Report: Apple May Stop Producing Vision Pro by the End of 2024

MrGuvernment

MrGuvernment

Fully [H]
Joined
Aug 3, 2004
Messages
22,209
Short lived if true...... many people noted it was great, but over priced, poorly marketed in actual use cases...

https://www.macrumors.com/2024/10/23/apple-may-stop-producing-vision-pro-by-end-of-2024/

Citing multiple people "directly involved" in making components for the headset, the report says that the scaling back of production began in the early summer. This indicates that Apple now has a sufficient number of Vision Pro units in its inventory to meet demand for the device's remaining lifespan through to next year.

The Vision Pro is widely reported to have seen weak demand due to insufficient content and its high price point. The Information says that Vision Pro suppliers have now produced enough components for between 500,000 to 600,000 headsets. Some factories suspended production of Vision Pro components as early as May based on Apple's weak sales forecasts, and warehouses remain filled with tens of thousands of undelivered parts.

Apple is said to have recently told Luxshare, a Chinese company that serves as the Vision Pro's assembler, that it may need to wind down production in November. Luxshare is currently making around 1,000 Vision Pro headsets per day, which is half that being produced at its peak. Apple will still be able to resume Vision Pro production if sales pick up since the production lines are not yet due to be dismantled.

Moreover, Apple has apparently suspended work on the second-generation Vision Pro for at least a year to focus on developing a lower-cost headset. Interestingly, Apple has told suppliers to prepare to build four million low-cost headsets over the entire lifespan of the future product. This is half the total number of Vision Pros that Apple told suppliers to produce, suggesting that sales expectations are even lower for the cheaper headset.

Although Apple's work on the second-generation Vision Pro has apparently stalled, there are some indications that the company could release "an incremental update to the product with limited changes to its physical design," such as a chip upgrade. This would allow Apple to use up the considerable number of excess components in its supply chain.
Click to expand...

LI
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/kevi...VZ?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop
1729792238798.png
 
Well I mean, it's kind of a dud, it's expensive, and limited, also it's Apple, if they are still making it how will they sell the Vision Pro 2?
 
philb2 said:
What Vision Pro 2?
Click to expand...
Apple stated a few times that it planned to do a follow up and iterate on the design. The article mentions the lower-priced version in the pipeline but I'm still not seeing how that is supposed to pan out. A future Apple headset needs to have more content, more software, and be overall better in every way while also being about 2/3 cheaper. Very tall order.
 
I would have thought they would have ended production already a long time ago (with sales much lower than expected, overstock over projection happening quicker than this, but maybe I am wrong and it sold really well for what it is)..... how long would they have made them..... for it to not be news ?

The actual 2 big news seem buried a little bit here:
Moreover, Apple has apparently suspended work on the second-generation Vision Pro for at least a year to focus on developing a lower-cost headset.

I.e. no 2025 refresh and Apple is apparently not abandoning the idea, I feel Meta latest prototype could have felt so much closer to what the product should be, to change their plans.
 
Last edited:
I've heard it was an excellent VR device, but the high cost killed it for most users. Would have been a hit if it were <$1K.

I'd love to see VR expand and get better with more applications. But, it's still niche and many aren't seeing the returns they were looking for. I think Meta has the market on the lower cost ones, though.

I was hoping Apple would keep pushing to bring costs down and have some competition in the higher end segment.
 
I saw some (rich apparently) knobs using these out in public shortly after launch... God I hate California.... I laughed at them, in an unsubtle way to their immersive faces... god they looked like absolute tools.
 
Try to not get judgmental without obvious direct arm on what people do, but there is something that feel antisocial to walk like this (but I feel the same with people looking at a phone too much).

In factory line or at distance 3d design session or gaming, etc... cool and look perfectly fine, even if it is good enough as infinite desktop space as regular work, but in public space ? The meta one seems much more appropriate for that.
 
Ur_Mom said:
I've heard it was an excellent VR device, but the high cost killed it for most users. Would have been a hit if it were <$1K.
Click to expand...
Even then I think it would be limited in its market. The problem with VR/AR is that outside of gaming (which Apple doesn't really seem to be in to) there's nothing for a consumer to do with it, outside of things they already do with their phones. Everything Apple shows off was basically "Do X... BUT IN AR!" where X is something people already could do/did with their cellphone/tablet/laptop. That isn't compelling, since this involves putting a big ole' visor to do. While people might play with that, they will quickly set it aside. It might sound neat to have a recipe floating in your FOV while you cook... but you would find it much easier to just use the cellphone in your pocket to pull up the recipe and have it on the counter.

To get someone to want to take the time to wear something like this, it needs to offer something you either can't do with traditional devices, or at least can't do nearly as well. We are creatures of convenience and if one solution requires you to go suit up in your visor and the other requires you to grab the device in your pocket, you'll quickly gravitate towards device in pocket without some major reason.
 
GoldenTiger said:
Not half as much knobs as you for laughing at people for simply using a tech product :ROFLMAO:.

P. S. https://hardforum.com/forums/apple-products.74/
Click to expand...
I didn't laugh at them for using the tech product per se, but because they are the sort of uber douche that I encounter far to frequently in my (self-inflicted) exile to California... I'll tell you what you get golden handcuffed (work) into moving here for years and then have to deal with the people (really felt like using " marks around that.) here for years, and see if your patience doesn't wain for the whole god damn deal.

I would have probably laughed in their face either way, as they were being actively douche bags toward everyone in the vicinity, If I was 20yrs younger~ I would have probably just shoulder checked them on my way past them.
 
atarione said:
you can always tell someone that isn't a Californian (native) but has dealt with California / Californians.
Click to expand...
I have lived in California a lot more years than I care to admit. I don't hate all people there, and I still have a few friends in the Bay Area that work in tech. The ones I despise are the younger dudes that seem to think excessively highly of themselves for being a dev at salesforce or whatever. The man buns that really dress and act the part. I can't stand them because I sort of was one once and now realize how naive I was. Best thing for those dudes is to be taken down several notches...
 
1.1.2.3.5... said:
I have lived in California a lot more years than I care to admit. I don't hate all people there, and I still have a few friends in the Bay Area that work in tech. The ones I despise are the younger dudes that seem to think excessively highly of themselves for being a dev at salesforce or whatever. The man buns that really dress and act the part. I can't stand them because I sort of was one once and now realize how naive I was. Best thing for those dudes is to be taken down several notches...
Click to expand...
Fair enough... yes there are a lot of decent people here I guess, I had a rough day and I am very frustrated at work and in general and maybe just in a bad mood? It was just a why did I get up kind of day TBH. I do very much want to leave California however... To my horror realized it has been 20yrs we have been here now... 1st decade was in San Diego (about 4 blocks from ocean in SB) which I didn't hate, but then we had to relocate to LA area, which has made me hate everything and everyone apparently ...or at least today that is.

When I have to go to the bay area my patience is basically zero at this point. ..
 
So many folks are tempted to read this as “OMG Apple is ending sales of the Vision Pro in 2024, it’s all over!” Er, not really.

Apple thinks it now has enough Vision Pros around to match demand for a while. Yes, that means sales are low, but it’s still committed to the product. And like was mentioned, there’s a shift to both a more mainstream version and a spec-bumped Pro (likely the rumored M5 model).

It’s still wildly expensive and doesn’t have much software. But I’ve tried it, and it does feel like a peek at the future in some respects. Everything’s so sharp and detailed that it seems real, like that turntable you see should feel like cold metal. Apple mainly needs to shed weight and superfluous features (EyeSight, anyone?) so that it’s easier to wear and afford. App selection should improve once devs are convinced they’re writing for customers beyond themselves.
 
GoldenTiger said:
I hear movie watching is very immersive on them too.
Click to expand...
I'm sure... but how much better is it than a big screen TV which, lets face it, if you can afford one of these you already have? Like ya, it can do a bigger screen than you have unless you have a huge one, but how much do you care? Wouldn't surprise me if most people would rather NOT wear a headset for 2+ hours and deal with the slightly smaller screen.

It isn't that there are no uses, it is just that they are all basically something people already could do pretty well, and without a killer app, it is hard to sell something at least to a huge market, particularly something where the price is discussed using 4 figures.

It's why, despite hardware improvements, VR/AR is still very niche and even those who like it don't use it a ton because there's yet to be the killer app. It's clunky and not particularly comfortable, and ultimately it isn't transformative. There needs to be something (and I think something will some day be developed) that is really killer, that you really CAN'T do without VR, then people will be interested on a wide scale.
 
I think it will be when it will be about like that meta prototype journalist had tried that is that big:

GettyImages-2173579243-e1727340980277.jpg


That it could get popular, or just good old school windshield projector in cars (a gran turismo like real life driving line as your gps instead of having for your eyes to leave the road, sound just 100% better in everyway, same for your google map direction when you walk in an unknown place, catch a bus and so on, real time translation).

As it get cheaper (the picture above cost a literal fortune right now) and smaller, how good the application need to be for it to be interesting also get much smaller.

Like a smarthwatch as they became possible for $100-200 with long battery life, does not need to be that great for people to use them. A little bit smaller, get size of big regular glass almost, cheap enough and it could work, without doing nothing revolutionary, a lot of visual stuff we already do would be purely better present in the augmented real world instead of a second monitor and your phone-computer on you seeing what you see and knowing what you look at would be an obvious nice output for already existing app.
 
Last edited:
True, if it gets cheap and light enough, it could become a thing that does nothing but gives you a HUD for shit you already do and people would be interested. If it was the size/weight of normal glasses then sure. The other issue there is processing power/battery life. If it is going to be something you wear around it needs to last a day, and with size and people aren't likely to go for a bulky battery/processing pack they have to wear as well.

I do think there's a future where there is wider adoption, it is just the Apple goggles are not it. Apple worked hard on making good tech, but didn't make anything to do with it and thus it just really hasn't gone anywhere and even people who bought it don't use it much.
 
Sycraft said:
True, if it gets cheap and light enough, it could become a thing that does nothing but gives you a HUD for shit you already do and people would be interested. If it was the size/weight of normal glasses then sure. The other issue there is processing power/battery life. If it is going to be something you wear around it needs to last a day, and with size and people aren't likely to go for a bulky battery/processing pack they have to wear as well.

I do think there's a future where there is wider adoption, it is just the Apple goggles are not it. Apple worked hard on making good tech, but didn't make anything to do with it and thus it just really hasn't gone anywhere and even people who bought it don't use it much.
Click to expand...
I can't help but think that Meta's Orion glasses and the Apple Vision Pro represent two different paths to the same thing. They both want "perfect" mixed reality glasses you can wear all day and run sophisticated apps. Apple decided to focus on getting a shipping product out and then refine it, and that meant making a big headset with short battery life. Meta is waiting until it can ship something that's nearly ideal, which isn't a bad strategy but also means it can't do much more than show prototypes illustrating its progress.

I half expect them to show up in 2027 or 2028 with their dream hardware ready to go. I'm not sure which approach is the right one yet.
 
Aurelius said:
I can't help but think that Meta's Orion glasses and the Apple Vision Pro represent two different paths to the same thing. They both want "perfect" mixed reality glasses you can wear all day and run sophisticated apps. Apple decided to focus on getting a shipping product out and then refine it, and that meant making a big headset with short battery life. Meta is waiting until it can ship something that's nearly ideal, which isn't a bad strategy but also means it can't do much more than show prototypes illustrating its progress.

I half expect them to show up in 2027 or 2028 with their dream hardware ready to go. I'm not sure which approach is the right one yet.
Click to expand...

The Apple headset is meant for use around your house and office, not actually walking around in public with it on the whole day like the Orion glasses.

Apple's end goal is something like the glasses, but the technology isn't there yet. And they need to start working their way there by releasing things like the Vision Pro now, or by the time the tech gets there they'll have to play massive catch up.

The Orion glasses cost $10,000 to make so they aren't planning on selling them. It's really just a fully developed prototype Meta has a ton of R&D prototype MR and VR stuff.

Also, Meta has already shipped millions of mixed reality devices. The Quest 3, and the Quest Pro. The Quest Pro was supposed to be used more in the same way the Apple Vision Pro is, and that is sort of the idea with the Quest 3 too, but they're primarily gaming devices. But their true end goal is something like the Orion glasses they showed.
 
Lakados said:
Well I mean, it's kind of a dud, it's expensive, and limited, also it's Apple, if they are still making it how will they sell the Vision Pro 2?
Click to expand...
Not asking as a gotcha, but you seemed to be pretty excited about this when it first came out. People discovered it wasn't as useful as they had thought? IIRC you were talking about people using it for 3D modeling among other things.
 
Lakados said:
it's Apple, if they are still making it
Click to expand...
They're still selling Macbook Airs with both M2 and M3, although I admit they may be just trying to sell old stock at this point and not making new ones.
 
sharknice said:
The Orion glasses cost $10,000 to make so they aren't planning on selling them.
Click to expand...
God, they're so fugly, though. With that kind of development dollars available I'd much rather see something like Zach Freedman (Voidstar labs on youtube's) Optagon iterated on. No camera, but he's got a HUD, and the brains are all on a small belt pack holding a Khadas Edge 2. (I saw some kind of smart glasses recently on Hackter.io or somewhere that were kind of like the Orion, only with inch-tall temples because they housed a pair of RasPi Zeroes. Yeesh.)
 
1_rick said:
Not asking as a gotcha, but you seemed to be pretty excited about this when it first came out. People discovered it wasn't as useful as they had thought? IIRC you were talking about people using it for 3D modeling among other things.
Click to expand...
I’m excited for the lens tech they included.
It had some features and functions that as a glasses wearer I liked.

But the price tag and lack of functionality killed it for me.

I got a chance to demo one for a bit and it was by far the nicest VR/AR set I’ve had a chance to play with. The thing didn’t make me want to puke after 30 minutes… but if I played with the new Occulus I’d bet it wouldn’t be that much different and for the price difference I can easily get prescription inserts for the Occulus.

It is way the hell ahead of the Microsoft options though, which cost more, but things actually support the Microsoft one.
There were too few options for 3’rd party adoption, which is a shame.

If they had gotten support with the vendors who work with Hololense it could have been a hit.
 
Last edited:
1_rick said:
No camera, but he's got a HUD ... and the brains are all on a small belt pack holding a Khadas Edge 2
Click to expand...
No camera is almost a different product, you cannot have augmented reality possible and the computer not seeing what you see is a really big deal, maybe latency is not an issue with an wireless external brain specially when you do not try to do much like an simple hud... but I can see it for augmented reality to be good while allowing fast head movement.

I think a mix could work, basic compute on the glass (to make the fast render change on head movement, some camera movement analysis, etc...) augmented by the phone in the pocket or car computer.
 
Apple did a really good job with the software portion of this, but I still think VR goggles are an absolute dud consumer device with no real future. They're a shitty in-between until we have holographic projection, or some sort of far more lighter weight and less bulky device.
 
Mchart said:
Apple did a really good job with the software portion of this, but I still think VR goggles are an absolute dud consumer device with no real future. They're a shitty in-between until we have holographic projection, or some sort of far more lighter weight and less bulky device.
Click to expand...

I look at it this way: yeah, there's no way you're going to wander around in public with a Vision Pro on your head now. But if you could get something that performs at least as well while looking as good as Meta Ray-Bans and lasing a typical workday or better on battery (ideally the entire waking day)... let's go.
 
Not sure people would prefer projection to lens augmented reality (as everyone would see the projection or do you wear special class for them to be visible to you ?)

And how much strength the projection would need to be to have middle of a sunny day visible hologram ?

VR glasses (or more so AR), feel almost inevitable, with "bone conducting" speaker-mic and muscle signal controller.
 
Last edited:
LukeTbk said:
Not sure people would prefer projection to lens augmented reality (as everyone would see the projection or do you wear special class for them to be visible to you ?)

And how much strength the projection would need to be to have middle of a sunny day visible hologram ?

VR glasses, feel almost inevitable, with "bone conducting" speaker-mic and muscle signal controller.
Click to expand...
I mean imagine those sorts of glasses, and an updated version of Pokemon GO?
 
The solution seems obvious to me. Define a wireless format that allows a lot of data and low latency between the iphone and the headset.

Then the headset is only handling the display and the iphone does the heavy lifting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top