Malcolm Owen
It may take a couple of years for Apple to perfect the Apple Vision Pro, a report claims, with employees who worked on the headsets believing it could take four generations.
Apple's first-generation releases of products are usually impressive, as the Apple Vision Pro launch demonstrated. However, it usually takes a few iterations before products become exceptionally good.
While reviews of the headset propose that it hints at Apple's future but with the difficulties of modern technology's limitations, some inside Apple have similar feelings about the device.
In Sunday's "Power On" newsletter for Bloomberg, Mark Gurman offers that the Apple Vision Pro is "more of a preview of the future than the future itself. It's too heavy and cumbersome, the battery life is far too short, and there aren't enough dedicated apps." Gurman adds there are more bugs in visionOS that you'd expect from an Apple product, "even a first-generation one."
As for when to expect the best version of the headset to arrive, Gurman offers that the software update process needs to be adjusted to speed up the release of bug fixes. The software "feels like" a beta version, and about a year away from being refined enough for everyday consumer use, he adds.
On the overall package, Gurman refers to "some people in the Vision Products Group" within Apple, who say it "could take four generations before the device reaches its ideal form." This is said to be similar to the progression of the iPhone, iPad, and Apple Watch.
Until Apple brings out a refined version, "The Vision Pro is essentially a prototype - just one where you have to pay Apple for the privilege of testing out," Gurman summarizes.
William Gallagher
Christine McKee
AppleInsider Staff
Chip Loder
31 Comments
It took Apple 4 years and 5 or 6 models (plus additional variations) for the Mac to overtake Apple II in sales. I personally think it took Apple to the Mac Plus before the Mac was truly usable for enough people to be considered a success, and the SE/30 before the compact Mac was really “powerful”.
LOL...battery life with an M2 desktop class processor is as good or better than headsets using mobile Snapdragon processors. And the weight difference is 3-4 ounces versus something like Meta Quest 3. It's certainly interesting that the tech press suddenly thinks that 18 ounces is just fine and 21 to 22 ounces is "too heavy". If it were the other way around and the AVP was 3-4 ounces lighter it would probably just be blown off with a "both headsets are similar in weight" line. Example: Meta Quest 3 doesn't do Atmos surround for audio and AppleInsider doesn't think the audio comparison between Quest 3 and AVP is even necessary.
And four generations? Laptops didn't hit their "perfect" form factor in four generations. More like 20 years. The reality is that the AVP is right in line with other headsets in terms of the form factor and generally blows their doors off with the functionality.
By perfect, they probably mean the headset form will have obvious issues minimized. This category has a long way it could evolve.