While the new product surpasses its rivals, its necessity and affordability remain uncertain for the majority
As individuals share their firsthand experiences with Apple’s Vision Pro VR headset, it becomes increasingly evident that the company has created an exceptional piece of hardware. Even in limited demonstrations, users have lauded the remarkable craftsmanship of the tiny screens in each eyepiece, surpassing the pixel count of a 4K TV. The quality of the “passthrough” video, which provides wearers with detailed awareness of their surroundings, even allowing them to use their phones while wearing the headset, has left them astonished. Additionally, the seamless functionality of the gesture controls on the new hardware, facilitated by an array of infrared cameras that enable subtle hand movements for selection and scrolling, has left a lasting impression on users, eliminating the need for cumbersome controllers.
Naturally, such exceptional quality is to be expected considering the price point of $3,499 (£2,816, with the UK pricing and launch still awaiting confirmation) at which Apple plans to release this product. It far exceeds the current market’s high-end offerings, with devices like Valve’s $999 Vive considered as the epitome of quality.
While Apple has demonstrated its ability to create the finest VR headset globally, it has been less persuasive in making a compelling argument for why people should desire the best VR headset in the first place. In heralding the release as the beginning of the “era of spatial computing,” Apple defensively compared the $3,499 price tag to the expenses associated with equipping a home with a large TV, surround sound system, high-performance computer, and cutting-edge gaming console. This comparison suggests that Apple envisions the Vision Pro as a potential all-in-one replacement for these components in the future.
Drawing a parallel to the late Steve Jobs’ pitch during the iPhone launch, Apple seems to be following a similar approach. They aim to combine multiple functionalities into one device, just as they did with the iPhone—a fusion of a widescreen iPod, revolutionary mobile phone, and breakthrough internet communications device. However, while the appeal of consolidating three portable devices into one is evident, it is less apparent whether there is a pressing need to unify the TV, laptop, and sound system into a single device at home.
Likewise, the key differentiators between Apple’s headset and its competitors do not solely revolve around raw technical specifications. Instead, Apple’s emphasis lies in creating a headset that users can keep on continuously. The EyeSight feature, which projects the user’s eyes on a front-facing screen, aims to facilitate conversations with others without the need to remove the headset. The external battery pack redistributes weight from the head to the pockets, ensuring comfort during extended usage (Apple even claims it can be worn “all day” when connected to a power source). Apple even suggests the possibility of using the Vision Pro while working, allowing users to open their Mac laptops and type on a larger virtual screen floating in front of them, without taking off the headset.
The product gives the impression of being reverse-engineered from the future into the present. It’s plausible to imagine a future, perhaps a decade from now, where technology has been miniaturized and made commercially available, resulting in a world where unobtrusive “smart glasses” are worn by everyone for a significant part of their day, rendering other devices like phones and laptops unnecessary. To achieve this future, the journey must begin here: starting with a bulky headset and gradually improving it year after year. This future represents a continuation of Apple’s dominance in the consumer electronics realm. However, what remains uncertain is whether this vision, embodied in the Vision Pro, is something that others should desire.
