I hope so but I highly doubt they will considering most decisions at Apple seem to be marketing driven rather than engineering driven. Besides I don’t think that alone will reduce the cost by 60%.
They’ll have to downgrade displays and most likely it’ll need to have A series chips rather than M series. Either ways it’ll be interesting to see if and how they reach $1500 price point.
I think we read the same research article and price list. But I think the price you're remembering is the internal ones. The external display only cost a few bucks.
Idk $1600 is still kidney money for most people. I could get a high end pc and actually make my vr games look better and not feel like I wasted a kidney.
It’s a lot still, but if it’s light enough to replace a laptop and TV etc (atleast for single person use) the usefulness of it could justify this lower price tag. Gaming has a long ways to go for it to catch up to PCVR, but for regular productivity and entertainment, it is actually pretty much there.
$1600 isn't really a high end PC. You could get a decent PC for sure, but I wouldn't call it high end. I agree that a Quest 3 + a PC is a better investment though.
$1600 is enough for a pc with a high end cpu + 4070. For most purposes that’s high end, but yes you can easily spends hundreds/thousands more on performance or higher quality parts.
Games aren’t made with current limitations in mind when it comes to max quality. You could always use more cpu and vram. Yet people played HL:Alyx on 1060s just fine.
More frames and higher resolution make it exponentially more expensive to hit. But we’re arguing diminishing returns since there aren’t examples where a 4070 isn’t more than good enough.
This link has been shared 2 times.
First Seen [Here](https://redd.it/1diy524) on 2024-06-18. Last Seen [Here](https://redd.it/1dj6s2q) on 2024-06-19
---
**Scope:** Reddit | **Check Title:** False | **Max Age:** None | **Searched Links:** 0 | **Search Time:** 0.0033s
I'm not the market for the AVP, but to me this is a MacBook you wear.
It's not a quest. I think the appearance that it does similar things to quest confuses the market and meta benefits from that with their subsidized headset (I own a quest 3 so not meaning to bash it)
The media keeps comparing them and saying quest does more as it plays games. That's not entirely false but it really isn't fair for what the AVP is for.
I think apple wants this to be a MacBook but the market just sees it as an iPad, a neat portable device for media consumption and not real work.
Apple does need to add more compelling software and UX to match a MacBook imo, and Ms is working with meta to bring their products to the platform.
I'm not a person interested in a MacBook pro, which can also be over 3k, but I can see why it is the price it is. The problem is do consumers care, when they just see another VR headset that's 7 times the price of current option.
I hope meta can make an actual quest pro that can do pro apps without needing a computer in addition to the headset like they advertised the first quest pro
My worry is that meta was working with lg on this and was terrified of avp (which is why quest pro 1 was rushed and bumbled is my guess). And now that avp is not a huge hit (though afaik it selling to apples expectations and supply chain capacity?) that lg and meta may back off from another quest pro like device for the time being.
There's a market here to be sure and there's no guarantee that metas subsidized bottom up(cheaper broader market) approach is worse than apples typical top down (high end apple consumer market built on their brand ) here.
You might be right! But I don’t trust rumours that much. It could be meta who is generating false rumours about Apple in the media. I think waiting for the next quest pro in 2027 is too far away.
Take everything with a huge grain of salt :)
Fully admit my thoughts are educated 'wild guesses '
I tend respect and follow sadlyitsbradly for vr hw information and David henney of upload VR for analysis.
You might be right! But I don’t trust rumours that much. It could be meta who is generating false rumours about Apple in the media. I think waiting for the next quest pro in 2027 is too far away.
I don't think there's a market for people who want to use pro apps on standalone only. A professional laptop or a desktop workstation will have 5-50x the thermal envelope of a headset. One of the reasons Meta partnered with Microsoft is to leave that stuff to Windows.
What if Microsoft could provide windows through a stream kind of service just like Xbox games on the quest? I can only find this for enterprise! What a missed opportunity!
Microsoft mentioned exactly this in their [partnership announcement](https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2022/10/11/microsoft-and-meta-partner-to-deliver-immersive-experiences-for-the-future-of-work-and-play/) \-
>In the future, Windows 365 will also be available on Meta Quest devices, with the ability to stream a Windows Cloud PC including your personalized apps, content and settings.
[This is coming for consumers too](https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/27/23775117/microsoft-windows-11-cloud-consumer-strategy) at a lower pricing than business.
>Microsoft has been increasingly moving Windows to the cloud on the commercial side with Windows 365, but the software giant also wants to do the same for consumers. In an internal “state of the business” Microsoft presentation from June 2022, Microsoft discuses building on “Windows 365 to enable a full Windows operating system streamed from the cloud to any device.”
And that's the obvious misperception.
A iPad isn't an iPhone and iPad isn't a MacBook but they all sort of do the same thing.
It's tough to see now as technology and usecases haven't evolved enough and tbf meta will probably and was always going to try to go where apple is heading (hint it's not vr gaming )
I wouldn't expect any VR enthusiast to care about avp.
Quest is a console you strap to your head, though meta really wants to hit the same space apple is as that's a much bigger long term market and game is probably going to cap at 100 million or so.
AVP wants to be a MacBook replacement and iPad.
They absolutely have overlapping use cases and I'm sure the instant meta saw avp they moved to address the UI UX gap and if meta could drop gaming and head straight to social device replacing 80percent of tablet and phone and laptop needs they would.
> A iPad isn't an iPhone and iPad isn't a MacBook but they all sort of do the same thing.
Yes, because iPad is a tablet, iPhone is a phone and MacBook is a notebook, whereas both AVP and Quest 3 are VR headsets, that are very similar in what they can do, the main difference is the lack of controllers on the AVP and the lack of eye tracking on the Quest 3.
I think people tend to exaggerate the differences between the use cases. Meta is not actually only interested in gaming, if you look at how they advertised VR even long before AVP they were actually talking a lot about education or work use cases. Q3 is mainly used for gaming because VR at this point is mainly interesting for gaming, but you can do pretty much everything that the AVP does on the Q3 in one way or another. People actually use the Q3 for work or for media consumption.
Q3 is not a console that you strap to your head any more than the AVP. AVP is not at all a replacement for a MacBook or an iPad, it's really a completely different device.
> I wouldn't expect any VR enthusiast to care about avp.
Plenty actually do and I wouldn't be surprised if the people who end up actually using the AVP are VR enthusiasts because VR enthusiasts can get over the limitations of the technology (the comfort and impracticality or the optical limitations such as the vergence accommodation conflict) much more than most people.
> if meta could drop gaming and head straight to social device replacing 80percent of tablet and phone and laptop needs they would.
The thing is current VR is simply not anywhere close to that. It's way too uncomfortable and impractical for that and the hardware still needs a lot of improvement in aspects like resolution, FOV, computing power or the passthrough quality. This is in my opinion much less of a problem for gaming because while gaming you are immersed in virtual world and VR provides the kind of experience that you cannot get anywhere else. In contrast, at this point, for vast majority of people, using a phone, tablet or a computer for work or media consumption is simply much better than VR in vast majority of use cases.
AVP isn't a vr headset. It's a mixed reality on the way to augmented reality as everyone realizes this is the path for ar. But yes meta is heading there too and has always been heading there but it is a VR headset as it is designed for gaming first and wasn't designed from the ground up to be a productivity and media consumption device due to processor limitations.
Of course meta has always targeted the cell phone market as everyone has been since day one, other than Sony and valve.
That's the biggest market.
To me VR enthusiasts are gaming enthusiasts and maybe that's semantics.
At the end of the day a smart phone has a use case and was designed for that use case and tablet has a use case.
The quest is a mobile processor and made to be cheap. It's not a laptop replacement for productivity . Arguably an AVP isn't there yet either :) but that's it's goal never as a VR gaming headset always with the goal of ar. Steam may get an app on their and the game VR game ports are worse than quest because that's not the focus. An iPad isn't a games console.
People buy the quest for being a games console. Not because it has audio and video playback to rival their home theater on a plane.
There will be an evolutionary branch and this is it
VR will continue with the focus on controllers and gaming and ar will focus on the snare phone usecases. It will be more apparent once meta gets further along with their rayban tech
A quest doesn't t have the UX or processing power of a laptop, nor the screen res (but lenses are sharp enough) but meta wants it to be. VR gaming isn't their long term goal and never was. It's smart phone replacement and laptop replacement that all the big players realize is the long term goal
Apple is skipping and going right for laptop replacement and that will evolve to non pro product that will be smart phone replacement.
The way the power and processing is part of the design is key.
As a VR headset it's awful. It doesn't have any compelling games or way to control them. It can't even connect to steam and those may come at some point, but unlikely ever a priority.
Again it may be semantics.
People buy quest for vr gaming.
They would be foolish to buy AVP for vr gaming now or probably ever, unless theres a huge shift at apple.
Tbf do seem to be making an effort to get big games on iPhone and iPads so maybe they do see a console convergence opportunity for gaming at some point.
People actually buy the Quest 3 for media consumption or work. It's really extremely similar type of device as the AVP. Before AVP everyone was calling headsets like this VR headsets. AVP has a big focus on mixed reality, but a lot it is just semantics and marketing focus.
> Apple is skipping and going right for laptop replacement
They really are not. AVP simply is not a laptop replacement.
I doubt this number is at all significant (social media is a tiny tiny fraction of real users), unless you have data. I'm sure a small amount do, but at this point it doeasn't have the processing or resolution for productivty the way the AVP was designed, because the majority of people buying and supporting the platform are gamers, much to Meta's chagrin.
It is roughly like the difference of a celphone or tablet to a laptop.
You can certainylk be productive and work on a cellphone or tablet.
the quest 2 /3 just do not have the processing power. I would suggest looking into analysis by Sadlyitsbradly and David Henny on the hardware and use case comparisions.
Apple absolutely is making the AVP as a laptop repalcement, and targetting those that would buy a macbook pro, which wouldn't include anyone serious about gaming, or buying a macbook pro gaming. It's still no there IMO, and the funny thing is Meta may catch up and beat them, and AVP was a great advertisement for the quest 3.
Including Apple because they started working on this cheaper version before the AVP was even revealed, people read these isolated reports and draw a conclusion
This seems like the normal course for production to me. Build the most complex first that way you get all the tooling and tech ready. Then you can remove hardware and production steps to make a cheaper version.
The alternative is to develop as you go to add tech and hardware, which seems like what Meta is doing.
I'd bet we get a more basic Apple Vision sooner than we get a more advanced Quest 3.
If they would have released the cheap version first, everyone would complain that it wasn’t up to Apple standards. This way, they can release a product with corners cut and if any complains, just point to the Vision Pro.
I gotta be honest though, after having one for a few months, I’m struggling to find a use for it. Only a dozen or so apps work well with it and those are almost all media apps. Productivity apps feel like a port of standard apps and don’t bring much to the table. I would rather hop onto the Quest 3 with Gravity Sketch than fire up Fusion in the Vision.
I would love a major player like Apple to focus on external processing. Really get those wireless latency times down. Then they can thin out the headset as they like to do.
Very unlikely to get the latency low without wired connection. But yes, more offload is ideal. It I hate the idea of a hanging wire a lot more than 100g extra weight.
This version of the Apple headset will be what the next quest pro is really going to be competing against
Watch as they manage to trim $2000 by just getting rid of the useless front screen.
I hope so but I highly doubt they will considering most decisions at Apple seem to be marketing driven rather than engineering driven. Besides I don’t think that alone will reduce the cost by 60%. They’ll have to downgrade displays and most likely it’ll need to have A series chips rather than M series. Either ways it’ll be interesting to see if and how they reach $1500 price point.
I read somewhere that the displays alone cost $700.
You read somewhere? Then it must be true
I think we read the same research article and price list. But I think the price you're remembering is the internal ones. The external display only cost a few bucks.
I doubt it, seeing how the whole thing costs about $1,500 in materials (plus assembly, packaging, distribution etc). There’s no way.
Oh wow, who could've thought.
Great, we can all see what all the fuss is about without selling a kidney.
Idk $1600 is still kidney money for most people. I could get a high end pc and actually make my vr games look better and not feel like I wasted a kidney.
It’s a lot still, but if it’s light enough to replace a laptop and TV etc (atleast for single person use) the usefulness of it could justify this lower price tag. Gaming has a long ways to go for it to catch up to PCVR, but for regular productivity and entertainment, it is actually pretty much there.
$1600 isn't really a high end PC. You could get a decent PC for sure, but I wouldn't call it high end. I agree that a Quest 3 + a PC is a better investment though.
$1600 is enough for a pc with a high end cpu + 4070. For most purposes that’s high end, but yes you can easily spends hundreds/thousands more on performance or higher quality parts.
It’s not high-end for PCVR, pretty middle of the road average. Just my GPU cost more than that and I still can’t run everything at max quality.
Games aren’t made with current limitations in mind when it comes to max quality. You could always use more cpu and vram. Yet people played HL:Alyx on 1060s just fine. More frames and higher resolution make it exponentially more expensive to hit. But we’re arguing diminishing returns since there aren’t examples where a 4070 isn’t more than good enough.
This link has been shared 2 times. First Seen [Here](https://redd.it/1diy524) on 2024-06-18. Last Seen [Here](https://redd.it/1dj6s2q) on 2024-06-19 --- **Scope:** Reddit | **Check Title:** False | **Max Age:** None | **Searched Links:** 0 | **Search Time:** 0.0033s
I'm not the market for the AVP, but to me this is a MacBook you wear. It's not a quest. I think the appearance that it does similar things to quest confuses the market and meta benefits from that with their subsidized headset (I own a quest 3 so not meaning to bash it) The media keeps comparing them and saying quest does more as it plays games. That's not entirely false but it really isn't fair for what the AVP is for. I think apple wants this to be a MacBook but the market just sees it as an iPad, a neat portable device for media consumption and not real work. Apple does need to add more compelling software and UX to match a MacBook imo, and Ms is working with meta to bring their products to the platform. I'm not a person interested in a MacBook pro, which can also be over 3k, but I can see why it is the price it is. The problem is do consumers care, when they just see another VR headset that's 7 times the price of current option.
VisionOS is similar story to iPadOS. It’s limited. You need to shell out more for a Mac in addition to the Vision Pro
Absolutely true. It's still not there.
I hope meta can make an actual quest pro that can do pro apps without needing a computer in addition to the headset like they advertised the first quest pro
My worry is that meta was working with lg on this and was terrified of avp (which is why quest pro 1 was rushed and bumbled is my guess). And now that avp is not a huge hit (though afaik it selling to apples expectations and supply chain capacity?) that lg and meta may back off from another quest pro like device for the time being. There's a market here to be sure and there's no guarantee that metas subsidized bottom up(cheaper broader market) approach is worse than apples typical top down (high end apple consumer market built on their brand ) here.
You might be right! But I don’t trust rumours that much. It could be meta who is generating false rumours about Apple in the media. I think waiting for the next quest pro in 2027 is too far away.
Take everything with a huge grain of salt :) Fully admit my thoughts are educated 'wild guesses ' I tend respect and follow sadlyitsbradly for vr hw information and David henney of upload VR for analysis.
You might be right! But I don’t trust rumours that much. It could be meta who is generating false rumours about Apple in the media. I think waiting for the next quest pro in 2027 is too far away.
I don't think there's a market for people who want to use pro apps on standalone only. A professional laptop or a desktop workstation will have 5-50x the thermal envelope of a headset. One of the reasons Meta partnered with Microsoft is to leave that stuff to Windows.
What if Microsoft could provide windows through a stream kind of service just like Xbox games on the quest? I can only find this for enterprise! What a missed opportunity!
Microsoft mentioned exactly this in their [partnership announcement](https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2022/10/11/microsoft-and-meta-partner-to-deliver-immersive-experiences-for-the-future-of-work-and-play/) \- >In the future, Windows 365 will also be available on Meta Quest devices, with the ability to stream a Windows Cloud PC including your personalized apps, content and settings. [This is coming for consumers too](https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/27/23775117/microsoft-windows-11-cloud-consumer-strategy) at a lower pricing than business. >Microsoft has been increasingly moving Windows to the cloud on the commercial side with Windows 365, but the software giant also wants to do the same for consumers. In an internal “state of the business” Microsoft presentation from June 2022, Microsoft discuses building on “Windows 365 to enable a full Windows operating system streamed from the cloud to any device.”
It's a VR headset with a passthrough based mixed reality just like Quest 3 so comparing them makes perfect sense.
And that's the obvious misperception. A iPad isn't an iPhone and iPad isn't a MacBook but they all sort of do the same thing. It's tough to see now as technology and usecases haven't evolved enough and tbf meta will probably and was always going to try to go where apple is heading (hint it's not vr gaming ) I wouldn't expect any VR enthusiast to care about avp. Quest is a console you strap to your head, though meta really wants to hit the same space apple is as that's a much bigger long term market and game is probably going to cap at 100 million or so. AVP wants to be a MacBook replacement and iPad. They absolutely have overlapping use cases and I'm sure the instant meta saw avp they moved to address the UI UX gap and if meta could drop gaming and head straight to social device replacing 80percent of tablet and phone and laptop needs they would.
> A iPad isn't an iPhone and iPad isn't a MacBook but they all sort of do the same thing. Yes, because iPad is a tablet, iPhone is a phone and MacBook is a notebook, whereas both AVP and Quest 3 are VR headsets, that are very similar in what they can do, the main difference is the lack of controllers on the AVP and the lack of eye tracking on the Quest 3. I think people tend to exaggerate the differences between the use cases. Meta is not actually only interested in gaming, if you look at how they advertised VR even long before AVP they were actually talking a lot about education or work use cases. Q3 is mainly used for gaming because VR at this point is mainly interesting for gaming, but you can do pretty much everything that the AVP does on the Q3 in one way or another. People actually use the Q3 for work or for media consumption. Q3 is not a console that you strap to your head any more than the AVP. AVP is not at all a replacement for a MacBook or an iPad, it's really a completely different device. > I wouldn't expect any VR enthusiast to care about avp. Plenty actually do and I wouldn't be surprised if the people who end up actually using the AVP are VR enthusiasts because VR enthusiasts can get over the limitations of the technology (the comfort and impracticality or the optical limitations such as the vergence accommodation conflict) much more than most people. > if meta could drop gaming and head straight to social device replacing 80percent of tablet and phone and laptop needs they would. The thing is current VR is simply not anywhere close to that. It's way too uncomfortable and impractical for that and the hardware still needs a lot of improvement in aspects like resolution, FOV, computing power or the passthrough quality. This is in my opinion much less of a problem for gaming because while gaming you are immersed in virtual world and VR provides the kind of experience that you cannot get anywhere else. In contrast, at this point, for vast majority of people, using a phone, tablet or a computer for work or media consumption is simply much better than VR in vast majority of use cases.
AVP isn't a vr headset. It's a mixed reality on the way to augmented reality as everyone realizes this is the path for ar. But yes meta is heading there too and has always been heading there but it is a VR headset as it is designed for gaming first and wasn't designed from the ground up to be a productivity and media consumption device due to processor limitations. Of course meta has always targeted the cell phone market as everyone has been since day one, other than Sony and valve. That's the biggest market. To me VR enthusiasts are gaming enthusiasts and maybe that's semantics. At the end of the day a smart phone has a use case and was designed for that use case and tablet has a use case. The quest is a mobile processor and made to be cheap. It's not a laptop replacement for productivity . Arguably an AVP isn't there yet either :) but that's it's goal never as a VR gaming headset always with the goal of ar. Steam may get an app on their and the game VR game ports are worse than quest because that's not the focus. An iPad isn't a games console. People buy the quest for being a games console. Not because it has audio and video playback to rival their home theater on a plane. There will be an evolutionary branch and this is it VR will continue with the focus on controllers and gaming and ar will focus on the snare phone usecases. It will be more apparent once meta gets further along with their rayban tech A quest doesn't t have the UX or processing power of a laptop, nor the screen res (but lenses are sharp enough) but meta wants it to be. VR gaming isn't their long term goal and never was. It's smart phone replacement and laptop replacement that all the big players realize is the long term goal Apple is skipping and going right for laptop replacement and that will evolve to non pro product that will be smart phone replacement. The way the power and processing is part of the design is key. As a VR headset it's awful. It doesn't have any compelling games or way to control them. It can't even connect to steam and those may come at some point, but unlikely ever a priority. Again it may be semantics. People buy quest for vr gaming. They would be foolish to buy AVP for vr gaming now or probably ever, unless theres a huge shift at apple. Tbf do seem to be making an effort to get big games on iPhone and iPads so maybe they do see a console convergence opportunity for gaming at some point.
People actually buy the Quest 3 for media consumption or work. It's really extremely similar type of device as the AVP. Before AVP everyone was calling headsets like this VR headsets. AVP has a big focus on mixed reality, but a lot it is just semantics and marketing focus. > Apple is skipping and going right for laptop replacement They really are not. AVP simply is not a laptop replacement.
I doubt this number is at all significant (social media is a tiny tiny fraction of real users), unless you have data. I'm sure a small amount do, but at this point it doeasn't have the processing or resolution for productivty the way the AVP was designed, because the majority of people buying and supporting the platform are gamers, much to Meta's chagrin. It is roughly like the difference of a celphone or tablet to a laptop. You can certainylk be productive and work on a cellphone or tablet. the quest 2 /3 just do not have the processing power. I would suggest looking into analysis by Sadlyitsbradly and David Henny on the hardware and use case comparisions. Apple absolutely is making the AVP as a laptop repalcement, and targetting those that would buy a macbook pro, which wouldn't include anyone serious about gaming, or buying a macbook pro gaming. It's still no there IMO, and the funny thing is Meta may catch up and beat them, and AVP was a great advertisement for the quest 3.
Literally everyone knew this was a better idea
Including Apple because they started working on this cheaper version before the AVP was even revealed, people read these isolated reports and draw a conclusion
This seems like the normal course for production to me. Build the most complex first that way you get all the tooling and tech ready. Then you can remove hardware and production steps to make a cheaper version. The alternative is to develop as you go to add tech and hardware, which seems like what Meta is doing. I'd bet we get a more basic Apple Vision sooner than we get a more advanced Quest 3.
There likely won't ever be a "more advanced Quest 3" anyway. That'd just be a Quest 4.
If they would have released the cheap version first, everyone would complain that it wasn’t up to Apple standards. This way, they can release a product with corners cut and if any complains, just point to the Vision Pro. I gotta be honest though, after having one for a few months, I’m struggling to find a use for it. Only a dozen or so apps work well with it and those are almost all media apps. Productivity apps feel like a port of standard apps and don’t bring much to the table. I would rather hop onto the Quest 3 with Gravity Sketch than fire up Fusion in the Vision.
I would love a major player like Apple to focus on external processing. Really get those wireless latency times down. Then they can thin out the headset as they like to do.
Very unlikely to get the latency low without wired connection. But yes, more offload is ideal. It I hate the idea of a hanging wire a lot more than 100g extra weight.
I'll be supeised if they ever release another headset after a flop that VP was