions here but I keep getting distracted. Let me know if you have any specific questions. My one word review of the device: POTENTIAL.

I'm a generation or two behind now on the latest VR tech so it's hard to make a direct comparison. I've been tempted to get a Meta Quest 3 as it seems to be the top choice for gaming. Anyway, the AVP was clearly not meant at the outset to be a competitor in the gaming space, although it clearly has the capability to do some fantastic things if people get creative enough. Since the baseline is using your hands as the interface, I can imagine game developers coming up with creative ways to make this really fun and viable. Like making certain gestures to cast spells, or have your movements really reflect the feel of combat or whatever. And of course you can always just add conventional VR controllers, I was surprised there was nothing at release. Seems like it's taking time to port games over. The one I did try with the glowing balls (forgot the name) was a lot of fun, but nothing I hadn't seen before.

The main interface of the AVP Is a lot of fun, and certainly has the potential to be useful int he productivity space. I always think about Minority Report and some other movies where you have windows and info floating in space, and you can drag them around and zoom in.out etc using your hands. It's a really fun experience. I suspect other VRs have similar capability but the ones I used in the past were nowhere near this smooth. And of course given that it's essentially a spatial iPad, you have access to a ton of apps that you are likely already familiar with.

I really enjoyed the "full" VR content that was available, but it was just not a lot so far. It was really gorgeous and immersive, much more so than I recall with my previous hardware.

I also think for people with pets, babies, kids, etc, having the recording feature to try to capture memories could be a pivotal feature for the future. I took a couple videos of the rain around my building using my phone and then replayed them in the AVP, and it was really a very cool moment, even with such an un-special memory. I'm thinking more about parents or grandparents being able to capture moments and really feel almost like they are in that moment again. Remembering the giant old video cameras people used to clunk around I know people go to such great lengths for that kind of thing. I heard though that Meta already has an app to play the same videos you record from the iPhone, but I haven't heard if they have the same qualitative experience when you rewatch them. Apple really needs to find a way to make sure their version is the absolute best and enhance whatever is the most special/spatial (haha) about it.

I'm sure I'm forgetting a lot of stuff, but overall my overwhelming thoughts whenever I use the unit is just how much potential the thing has to be awesome. The content at present isn't really that compelling, but I knew in advance I'd be more or lest investing in the future.

As for the cost, I thought I'd throw in my two cents. Is it expensive? Hell yes, particularly compared with some of the competitors. But what I do find odd is how in come circles people get so critical over it, but then they don't seem to bat an eye over other different types of extravagancies. I was watching a TikTok yesterday and people were saying how much they paid for Super Bowl tickets, I think the average was like $7-8000 per ticket I've seen prices like that for Taylor Swift and Adele last year as well, I read the average price on the secondary market for Taylor was like $3800. In that light $3500 on a piece of cutting edge tech doesn't seem that expensive - to me, anyway.

Oh yeah on that note, that reminds me I was thinking if Apple really wanted to sell these things like hotcakes, here's my killer app. I remember for my Meta I bought a concert app, I think it was Kelly Clarkson, and it allowed you to kind of view the concert from different angles of the stage, etc. almost like you were there. It was a little clunky but still a ton of fun. Now just imagine if they partnered with... Taylor Swift and did the Eras Tour but you could be a virtual part of the concert. Make it exclusive and a unique virtual experience, and every tween girl (and gay guy) on the planet would throw their money at it

[raydude]

(Going to abbreviate Apple Vision Pro using AVP)

The main interface of the AVP Is a lot of fun, and certainly has the potential to be useful int he productivity space. I always think about Minority Report and some other movies where you have windows and info floating in space, and you can drag them around and zoom in.out etc using your hands. It's a really fun experience. I suspect other VRs have similar capability but the ones I used in the past were nowhere near this smooth. And of course given that it's essentially a spatial iPad, you have access to a ton of apps that you are likely already familiar with.

I would go even further and say Apple is trying to put a "Macbook Pro on your face" and is absolutely looking at this as a productivity multiplier. I recall when Kinect came out surgeons were repurposing it so they could see charts, x-rays, and other information by just using hand gestures and voice commands. Now imagine what they could do with a dedicated computer on their face.

Same thing with modeling and simulations. Being able to walk around a simulation of the air flow around a new airframe or engine, or seeing a radar model in 3D, so you can see where the signals get obscured by the structure itself would be much better than moving the 3D model with your mouse. In this respect I think Apple is gunning for Microsoft's HoloLens business.

[stessier]

Hmm, didn't realize it was Mac only, which narrows the niche considerably. I assume they'll eventually make it available for PC, but none of the buzz I've seen mentions this.

I very much doubt this. It is unique to their ecosystem - they are happy to let you pass if you aren't all in.

[Rumpy]

(
As for the cost, I thought I'd throw in my two cents. Is it expensive? Hell yes, particularly compared with some of the competitors. But what I do find odd is how in come circles people get so critical over it, but then they don't seem to bat an eye over other different types of extravagancies. I was watching a TikTok yesterday and people were saying how much they paid for Super Bowl tickets, I think the average was like $7-8000 per ticket I've seen prices like that for Taylor Swift and Adele last year as well, I read the average price on the secondary market for Taylor was like $3800. In that light $3500 on a piece of cutting edge tech doesn't seem that expensive - to me, anyway.

I wouldn't even touch a concert ticket at that price.

[Daehawk]

[Kurth]

(Going to abbreviate Apple Vision Pro using AVP)

The main interface of the AVP Is a lot of fun, and certainly has the potential to be useful int he productivity space. I always think about Minority Report and some other movies where you have windows and info floating in space, and you can drag them around and zoom in.out etc using your hands. It's a really fun experience. I suspect other VRs have similar capability but the ones I used in the past were nowhere near this smooth. And of course given that it's essentially a spatial iPad, you have access to a ton of apps that you are likely already familiar with.

I would go even further and say Apple is trying to put a "Macbook Pro on your face" and is absolutely looking at this as a productivity multiplier.

100% this. That's what I was trying to say above on this page!

[EvilHomer3k]

(Going to abbreviate Apple Vision Pro using AVP)

The main interface of the AVP Is a lot of fun, and certainly has the potential to be useful int he productivity space. I always think about Minority Report and some other movies where you have windows and info floating in space, and you can drag them around and zoom in.out etc using your hands. It's a really fun experience. I suspect other VRs have similar capability but the ones I used in the past were nowhere near this smooth. And of course given that it's essentially a spatial iPad, you have access to a ton of apps that you are likely already familiar with.

I would go even further and say Apple is trying to put a "Macbook Pro on your face" and is absolutely looking at this as a productivity multiplier.

100% this. That's what I was trying to say above on this page!

Niche market (VR enthusiasts) in a niche market (Apple desktop users) in a niche market (VR enthusiasts who want to work and be productive in VR). By the time those pies are all cut up there's a very small number of general users left. Most of the users of Virtual Desktop on Quest were people who just wanted to play Halflife Alyx. Apple can fund this for years but their target market right now is very small and even they aren't super jazzed about the product. It's going to take a prolonged effort and prolonged hype to get the general populace to adopt this. Is this the future of computing? Yes. But it's a long time off. Much more than Gen 2 of the Vision.

[Zaxxon]

(Going to abbreviate Apple Vision Pro using AVP)

The main interface of the AVP Is a lot of fun, and certainly has the potential to be useful int he productivity space. I always think about Minority Report and some other movies where you have windows and info floating in space, and you can drag them around and zoom in.out etc using your hands. It's a really fun experience. I suspect other VRs have similar capability but the ones I used in the past were nowhere near this smooth. And of course given that it's essentially a spatial iPad, you have access to a ton of apps that you are likely already familiar with.

I would go even further and say Apple is trying to put a "Macbook Pro on your face" and is absolutely looking at this as a productivity multiplier.

100% this. That's what I was trying to say above on this page!

Niche market (VR enthusiasts) in a niche market (Apple desktop users) in a niche market (VR enthusiasts who want to work and be productive in VR). By the time those pies are all cut up there's a very small number of general users left. Most of the users of Virtual Desktop on Quest were people who just wanted to play Halflife Alyx. Apple can fund this for years but their target market right now is very small and even they aren't super jazzed about the product. It's going to take a prolonged effort and prolonged hype to get the general populace to adopt this. Is this the future of computing? Yes. But it's a long time off. Much more than Gen 2 of the Vision.

Agreed. Like I said earlier, this is very clearly a seed product, with known glaring deficiencies. They’re playing the long game and I’m sure they aren’t expecting the Vision line to impact their financials for years. See also: iPhone. Apple sold more iPhones in 2021-2022 than in its first seven years on the market.

The breakthrough iPhone from a sales perspective was the iPhone 6…

[Kurth]

(Going to abbreviate Apple Vision Pro using AVP)

The main interface of the AVP Is a lot of fun, and certainly has the potential to be useful int he productivity space. I always think about Minority Report and some other movies where you have windows and info floating in space, and you can drag them around and zoom in.out etc using your hands. It's a really fun experience. I suspect other VRs have similar capability but the ones I used in the past were nowhere near this smooth. And of course given that it's essentially a spatial iPad, you have access to a ton of apps that you are likely already familiar with.

I would go even further and say Apple is trying to put a "Macbook Pro on your face" and is absolutely looking at this as a productivity multiplier.

100% this. That's what I was trying to say above on this page!

Niche market (VR enthusiasts) in a niche market (Apple desktop users) in a niche market (VR enthusiasts who want to work and be productive in VR). By the time those pies are all cut up there's a very small number of general users left. Most of the users of Virtual Desktop on Quest were people who just wanted to play Halflife Alyx. Apple can fund this for years but their target market right now is very small and even they aren't super jazzed about the product. It's going to take a prolonged effort and prolonged hype to get the general populace to adopt this. Is this the future of computing? Yes. But it's a long time off. Much more than Gen 2 of the Vision.

Agreed. Like I said earlier, this is very clearly a seed product, with known glaring deficiencies. They’re playing the long game and I’m sure they aren’t expecting the Vision line to impact their financials for years. See also: iPhone. Apple sold more iPhones in 2021-2022 than in its first seven years on the market.

The breakthrough iPhone from a sales perspective was the iPhone 6…

See also, the Apple Newton, launched in 1993 and the iPad which was born 17 years later in 2010.

[EvilHomer3k]

Zuckerberg compares the Apple Vision Pro (iVR) to the Quest 3.

[Rumpy]

Niche market (VR enthusiasts) in a niche market (Apple desktop users) in a niche market (VR enthusiasts who want to work and be productive in VR). By the time those pies are all cut up there's a very small number of general users left. Most of the users of Virtual Desktop on Quest were people who just wanted to play Halflife Alyx. Apple can fund this for years but their target market right now is very small and even they aren't super jazzed about the product. It's going to take a prolonged effort and prolonged hype to get the general populace to adopt this. Is this the future of computing? Yes. But it's a long time off. Much more than Gen 2 of the Vision.

I think it will be down to the apps. I think one question I have about this and other AR devices is what can I do with them that I can't already do? That's the ultimate question, really. So far, I'm not really coming up with much.

[RunningMn9]

Niche market (VR enthusiasts) in a niche market (Apple desktop users) in a niche market (VR enthusiasts who want to work and be productive in VR). By the time those pies are all cut up there's a very small number of general users left.

In all seriousness, do you imagine that Apple wasn’t aware of the task going in? I’m honestly curious as to what it was that they saw/see that resulted in “spend billions and billions of dollars trying to do that.”

I’d like to know what their end game is before I judge. iPod, iPhone, iPad. All winners but pretty easy to understand from the jump. “Put that on people’s faces” is less obvious. But I would still bet that there’s a legitimate goal here even if an old goat like me isn’t the target.

[RunningMn9]

I think it will be down to the apps. I think one question I have about this and other AR devices is what can I do with them that I can't already do? That's the ultimate question, really. So far, I'm not really coming up with much.

I’m into the AR part, so I’m not stumbling into walls like an asshole. Like…if I have this, do I even need a TV anymore?

[em2nought]

I wanna see a mixed reality Frogger app.

[YellowKing]

Any new tech is a niche market until it's widely adopted. I think the primary reason we haven't seen VR widely adopted is that companies simply aren't pushing it. And when they are, it's as a game console, not as a new way of interacting with work/education/social groups, etc. So far we've seen that "gaming" seems to only be a modest driver for consumers to pay for VR.

Now at least we have a player in the market saying, "Hey, VR can open up these other possibilities as well." It will ultimately be up to consumers to decide whether those possibilities are exciting enough to drive demand. But they can't make that decision if the product doesn't exist.

As far as cost, the first VHS player was $1,000 in 1970s dollars. I don't think that's a great indicator of a product's eventual success.

[Blackhawk]

Zuckerberg compares the Apple Vision Pro (iVR) to the Quest 3.

"Maker of product A compares product A to competitor! He prefers product A."

Gasp.

I'm also curious as to what they're trying to achieve.

Gaming is a big market for VR/AR, but they're Apple. Gamers aren't going to flock to Apple unless they're already Apple junkies.

Productivity? There are absolutely productivity tools in VR/AR that can't exist in the real world. Zoom meetings where you're actually face-to-face with others with actual expressions and body language are close to being realized (that kind of face/eye/body tracking just isn't there yet for anything I've seen.)

I've fiddled around with some design tools just out of curiosity. Although they're obviously not as cinematic, the whole Iron Man holographic design thing is actually a pretty accurate example of what can be done. Being able to create a prototype while actually seeing it and moving the pieces around, or making a tiny object big enough to stand in while you problem solve could be powerful. I know that some similar tools are already popular with some architects. But it still doesn't seem like a big enough market to justify the full development cost.

Entertainment? There's value there. I've mentioned it in the VR thread - the way VR works fools your perception in regards to distance and scale. Watching a movie in a good VR headset feels just like watching in in a theater. You're still limited by the resolution, but the screen is just as huge and immersive, plus you can watch while lying in bed, sitting in the recliner, or whatever. I could certainly see a live VR camera being developed that could be placed at sporting events, concerts, and so on that one could stream the event to themselves in a fully 360 degree, 3d environment, making it feel just like you were sitting in prime seats, free to look around at will.

But none of those markets exist yet (well, gaming does), at least not at this kind of scale. We're right on the edge them all existing, and could pull off the tech if it doesn't already exist, but there aren't enough people doing it to make it a profitable venture.

If I had to guess, I'd think that Apple was wanting to leverage their massive and dedicated customer base to create a new market, one that they could then Apple Store the crap out of.

[Blackhawk]

And when they are, it's as a game console, not as a new way of interacting with work/education/social groups, etc. So far we've seen that "gaming" seems to only be a modest driver for consumers to pay for VR.

FWIW, it's been quietly known for a while now that one of the major driving forces for VR has been porn.

[Jaymon]

for the previous product like the phone and the pod, it was clear, really clear, to basically everybody who saw them. How this product was going to make life better. Right, that was the point, this new thing nearly instantly made life better.

but with the computer on the face, its different. How does having a computer on your face make life better? How does it make life easier?
I don't care about which generation, or how many iterations it takes to make it affordable, thats the ultimate question to determine if this product is going to be THE THING, or just another headset on the pile.


Here is my opinion on why its not going to be THE THING, and its nothing to do with current hardware or eventual specs and pricing.

Humans, for the most part, interface with the world visually. We use our eyes. Having a computer between our eyes and the world puts a layer of distance between, and throws the world into a state of uncanny valley. No matter how good the graphics get, having the computer interpret the world for us instead of using our own eyes is always going to be met with resistance.


The general public is not going to see or want to have a computer in front of their eyes. There is just no value in it, there is no quality of life increase, there is nothing about it that makes life easier or better or faster or smoother.