• EdibleFriend@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    2 months ago

    I paid a lot of money for the privilege of getting an Apple Vision Pro brand-new in February. All-in, with optical inserts and taxes, I financed a little over $3,900 for the 256GB version of the headset.

    Financing something like this. Holy fuck this person is an absolute moron.

    • OutsizedWalrus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Eh, Apple offers essentially zero cost financing.

      If you actually have the cash and budget for this, it’s better to invest that $4k.

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

      That’s not a smart choice to finance. First release is almost always overpriced and going to rapidly devalue. There’s a ton of R&D overhead to cover with initial launch of a new product line. The next iteration will be less expensive, or at least have multiple models with tiered pricing.

    • Zoolander@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      Why? I financed an AVP too and use it extensively for my business. Maybe they’re doing the same? Especially with the Apple Card, it’s 0% interest. Why wouldn’t you do that instead of paying for the whole thing outright? Anyone who paid for the whole thing outright seems like a moron to me.

      • rbesfe@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Genuinely curious what business case exists for the vision pro that couldn’t be handled by a modern iPhone (for AR) or laptop (for getting real work done)

      • Chocrates@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        How do you use it at work? Do you think it has paid for itself? Does it enable anything that was impossible before?

  • ddonuts4@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    $2500-3500-ish, versus $3500-5k new. Steeper discounts on fully optioned models.

    Saved you a click. Looks to me like deprecation is not all that dissimilar to that of optioned out Macbooks.

    • jonne@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Aren’t these things tied to an Apple ID with personalised setup? Can you even factory reset these things and walk into the Apple store to get it set up again?

  • gregorum@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Hopefully, of the many things Apple learns from the Vision Pro Gen 1 is that building a massively over-engineered Rolls Royce MR face-computer is that they’ve finally hit a wall with both their bonkers product pricing scheme and their magical thinking about their internal product visions always seamlessly translating to widespread consumer reality. I mean, especially on the latter point, they’ve been falling flat for a few years, but mostly with smaller products and services, but now it’s happened with the launch of a major new product class— and it has failed spectacularly.

    Don’t get me wrong: the Vision Pro is revolutionary wrt what it can become, but Apple released a product that was way too fucking expensive and which didn’t have the ecosystem of support functions to make it clear to everyone even what it’s for. It’s not an MR/AR/VR headset. It’s a FACE-COMPUTER which operates in MR only, and very few people can really wrap their heads around using a computer only that way, especially since even Apple hasn’t made it work that way very well or even made a case for why it should (outside of extreme edge cases)— yet.

    This is future tech for a future when we’re ready for and need it. Right now, people just want an MR peripheral, not a whole ass FaceMac. And - for goddamn sure - nobody wants to pay for one.

    • folkrav@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Man, you’re spot on with that last phrase, at least, for me. All I want is a MR headset comfortable enough to wear all day, and to be able to manage virtual windows and/or monitors comfortably in front of me. The rest I genuinely don’t care about. I dream of the day I can replace my big monitor (or multi-monitor setup) with a lightweight pair of fancy goggles that would give me all the monitor real estate I would ever want.

      • kbin_space_program@kbin.run
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        It also has a number of core problems as a face computer.

        As Casey Neistat’s review video showed: you can’t use the thing on transit or even walking down the street. Any open windows stay in the physical location you opened them.

        • folkrav@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I can see both setups being necessary… If im sitting in a chair, I don’t think I’d want my virtual monitors to be following my head while I move, I’d still want them to be roughly around my keyboard and mouse. But using it while walking, they absolutely should be floating around my head, keeping the main one at some fixed angle.

        • Mongostein@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Man, I better not have to walk home from the train station because I forgot I left my “PRIVATE STUFF - DO NOT OPEN” folder on couch.

    • PhAzE@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Especially when 90% of the features etc can be done on a $200 quest 2 or a $600 quest 3.

    • narc0tic_bird@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Exactly. Not only is it too expensive, but it doesn’t have a “universal” killer app or use case. What I mean by that is something a lot of people could use it for.

      There are quite a few use cases for the device, but many of them are edge cases. For example I think the Keynote (Apple’s PowerPoint) virtual presentation mode is a great way to practice a presentation (you stand in a large room with the presentation behind you on a canvas and an audience in front of you), but how often are most people going to need it?

      I personally loved the F1 demo one guy made with a 3D track map with the option to glimpse at onboards an whatnot. But how large of an audience would that have outside of hardcore F1 fans? Still, immersive live sports would probably be a thing, but without a large user base the broadcasters won’t bother making an elaborate (and costly) stream with added features exclusive to Vision Pro.

      I’m not sure if Apple can fix this by “simply” releasing a second generation model, even if it somehow came at just half the price.

      • gregorum@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        I can think of 100 use cases just for me. Maybe 500.More for other specialists in other industries. What I can’t do - even as a UX designer - is even imagine 100,000 use cases, which I can for… a phone or an iPod or and iPad. More even.

        And Apple hasn’t engineered this device for those use cases. If they had, and marketed this device as such, we would be having a very different conversation.

        But they didn’t.

        And that’s a shame