One Year With the Vision Pro

“ I can’t give Vision Pro an A for 2024, but I foresee A’s in future years.”

Yes, sure… In the meantime, in an Apple Store, there is only one table where nobody goes, including the employees: the one where the Vision Pro demo devices collect dust.

As a developer of a (relatively) popular iOS and macOS app, I have had perhaps only one or two requests for Vision Pro support for the app, and this was within the first few weeks of the device's launch when hype was at its peak.

The app would be useful on the device but, from a developer and business perspective, the customer demand is not there and I doubt it will be at least for another 2+ years. Supporting this new platform for Apple would be at least a $AU5,9999 investment for the device purchase and then ongoing time investment in adapting the UI and additional testing for every app release.

The few developers who did jump in early (out of enthusiasm ?!) all seem to regret doing so.

Just not worth it. I'd say most developers are in the same position, and Apple knows this.

So it's in Apple hands if they actually want developers to support this device. Though I suspect Apple realises it's not worth trying any further to encourage developer support until the device itself is a lot more compelling – e.g. cheaper, lighter, more useful.

VR is such a niche space. It doesn’t matter how good the device is, wearing a headset is just not a great experience over a long amount of time, context switching is tedious, and the biggest issue is that it’s fundamentally disconnecting you with your surroundings and those around you.

@Matthew, agree. You left one thing out - you'll not only need to do addition testing for each app release, you'll need to do the same thing for each OS release. Even watchOS is closing in on 10 years. Forget about hardware, if Apple actually *does* have the patience to stick it out, the OS changes need to be dramatic.

What always struck me about the Vision Pro, is the people advocating for it were all describing it for situations where putting a giant, bulky helmet on your head isn't necessary for the task.

Pretty much nothing that Apple showed as a core competency of the product is an inherently three dimensional task, where stereoscopically separated depth perception is the key enabler of the job.

It was always a novelty way to do standard Apple iCloud app things, and watch video. This obsession with video marked Apple's last foray into VR with the iMac Pro, and this time around its a byproduct of the same problem - Apple lacks GPUs with the 3D punch to feed a high resolution headset, so they go to video (despite the market for immersive video being point of view pornography, and pretty much nothing else). Even an Nvidia 4090 (or 5090) at full pelt doesn't come close to the maximum consumption capabilities of a modern high resolution headset, like a Pimax, Varjo or Somnium.

Most importantly, Apple lacks a culture of caring about 3D graphics power - do less with less is their credo, and that simply isn't ever going to work. The desire for visual fidelity is always going to grow past the maximum capabilities of the highest end. We are decades away from the point at which adding pixels won't make a difference, where perfect resolution and near limitless geometry is commoditised for any hardware, and we can concentrate on reducing power draw and increasing efficiency.

That's Vision Pro's real flaw - as a standalone headset it combines the anaemic, non-replaceable GPU of an iPad, with the giant GPU-hungry screens of a high-end tethered headset. It's a real "nuts & gum together at last" product. It's a giant bulky headset for tasks that don't merit the inconvenience costs of wearing a headset, and it's a headset too underpowered for the tasks where the bulk is a easy-to-justify price.

My perspective on all this is having used VR for three dimensional sculpting tasks that couldn't be done without it, eg:

https://www.mattgodden.com/2018/05/03/bon541-v3-0/

VR was absolutely necessary in order to design the work - it being the only way to get the sight lines worked out, given I was going to be suspending the work over the stage, and the actors.

To @David's points, VR is a niche, the same way a welding helmet is a niche. The wear-time limit for most folks is about 4 hours for a session, but a lot of that also comes down to how long you can stand and walk about on your feet. Then again, 4 hours without a break is beyond what most experts recommend for "normal" computing.

Context switching is problematic - VR is vest suited to deep concentration with a single task. That's not necessarily a bad thing though, because that's what humans are best at. Humans can't multitask, there's always a huge cognitive loss when task switching. That's what makes VR a great work environment, you can just fall into a deep flow state, and work for hours, primari;y because you can shut the rest of the world out.

It is a tad funny to criticise a toolset for disconnecting the user from those around them, given the amount of work Apple puts into their focus system, for precisely that task. Ass to that the universal acknowledgement that the worst aspect of in-office work, is that no one gets anything done due to constant interruptions.

I was hoping that the whole spatial computing thing would have given us some genuinely new things by now.

Watching movies just doesn't cut it.

@matg I like your point about VR being nich, and the comparison to a welders mask feels spot on.

I think it will be hard to find mass market appeal outside of gaming. And even there it's not exactly taking off

At least until the tech has matured to the point of actual AR glasses.

Is the clue in the name and Apple considers it a vision of what computing could be like, and people think it’s the next iPhone and ready to replace everything. Maybe it’s just a glimpse of what can be once costs and a dozen iterations match up with reality.

“ Yes, sure… In the meantime, in an Apple Store, there is only one table where nobody goes,”

Yeah, I was surprised at this. I was at an Apple Store a few months ago. It was packed with people. However, nobody even looked at the Vision Pro the time we were there. I would not expect a lot of people to buy it, but I thought at least a lot of people would be trying it. Nada.

Admittedly, I didn’t have interest in trying one either.

There is success way. Apple could sell millions of Apple Vision Pro. Just forget spatial computing and sell it to watch 3D movies. No prescription glasses. Just that!

I meant, working with prescription glasses.

Apple has proven over and over again they're not good people to partner with. iPad, Apple Watch, Apple TV and Vision Pro are all app wastelands. Mac App Store is a trainwreck as well. Even the iPhone, while flush with apps, hasn't created an ecosystem of successful companies built on it. Would anyone start an iOS (or even Apple) focused company these days?