Apple Likely Planning to Use Bigger, Lower Resolution Displays for Cheaper Vision Headset

[JPack]

I still don’t believe they’re going to do this. If they’re putting out a request for information on these matters it’s means they are testing.

I still think the AVP set the minimum experience standards that Apple wants to operate in this space with what they consider “retina quality”.

We’ll see, but I don’t see the resolution dropping that much unless the PPI for the AVP was complete overkill for the “retina” level…which I doubt as well.

“There’s $3,500 worth of tech in the Vision Pro, but not $3,500 worth of value for the mass consumer, at least not yet."

This best represents the state of Vision Pro right now. Does it need to be 4K for consumers to appreciate spatial computing? The answer is probably no. Setting the minimum experience at 4K doesn't help if consumers can't appreciate it, especially if there's no killer app and nobody can afford the device. This is similar to 5G vs 4G iPhone. Is it necessary to have 5G for iPhone to succeed?

RFI asks suppliers for their capabilities, pricing range, manufacturing capacity. It wouldn't make sense for Apple to ask for a lower resolution display if they weren't interested in that direction.

 

[lilkwarrior]

“There’s $3,500 worth of tech in the Vision Pro, but not $3,500 worth of value for the mass consumer, at least not yet."

This best represents the state of Vision Pro right now. Does it need to be 4K for consumers to appreciate spatial computing? The answer is probably no. Setting the minimum experience at 4K doesn't help if consumers can't appreciate it, especially if there's no killer app. This is similar to 5G vs 4G iPhone. Is it necessary to have 5G for iPhone to succeed?

RFI asks suppliers for their capabilities, pricing range, manufacturing capacity. It wouldn't make sense for Apple to ask for a lower resolution display if they weren't interested in that direction.

It needed to and beyond (~5K natively and ~5K2K or 4K ultrawide with 2.0) with Dolby HDR+HLG HDR to work alongside Apple’s other prosumer hardware.

Like the Pro Display XDzr vs the Studio Display, Apple may dial it back a bit to be a high-end mid-tier headset.


With no aspirations like Meta’s Metaverse and being the mobile phone of VR AAA gaming , I don’t see Apple releasing a low-end headset competing the Quest 3 that necessitates selling at a loss

 

[NT1440]

“There’s $3,500 worth of tech in the Vision Pro, but not $3,500 worth of value for the mass consumer, at least not yet."

This best represents the state of Vision Pro right now. Does it need to be 4K for consumers to appreciate spatial computing? The answer is probably no. Setting the minimum experience at 4K doesn't help if consumers can't appreciate it, especially if there's no killer app. This is similar to 5G vs 4G iPhone. Is it necessary to have 5G for iPhone to succeed?

RFI asks suppliers for their capabilities, pricing range, manufacturing capacity. It wouldn't make sense for Apple to ask for a lower resolution display if they weren't interested in that direction.

We’ll see, but I really don’t see it happening. That’s my opinion and has been since the release of the AVP representing Apple’s baseline MVP (minimal viable product) for spatial computing.

I don’t see them backpedaling on a core part of the UX like that.

 

[macduke]

No thanks to any of this mess.

 

[Armadillo21]

This.
It really hit me when I saw it was $5 000 in Canada. Like, I can explore cool tech for $1 500, maybe even stretch it to $2 000, but never $5 000.

Mine came to $5,750 . Ziess lenses , case and tax. Apple care will add $700 more. Not sure if I will or not. But ya that is a scary price. But I want one bad!!

 

[Armadillo21]

I think Apple finds it to be very important. So important to their product experience that they developed a realtime-os and silicon specifically to address it.

Crappy passthrough does not matter, you’re right on that.

It will never be below $1000.

 

[wbeasley]

I see noone is triggered yet that "tethering to a phone or Mac" is going to make the EU unhappy

Wait until Spotify or Epic read this post and send in their support crew... LOL

 

[JPack]

It needed to and beyond (~5K natively and ~5K2K or 4K ultrawide with 2.0) with Dolby HDR+HLG HDR to work alongside Apple’s other prosumer hardware.

Like the Pro Display XDzr vs the Studio Display, Apple may dial it back a bit to be a high-end mid-tier headset.


With no aspirations like Meta’s Metaverse and being the mobile phone of VR AAA gaming , I don’t see Apple releasing a low-end headset competing the Quest 3 that necessitates selling at a loss

We’ll see, but I really don’t see it happening. That’s my opinion and has been since the release of the AVP representing Apple’s baseline MVP (minimal viable product) for spatial computing.

I don’t see them backpedaling on a core part of the UX like that.

Vision Pro is basically iPhone X. This upcoming mass market headset will essentially be iPhone XR.

If it's called Vision Pro and the display spec is already baseline, then what would be the Vision? How could it be baseline if it's a Pro device?

I agree Apple won't release a low end headset, but even a base level Vision with half the PPI will still outperform Meta due to the build quality, software, and processing power.

 

[lilkwarrior]

Vision Pro is basically iPhone X. This upcoming mass market headset will essentially be iPhone XR.

If it's called Vision Pro and the display spec is already baseline, then what would be the Vision? How could it be baseline if it's a Pro device?

I agree Apple won't release a low end headset, but even a base level Vision with half the PPI will still outperform Meta due to the build quality, software, and processing power.

The Vision Pro is the baseline of a prosumer headset in Apple’s portfolio just like the Pro Display XDR is the baseline of a prosumer high PPI HDR 32” monitor (6K for 218PPI, Dolby Vision + HLG HDR, 1000 sustained nits aligned with Dolby Vision requiring 1000 for reference monitors, and 1600 peak nits which became the highest end VESA HDR standard).

The lower end product will be called something like The Vision Air.

VisionOS isn’t tied to headsets, so it could be used for AR glasses instead for a much more interesting mainstream play than a low-end header, IMO.

Low-end headsets have uphill battles to climb with the horrible execution and pricing situation Meta, HTC, and Sony have caused.

 

[NT1440]

Vision Pro is basically iPhone X. This upcoming mass market headset will essentially be iPhone XR.

If it's called Vision Pro and the display spec is already baseline, then what would be the Vision? How could it be baseline if it's a Pro device?

I agree Apple won't release a low end headset, but even a base level Vision with half the PPI will still outperform Meta due to the build quality, software, and processing power.

It’s the baseline because time and technology match forward…

Sony already has their next gen version of the AVP screens coming to market this year. Industrial partners share their roadmaps with each other when they make commitments and collaborate.

I could be completely wrong, but everything about the AVP introduction event read to me as “this is where we are planting our flag for user experience in this new platform” 🤷‍♂️

 

[NT1440]

It will never be below $1000.

Sure it will, 20 years from now.

But who made this claim and why are you responding to me like I did?

 

[Corefile]

Make it rubbish by down specing it and neutering the functionality? What is Tim Apple thinking.

 

[No5tromo]

Looks like Apple is about to collaborate with Fischer Price for the budget Vision Headset

 

[GrayFlannel]

…The Vision Pro’s price actually makes it a bargain for the price of prosumer monitors that don’t even have its HDR capabilities—just like the Pro Display XDR which to no surprise had similar criticism for its price and instead aged like fine wine.

Look at the price of a prosumer 4K+ Dolby HDR + HLG HDR monitor with 1600 peak nits (and ideally 1000+ sustained nits); even large, low-end HDR (HDR600) 5K2K monitors are consistently ~$2000 MSRP.

The sole other headset in the world with a higher resolution than the Vision Pro and more pixel density than the Vision Pro is a non-standalone headset that doesn’t even have HDR. It costs more than the Vision Pro.

The Vision Pro isn’t priced or compromising for the mainstream consumer; the market has enough of those headsets with middling success at best:

The Quest headsets are arguably the most successful headsets in the market that have lost 4 billion dollars and have contributed to a mediocre reputation for the device category alongside Sony’s abysmal execution of supporting the PSVR2.

Apple had no obligation catering to budget/mainstream audiences first compared to a niche of prosumers most understanding, most likely to afford, and most knowledgeable/appreciative of the innovations of the Vision Pro.

I don’t see VP, under any work scenario, being more efficient or cheaper than a normal workstation and 2 or 3 basic monitors.

 

[120FPS]

They should put in cheaper Furby Connect eyes😋

 

[GrayFlannel]

Mine came to $5,750 . Ziess lenses , case and tax. Apple care will add $700 more. Not sure if I will or not. But ya that is a scary price. But I want one bad!!

Apple is confident you will find a justification to buy it.

 

[frownface]

Apple Vision XR

 

[frownface]

Mine came to $5,750 . Ziess lenses , case and tax. Apple care will add $700 more. Not sure if I will or not. But ya that is a scary price. But I want one bad!!

sounds to me like you've already decided to buy it

 

[NT1440]

I don’t see VP, under any work scenario, being more efficient or cheaper than a normal workstation and 2 or 3 basic monitors.

Why is “efficiency” the lens to view this product through?

 

[jimbobb24]

Why? It would be a completely different and not Apple Vision experience. Lower resolution introduces so many issues. Just ditch the glass and the complicated manufacturing process.

 

[Bass Ackwards]

Get rid of the outer display, the creepy eyes or color effects are an expensive party trick. I imagine making the outside more basic would make a pretty good dent in cost, weight, and battery life.

 

[jimbobb24]

Why do we need 10000 nits? I don't need the retina display to burn out my retina. What material is even mastered at 10000 nits?

What I want is a wider field of view. I want to feel like I'm watching IMAX, not a home theater

Go watch videos on it (too complicated to explain and I will probably get it wrong). To get through the lenses. The actual experienced nits is way way lower.

 

[zubikov]

This is a non-starter for me. Honestly for $500 the Quest 3 is a great device that keeps improving with new updates. If Apple downgrades the hardware specs, what else does it have going for the headset? It’s so disappointing to see a lack of coherent strategy with the AVP. So much potential and time already wasted.

 

[GrayFlannel]

Why is “efficiency” the lens to view this product through?

In what world is inefficiency a desirable product trait?

 

[knowsuchpeace]

The tethering rumor is dumb and bad. Apple needs more headsets that run visionOS asap, and I can't fathom Apple explaining to users how to dual-boot into visionOS through their iPhone. Headsets also require much more juice than an iPhone battery is capable of giving it. Who is willing to burn through their iPhone battery after watching half of a film?

The main cost of the vision pro is in those expensive displays, and cheaper micro-OLED displays is the easiest path to slashing the production costs for a lower-end device. A lighter device with slightly worse displays and at a fraction of the price seems like a no-brainer if Apple can get it out the door in a reasonable timeframe.