Apple Vision Pro – Two Things I Liked… One Thing I Didn’t.



Apple Vision Pro looks pretty wild If you want to support the channel, consider a Dave2D membership by clicking the “Join” button …

source

This Post Has 35 Comments

  1. Dave2D

    late upload. had to "iron" out the details
    thx for watching!

  2. Austin Crow

    “With this thing, you’re catch’n balls” – Dave2D 2023

  3. alwaysyouramanda

    I have a theory about “eye sight.” Now, they can capture and record data on people’s gaze.. people other than the user.

  4. Brayden Turner

    Anyone else unable to not focus on the iron for the entire video?

  5. Half Alligator

    It is "pro" so I guess they wanted all the features. They'll see what vibes with users and devs and the next device (and budget devices) will hone in on what's important. But still… I agree it must have been very expensive.

  6. Middernag

    I feel like their eye sight feature is more for marketing and being recognizable just like what they first did for the notch on iPhones and the wheel on iPods. But Steve Jobs can consider functionality and appearance while Tim Cook seems to go for being recognizable first and reverse engineer to come up with functionality to justify the price. (the notch and Face ID for example, less secure, more latency and more costly than Touch ID but hey definitely more recognizable and marketable).

  7. N R

    While I think it's a gimmick,
    they wouldn't be able to sell this thing without it.
    Just imagine how much worse marketing for this thing would look without it.
    Every time you wanted a picture of it it would just be a person with half their face blocked out, all dystopian like.
    Also how much harder it would be to visually differentiate this product from the competition.
    I think Apple needed this gimmick in there, and it'll do wonders for sales, even if it means +$700 to the price.

  8. Phantom

    if 2nd gen is comin in 2 years, gonna wait for that one. i imagine this one gonna have like 5k retina xdr or some liquid shit 😂 and more like 3000k. like the 1gen of now very good known ipad design, it was kinda 500 bucks more than 2nd gen. and we bought the 1gen. so yeah.

  9. duartemu

    Finally a review that points out iSight as probably a bad move from Apple! I personally think it's superfluous and insanely gimmicky, and sadly it's the only feature that makes this headset stand out as something "new". It is instead an amalgamation of pre-existing tech. Features that, good or bad, have been done before by others, so people can pay Apple an exorbitant amount of money to do the same things they already do on their phones and computers, aside from packing luggage with goggles strapped to their face for no logical reason, because that's what people do when they have only 2 hours of battery life. Meanwhile, other companies are pushing the envelope and coming up with devices that project images to transparent lenses the wearer can look through, and trying to improve upon that, instead of faking it with the use of camera feed.
    Glass that can get tinted on demand already exists as well as glass that can go from transparent to opaque. Transparent displays also already exist. I was hoping for an implementation that takes these resources to the next level, or something using new tech never seen before.

  10. Ty

    I think they had to do the eyesight thing personally, otherwise it’d just look like yet-another headset

  11. SoloKarry

    I think eyesight is good

    Since this is a first gen and a pro product, my guess is Apple wants to give as much flexibility for usability as possible. If a use case develops, they keep it around, if it doesn't, they skip it for the consumer version.

    Kinda reminds me of 3d touch if we scale down the perspective.

    Like I know weird animated programmable DJ masks that go for such a massive price, if that can be done through eyesight on top of being a very advanced AR device, i think its worth it.

    Lastly the point of price, I don't think having this 500 cheaper or more expensive changes a lot of minds, beyond a 1000 usd for an electronic device you are already looking at only enthusiasts or early adopters, for them it doesn't matter, the calculus behind the 3500 number is just the average cost of owning a flagship laptop+smartphone+tv averaged out. They could've priced this 5k and the difference in sales would've been minute.

  12. Aswindev A

    Finally! Someone said something useful about the headset. Everyone else has been just saying praises without actually giving any measurable or comparable info.
    Knowing that it can process all that data with such high resolution at such low latency, as standalone, is super impressive. BUT, they're only doing 2D right now, right? I wonder how it would perform doing actual 3D VR like the rest of the VR headsets.
    It feels like the glass & metal body, with the external display is a gimmick to standout from the rest of the high-end VR headsets to avoid comparison in performance.
    Imagine if it was this smooth & high-res, while being able to play sim titles. The $3500 isn't that high for an average sim racer.

  13. Wayne

    Realistically speaking, you have this gigantic goggles on your head, does it really matter to the other person whether your eyes are showing or not? Definitely a weird decision to include an OLED outward facing panel just for that… If anyone wants to have a prolonged convo, they will take the damn thing off…

  14. 0xVerse

    iSight or whatever that screen it's just stupid, i don't care about what others see.

  15. At this point, it kinda seems like Apple created EyeSight so YouTubers would have a nice visual for their thumbnail images. 🙂

  16. Wataru IK

    Without enough good contents and apps, majority of ppl will not find it's useful as much. 1st gen for dev/business is not a bad idea,take it slowly.

  17. stan_sprinkle

    2:57 the line was supposed to be “it’s too late, the ball already hit you in the nuts”

  18. NoTruth

    i mean how much people know about this lasers tracking your eyes all day really? sure be on the frontier of technology and get eye cancer in 5 years…

  19. John

    If you can afford to blow $3000 on essentially a developer headset, you can afford $3500. Yes it’s likely to help make it iconic but it also adds the thing to the headset they all miss when talking to people when you have one on, a feeling of being part of what you’re doing, even if you stopped to look at the person, they feel you are 100% focusing on them, unlike talking to someone whilst they tap away on their phone, they aren’t 100% focusing on you.

  20. Diego Moreno

    great videos. but can you put more volume on them plz

  21. e21big

    I think the eyes display makes sense if you want to use your headset in public or wear it on the street basically

    But with wire, and 2 hours battery life? That thing isn't going anywhere from the wall which make this feature pretty much useless, and a waste of glass

  22. sidewinder3000

    Hey Dave, appreciate your insights, as always. I think there is one main reason that Apple included Eyesight: they are trying to legitimize and popularize an emerging technology category that has a LOT of baggage around isolation via technology, and so they wanted to create a gen 1 product that directly addressed those concerns. Now, instead of a lot of conversation around how AR/VR separates and isolates users, the conversation is about “gee whiz this tech is amazing” and maybe even looking at ways it can help connect certain populations. So basically, it’s a big picture play. And if they lose a few purchases early on it’s worth it to control the narrative.

  23. Tim

    If $500-$$600 difference on a $3,500 device is a decision maker for buying it or not, you shouldn't be buying it. You're talking about 15% or so. And clearly this is built to establish a new paradigm of 'spatial computing' when we become more accustomed to virtual representations of each other even when we're in the same room. And it wouldn't have cost Apple that much to implement this. They were already creating a lifelike avatar of the user for FaceTime. The external display of this is just a cropped version of that effectively, so the real cost is the external facing display.

  24. jso

    i love that you look like you just came out of the shower!

  25. Sir JM

    Eyesight grounds us to reality…

  26. b__b

    I do think the eye sight is an important feature for adoption by making the social experience less weird. Hopefully they find use cases for the external oled which benefit the user later on (multiplayer gaming? Would be perfect for something simple like heads up lol)

  27. Faeez F

    The humble iron is remarkable, creasing shirts and pants

  28. nakedcellist

    I have the suspicion that eyesight is an essential part of the Apple strategy in order to make this a successful AR headset, instead of a VR headset and that therefore the developers also need to be able to develop for it.

  29. aDx Angeles

    if Dave got excited like this on a product we know its good

  30. GSUS

    Gen 1 is ALWAYS for developers.

  31. Sean Murdock

    My unpopular opinion is Microsoft hololens is better device for me

  32. Gabriel Moro

    Criticizing a technology because of the initial price is funny… The future needs to be shaped as best as possible.

Leave a Reply