Apple is said to be working on a lower-priced Vision Pro model, aiming for a retail price between $1,500 – $2,500 that would use lower-resolution displays, an Apple A-series iPhone processor instead of a Mac M-series chip, and omit the EyeSight feature.
Mark Gurman for Bloomberg News:
I’m now told that the company is also likely to remove the EyeSight feature — the external display that shows a user’s eyes — and include fewer external cameras and sensors.
In addition to developing the cheaper model, Apple is working on a second-generation version of the full-fledged Vision Pro. That headset will have all the bells and whistles but be smaller and lighter, making it more comfortable to wear. The company is also looking to integrate prescription lenses directly into the device, simplifying the design. The first Vision Pro, in contrast, will use lens inserts from optical component maker Zeiss.
As for when the first Vision Pro is coming, the company continues to say “early next year.” In Apple terminology, that could mean anything before the end of April (which I personally don’t consider “early”).
MacDailyNews Take: Without the EyeSight feature, a lower-price Vision Pro would work pretty much the same to the user; it’s other people who would be affected. This cheaper model would appeal to people who often work alone or who plan to use the Vision Pro more as an entertainment / gaming device than as a spatial computer in an office or school setting.
Please help support MacDailyNews. Click or tap here to support our independent tech blog. Thank you!
Support MacDailyNews at no extra cost to you by using this link to shop at Amazon.
Hey, it could be marketed to people with poorer eyesight…. or people with vision in only one eye ….
May be just me but that Eyesight feature just reminds me of those eye masks with cartoon eyes printed on them. I can just imagine someone making a vid/movie of the humorous interactions of groups of people all wearing the Vision Pro.
The Greys have had Apple Vision Pro for have a century at least. They went with the eyeless ones. So I will.
It occurred to me that Apple may not need to include any cameras or front screen on the Apple Vision (regular, or Air, or whatever), if they use the Apple watch as the interface input (which may be how people would ultimately prefer to use the Vision Pro).
I don’t understand what you mean. If you’re wearing the Vision Pro, you can’t see your Apple Watch so the Watch interface is meaningless since you could virtualize it within Vision Pro.
If you mean use the Apple Watch’s camera in place of front facing ones on the Vision Pro, you are basically asking the user to point the Watch in the direction they wish to see instead of in the direction their head is facing.
The watch only needs to sense pinch and movement to control the interface (the eyes are still the ‘cursor’); the cameras would not be needed to observe hand movements. With this set up the user would be stationary, without a ‘look through’ (‘Pro’ feature), just the Vision part. This set up would dramatically ease production and decrease cost, makes a lot of sense to me.
Ok I see what you mean, but doesn’t that also mean you either wear two watches or do everything ‘one handed’ in comparison?
Only one watch would be needed.
I don’t think the Apple Watch can detect ‘pinch-to-zoom’. The most recent gesture that was mentioned was tapping two fingers as a ‘click’ event. I had assumed you mistyped ‘pitch’ in your earlier message. Since you suggested no forward cameras to see the hands you’d need two watches to detect a user’s hands either moving together or apart to indicate ‘zoom’.
Dang the ‘no edit’ in MDN comments. I realized you meant use the face of the Apple Watch like a touchpad.
While I think I understand the interface you’re describing, using the Apple Watch as a touchpad seems to be a step or two backwards from the Spatial Computing UI environment to me. Sort of like if you had to use both hands to move your mouse and your nose to work the touchscreen. If you had to use a virtual keyboard it would be no better than using the AppleTV controller to type on your TV.
Great points. I hadn’t really flushed this idea out fully. But theoretically Apple could do the full gesture interface with just the watch. Pinch to select, move towards and away from the body to zoom. Only Apple knows if this is effective, but I suspect they could make it work.
Wouldn’t the less-expensive lower-specs version just be called Apple Vision? 😏