> Yes (albeit not at an Apple Store)
Who said anything about an apple store?
> What am I supposed to use it for, a $3,500 dedicated 360-degree porno machine? An overpriced streaming client for desktop VR? I have literally zero applications for it, I wouldn't have a reason to own Apple's headset if it was as cheap as an iPhone.
Like I said, I think right now it's a glorified dev kit. If you have one, you can get a head start on making apps/experiences so that when the mass market one comes out, you can be on the app store already. Many people including myself didn't buy an iPhone until the 4 one came out.
> For $3,500 it's not a competitive AR experience
> If the iPhone has taught us anything, it's that when prices drop, profit margins rise
My whole point is not to use the current price as an indicator of anything. Apple cut the price of the first iPhone by 50% after 3 months due to poor sales.
>> Once the weight is reduced and the input UI is fixed, it will be truly useful.
>Do you honestly believe that? After hundreds of failed attempts to make VR useful, you sincerely think Apple will be the one to do it?
I believe if the weight and input are addressed, then it's automatically a million times better. But it's not the only thing that needs to be fixed. It also needs a bigger field of view and battery life. But the MOST IMPORTANT thing is a better input method. It's obvious that for input methods, Apple has a huge head start compared to everyone else. (mouse, click-wheel, multi-touch, force touch, etc). They are probably keeping their cards close on input to the vest until the mass market version is ready in order to keep their head start. For now, gaze tracking is all we have.
> Gaze tracking is more trouble than it's worth
I think gaze tracking is great, but shouldn't be required for input.
> Have you tried other, modern headsets? Bigscreen Beyond, Pimax Crystal, even the Valve Index?
I've only tried the Quest2, which was super pixellated. The Vision Pro is very price competitive with varjo headsets, which are just about equivalent on specs.
> the glowing eyes on the outside are like a cheap Halloween decoration
The outside display feels unnecessary right now because the whole device is meant to be used at home. But the fact that they are building this tells us they are working on a more mobile version of it, where interacting with other people is actually important.
The thing is no one is forcing you to buy it. You can buy the competitors if you prefer. You have the opportunity to start developing apps on the apple system, for an up front cost. Or you can wait for the cheaper, better ones to come out and not have a head start on making apps. It's whatever.
> What am I supposed to use it for, a $3,500 dedicated 360-degree porno machine? An overpriced streaming client for desktop VR? I have literally zero applications for it, I wouldn't have a reason to own Apple's headset if it was as cheap as an iPhone.
Like I said, I think right now it's a glorified dev kit. If you have one, you can get a head start on making apps/experiences so that when the mass market one comes out, you can be on the app store already. Many people including myself didn't buy an iPhone until the 4 one came out.
> For $3,500 it's not a competitive AR experience > If the iPhone has taught us anything, it's that when prices drop, profit margins rise
My whole point is not to use the current price as an indicator of anything. Apple cut the price of the first iPhone by 50% after 3 months due to poor sales.
>> Once the weight is reduced and the input UI is fixed, it will be truly useful. >Do you honestly believe that? After hundreds of failed attempts to make VR useful, you sincerely think Apple will be the one to do it?
I believe if the weight and input are addressed, then it's automatically a million times better. But it's not the only thing that needs to be fixed. It also needs a bigger field of view and battery life. But the MOST IMPORTANT thing is a better input method. It's obvious that for input methods, Apple has a huge head start compared to everyone else. (mouse, click-wheel, multi-touch, force touch, etc). They are probably keeping their cards close on input to the vest until the mass market version is ready in order to keep their head start. For now, gaze tracking is all we have.
> Gaze tracking is more trouble than it's worth I think gaze tracking is great, but shouldn't be required for input.
> Have you tried other, modern headsets? Bigscreen Beyond, Pimax Crystal, even the Valve Index? I've only tried the Quest2, which was super pixellated. The Vision Pro is very price competitive with varjo headsets, which are just about equivalent on specs.
> the glowing eyes on the outside are like a cheap Halloween decoration
The outside display feels unnecessary right now because the whole device is meant to be used at home. But the fact that they are building this tells us they are working on a more mobile version of it, where interacting with other people is actually important.
The thing is no one is forcing you to buy it. You can buy the competitors if you prefer. You have the opportunity to start developing apps on the apple system, for an up front cost. Or you can wait for the cheaper, better ones to come out and not have a head start on making apps. It's whatever.