Apple fans are starting to return their Vision Pros::The return window for the very first Apple Vision Pro buyers is fast approaching — and some have taken to social media to explain why they won’t be keeping their headsets.

  • Rin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    As someone who is unironically into a lot of VR stuff and even owns a pricey headset myself, I did not understand the appeal from the features I’ve seen past looking “”“cool”“”. Even the stuff that looks at least somewhat fun or useful doesnt even seem worth it considering the price, especially when there’s apparently a lot of basic features that cheaper headsets preform much better at.

    • TheDarksteel94@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      It has some neat features and ideas, but nothing I haven’t seen in other products before. Definitely more polished, and it brings all of those big features together in one package. But for me, it’s the price that kills it. Maybe Apple had a hunch that all of this might happen and they just wanted it out as a setup for the next version?

    • Starkstruck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Fr, I love VR, but this headset is just Apple trying to cash in on the VR market without understanding what people actually like about VR.

      • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        I think they totally understand that there is a legitimate mixed reality / AR use case that people have wanted addressed for decades, but the hardware has never been able to pull it off well.

        If I could pop on a light weight headset, and have a desktop with infinite 4K monitors, with a high refresh rate, without breaking my wallet, I would 1000% buy that product.

        The hardware isn’t there yet, but I’m glad to see people are investing in platforms that could get us there in a decade or two.

  • Matriks404@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    I dislike Apple, but this is the way future will like. AR (and maybe VR, but who knows) will definitely be amazing in a decade or so. BUT I think some people will still stick to smartphones, especially ones who don’t want to spend their whole day with technology and social media.

    I am definitely buying an AR headset, as long as it’s affordable and can replace at least half of the tasks I do on my computer/phone. The AR device with Windows 11 and computing power of standard computer would be just fucking amazing, and I wouldn’t go back.

    • MrSpArkle@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Microsoft barely made a PC interface, they’re the last ones i would expect make a proper AR interface.

      • OrderedChaos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Aren’t they removing the AR they built into the OS? I swear I read recently that they gave up on their customers that bought their headset so people that have it are forced to stay on an old version of windows just to use them.

        • Vinny@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Microsoft’s game plan seems to be:

          1. Sell a cool idea, halfheartedly.
          2. Abandon the idea.
          3. Wait until someone else done it right.
          4. Ripe them off / play catch up.

          It was exactly like that for Windows on ARM.

          In other words, regardless of whether you like/hate Apple, if the Vision Pro does not success, then there probably won’t be any further investment in the space from MS either.

          • OrderedChaos@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            I don’t mind any of the companies when they have tech that does a job really well. Sadly it seems that they all have this collective idea that anything they’ve done well is not worth maintaining at some point. I’m neither a Linux, windows, or Mac fan. And each have their strengths. You just pick the poison while it’s available to fill a need.

      • Matriks404@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Not sure what do you mean by PC interface. Do you mean interface between user and computer? (which has nothing to do with software) Or like GUI in an operating system?

        If by “PC interface” you mean GUI, then I still don’t get you, because there’s real alternative to Windows UI in any desktop operating system last time I checked. Sure Apple has macOS with its simple UI, and may be good for users that need to do only basic tasks, but if you need to have powerful (and in some parts customizable, although Unix desktops like KDE or Xfce may be better suited for max customization) UI with great UX for power users and without need to get to command line often (like you do on Linux) nothing beats Windows.

        • sacredfire@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          I don’t know, when we start talking about power users my mind goes to developers and most seem to not like windows. At least that has been my experience. Most of us prefer unix based systems, primarily because we have to use it to interact with like almost every server anyway. And of course I’m not just talking about different Linux distos, Mac is essentially Unix based and is in heavy use in a lot of shops.

          • Matriks404@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            Yeah, as for development I’d say Linux (or any Unix-like) is more suited for that, especially when you have really great shell, development utilities and awesome package managers, and the overall system design is good for that. Also some stuff is just faster to do in command line, I could never see myself using git graphically for example, as doing so only gives me more headaches. But for most stuff I prefer GUI, because GUI’s tend to have common design choices, and you can generally figure it out in few minutes, while for CLI utilities anything goes, some have built-in interactive prompts, some incompatible syntax, there’s sometimes steep learning curve, and list goes on.

        • MrSpArkle@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          Microsoft puts ads in the start menu. I could go into a deeper critique, but ultimately that is the canary in the coal mine. Any company with a structure capable of shipping that feature is fucking busted in terms of user experience and ui design.

    • ExLisper@linux.community
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Flying cars will be the future but I wouldn’t buy a flying car today.

      Brain-computer interfaces will be the future but I wouldn’t implant a chip in my brain today.

      Personal AI assistants will be the future but I wouldn’t pay $350 for ChatGPT today.

      Lot’s of things will be great in the future. Bringing it up in the context of existing, silly products is a bit pointless.

      • june@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        I think they mean a full windows OS for AR, which doesn’t currently exist.

        • xthexder@l.sw0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          Hololens 2 still exists and runs a highly modified version of Windows, so it does sort of exist. But obviously there’s no chance of running desktop apps on a Hololens.

          • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            Hololens is what they’re discontinuing support for and removing from future updates to the OS.

      • Matriks404@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Well, that’s kinda stupid on their part, but I bet they will be rejoining AR race later though, probably too late while Apple and Google creates good AR platforms with massive support of 3rd parties. And I expect Google (or, ekhm, Alphabet?) to show something like that in next few years.

        Still, as for Windows AR devices, I expect to there being some 3rd party ones in ~10 years, that have computing power of desktop PC’s we had yesterday or we have today. And we can already see that even mid-budget mobile devices can run heavy desktop environments (like Windows or some Linux desktops (like GNOME and KDE)) with no issues whatsoever, this is just going to expand into AR devices.

  • danielfgom@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    I’m not surprised. Apple Vision Pro is junk. Zuckerberg released a short video giving his opinion and he’s right::Quest is way better in every way and 7 times cheaper.

    The Quest is lighter, has no cables, can do AR and VR, has better controllers, has way more apps and games and costs 7(!) times less.

    The Vision Pro is bulky and heavy, cords get in the way, the battery only lasts 2 hours, you need special lenses if you use glasses, it barely has any apps and it’s watching you all the time.

    Apple should really be embarrassed at how bad this product is after years of R&D and millions spent. They can’t even compete against Quest. All they had to do was copy it but they couldn’t even manage that.

    What a joke!

    • MrSpArkle@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Quest is better in every way

      Zuckerberg can’t even buy an SOC to put in the quest to compete with Apple. Qualcomm doesn’t make one. So it can’t be better in every way.

      It can be better subjectively to some people. But objectively the Vision Pro has specs other manufacturers literally won’t be able to do for at least 2-3 years, and not for 500 bucks.

      • danielfgom@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        The SOC isn’t the whole story. The user experience is what counts. But Qualcomm do hehe a chip as powerful as Apples. Zuck should just buy that

        • MrSpArkle@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          They only recently announced a laptop chip that beats the m2 in SOME benchmarks, but at a higher power draw, but it is not shipping in any product. Mind you Apple is on M3.

    • DingoBilly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      They’re two different market segments. The Quest is definitely more practical for most people, but to just day it’s better in every way is a disservice to the fact the tech in the Vision Pro is the best version of VR out there. It’s just way too expensive.

      • BurnSquirrel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Oh but it’s not though right? I’m not big into that space but there are professional VR headsets that costs several thousands of dollars, like apples, but still lead it in tech, which to me seem to leave apple’s device in this weird cost middle ground between professional headsets like varjo and consumer headsets like oculus.

      • danielfgom@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Lol. Thanks. But I take don’t give a crap about up or downvotes. I literally never look at that ever. I just want to get my opinion out and see what other people’s opinions are.

        But you’re right, it’s probably the isheep…

      • Bandicoot_Academic@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Can you use the Vision Pro while wearing glasses? I can use my Quest without special lenses because i can just wear my glasses while using it.

  • stoly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    So…stupid people with too much money to burn jumped on something they neither wanted nor needed and then got bored.

    • Rediphile@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Hard to call them stupid when they got to use it for free within the return window. Seems like a good deal. I agree with all the other points though.

  • MiDaBa@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Apple pitched the Vision Pro as if VR hadn’t wasn’t already a thing that’s been around for a while. While the VP has some higher specs particularly in its display it lacks in areas like field of view, comfort, game selection and portability. The first group of people that would be interested are those who already own or have used other VR systems. They those people won’t see the VP as such a jump. Especially considering it’s locked to the Apples app store with not many VR options. The second group is composed of people who have been out of the loop and think this is the begining of VR. I think thats the camp more likely to return the unit once they realize it’s just a novelty in its current state.

  • squid_slime@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    These are the same complaints most report for most vr headsets, headaches, nausea and dry eyes… Disappointing article.

    • DingoBilly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Your comment suggests you read the first paragraph and didn’t read the rest which is disappointing.

      The article talks about the most common complaint being comfort, then goes on to other complaints like the fact it offers no productivity savings and is expensive.

      It’s a bit of a no brainer though at end of day. Anyone surprised this is just a gimmick like any other is new to the VR space.

      • squid_slime@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yea looking at the site I mistook the large gaps between paragraphs to be the end of the article. Going over it and I can see I missed a large deal. But I am still unsurprised with the reasons why people are returning the headsets. Its expensive, sold for productivity yet is restricting and uncomfortable. Vr has a place in the world and that is mostly media consumption.

    • JaymesRS@literature.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      The other thing I keep hearing is that it’s a super expensive purchase that people don’t know what to do with once they’ve got it. I’m old enough to remember when they said the same thing about early home computers ($3000-$5000 in equivalent cost) from the late 70s and early 80s.

      • squid_slime@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Silicon and engineering has come down in price and vr is hardly revolutionary at this point so yea price point is stupid high but what do people expect from apple

    • NevermindNoMind@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Some are, sure. But others have to do with the weight. The most interesting rationals for returning it are because it’s shit as a productivity tool. So if you can’t really use it for work, there aren’t many games on it, then why are you keeping it? At that point it’s just a TV that only you can watch (since it doesn’t support multiple user profiles).

    • swayevenly@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Given the odd weight distribution, it’s also unfortunate that this may have been their first headset.

      • JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Making a VR headset from aluminium and glass with nothing to balance it in the back is yet again another perfect example of Apple going hard with form over function.

        • lud@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          One reason for not balancing it in the back is probably because putting stuff in the back makes it uncomfortable if you want to lean back in a chair or a couch which is probably very important for the device since it’s primarily for sitting down compared to most other VR headsets.

    • KiloGex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      We’ll never know. This is all based on people’s complaints online. Apple will never actually release how many were returned and for what reasons.

      • darth_helmet@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        They’re a public company, we’ll get sales figures and enough proxy numbers to have a good guess. Shareholders are going to want to know.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    Parker Ortolani, The Verge’s product manager, told me that he thought using the device led to a burst blood vessel in his eye.

    “Despite being as magical to use as I’d hoped, it was simply way too uncomfortable to wear even for short periods of time both due to the weight and the strap designs.

    For smart glasses and headsets, having a low nose bridge can mean the device just slips off your face or fails to adequately block out light.

    Another engineer wrote on the social media platform X that the “coding experience failed to convince [him]” and focusing issues caused headaches.

    “If I’m not using this for productivity, and if I don’t love it for entertainment, and if there aren’t enough games to play on it - I just can’t justify keeping it,” one Reddit user wrote.

    While these users are speaking out on social media, we have no idea of the actual return rate — or what Apple’s internal expectations for the Vision Pro are.


    The original article contains 621 words, the summary contains 168 words. Saved 73%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • KiloGex@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    The problem with this article is that it’s all circumstantial. Sure these are people complaining of problems and critiques, but we’ll never get the full report of how many returns there actually are and why they were returned. That’s just not data Apple will ever give out.

    • nutsack@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      it’s probably not even circumstantial. I think it’s just a cool trend to write articles about how bad the next new experimental tech product for rich people is.

      • Flaky@iusearchlinux.fyi
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        I’m thinking on buying a Quest to dip into PCVR. I’ve heard horror stories about the Index’s poor QC (which is weird given the Steam Deck’s done me well so far) and PSVR2 isn’t compatible with PC. Yes, iVRy exists but that driver is in development and the developer basically said “just buy a Quest if you want a cheap PC VR headset”.

      • thejml@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Honestly, no one should buy a Quest 3, or any other Quest for that matter… Meta doesn’t need any more money or tracking data. PS VR2, Vive Pro 2 or even the Valve Index would be better.

    • just_another_person@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      SOME WOULD SAY you don’t need the controllers. Then you’re just a regular VR headset. Would Apple say that? No. I think this boils down to a dumb product with lackluster payoff at $3.5k.

    • DingoBilly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      It needs to be maybe 75% cheaper as well as what you’ve said and it becomes worth it.

      At this price point it will never be successful.

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Here’s an application…every fridge would have a visor on the door. Stick your face in the visor and you’ll be able to see the fridge from the webcam in front of it… including your self!

    • PhilMcGraw@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Why not just have a VR fridge app that connects remotely to cameras in your fridge? Or even better some ML shit that would identify what is in your fridge.

      • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Because that’s not ridiculous. But what about an app where you control a little robot that you have to crawl around the fridge to investigate and discover what’s inside?

        • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          Why doesn’t it support 3D VR porn?

          Most of those are just video’s aren’t they? Can’t the Apple glasses run videos?

          • UsernameIsTooLon@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            Not just porn, but 3D videos in general are stereoscopic videos where it’s side by side. They look like this. Without something proper to split the video across your eyes, you just see this 2D video floating in space rather than get the full 3D experience.

          • thorbot@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            It doesn’t support it out of the box but it’s just a computer… you install the media player that supports that.

        • nutsack@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          3D VR porn it’s just a matter of having a media player that can play the video files

            • nutsack@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              I’m always glad to see another VR headset enter the marketplace and compete a little bit. I’m not really an Apple fan boy and I wouldn’t buy this, but the MacBook display feature looks pretty good to me. this is probably how I would use it 100% of the time.

              • UsernameIsTooLon@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                5 months ago

                Oh yea, credit where credit is due. Apple products are always engineering marvels. But man you can do so much more for almost 1/10th of the cost.

    • thorbot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      It runs Steam Link very well and has a number of built in games too. And it runs porn great, just not the stereoscopic videos by default, but you can sideload an app for that too.

      • Blackmist@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yeah, but surely you’d want actual VR games, rather than just Steam Link to a big virtual screen.

        Half Life Alyx is a great game, but there’s no way it would ever come to this headset just because of the lack of VR controllers.

  • linearchaos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Some people are returning it because they had expectations that using VR would be immediately comfortable. The headset is heavier and more poorly strapped/distributed than ‘alternatives’ but it’s also graphically far more stunning. I honestly hope they stay in the game and push the competitors to up their game. maybe we can get pancake lenses, foveated rendering and eye tracking in a $1500 package.

    • darth_helmet@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      So the quest pro? Foveated rendering only matters if you don’t have the graphics throughput to render it all, so I don’t totally buy that it’s key to a good vr headset so much as helps you get away with cheaper silicon. Maybe enough-lower tdp that it enables slimmer design.

      • daltotron@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        I don’t really look at it as a symptom of lack of graphics throughput, but more as a benefit of eye tracking, which is also potentially something that benefits, say, the immersion of others through portraying your facial expressions more realistically, or something to that effect. You could also use it as a kind of peripheral for games or software, and apple currently uses it as a mouse, so it’s not totally useless. But I also can’t imagine that most developers are going to be imaginative enough to make good use of it, if we can’t even think of good uses for basic shit, like haptic feedback.

        Perhaps it breaks even in terms of allowing them to save money they otherwise would’ve spent on rendering, but I dunno if that’s the case, since the camera has to be pretty low latency, and you have to still dedicate hardware resources to the eye tracking and foveated rendering in order to get it to look good. Weight savings, then? I just don’t really know. I guess we’ll see, if it gets more industry adoption.

      • Kage520@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        I think foveated rendering also helps with immersion. Being able to blur things you are not specifically looking at and are farther away is a closer match to reality.

          • orgrinrt@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            As far as I understand (and do correct me if I’ve got it wrong), your eyes still know they are looking at very small and very rapidly blinking lights in close proximity and in a flat array, which is why it mostly feels like uncanny valley in regards to that exact experience, and why software enhancement/approximation of the effect could be beneficial.

          • kava@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            reality doesn’t downsample when you’re not looking

            As far as you know. Maybe that’s the reasoning behind weird stuff in quantum mechanics. The cat is both alive and dead until you open the box and look at it.

            • treesquid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              The whole point of the cat thing was to point out the absurdity of the claim that reality isn’t real until you know about it. The cat is already in whatever state you observe when you open the box. It’s not both alive and dead, it’s either alive or dead. The thought experiment isn’t serious, and it’s not supporting the idea that the cat is somehow magically in both states just because you haven’t yet manipulated the lid of a wooden cube.

              • kava@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                When we talk about the cat being both alive and dead, it’s a simplification to help visualize a quantum phenomenon where particles exist in multiple states simultaneously until measured or observed.

                Schrodinger came up with the cat to represent the absurdity of quantum mechanics because he thought it was absurd - but that doesn’t mean his metaphor isn’t a useful one. Particles like electrons or photons can exist in a state of superposition, where they hold multiple potential states (e.g., spin up and spin down) at the same time. This isn’t just a theoretical curiosity; it’s been experimentally verified in numerous quantum experiments, such as the double-slit experiment.

                The act of measurement in quantum mechanics forces a system to ‘choose’ a definite state from among its superposed states, a process known as wave function collapse. Before measurement, the system genuinely exists in all its possible states simultaneously, not in one state or the other. This is a fundamental aspect of the quantum world