Apple launched a brand new product after many years and also one of the most expensive ever released by a well-known premium gadget company. Who will buy a $3,500 VR headset? What are their good sides. What are the cons besides the price?

For more than four years, Apple has been working on virtual reality headsets, and finally the day has come to introduce a gadget called Vision Pro, which resembles some kind of ski goggles.

The selling price of $3,500 is higher than the press release and will undoubtedly be the biggest drawback of this “VR/AR headset”. There is no doubt that there won’t be huge sales, and the question is whether many developers will want to create applications for such an expensive terminal (and with sales that are unlikely to be high in terms of units).

Apple’s “die-hard fans” and so-called “early adopters,” those who want to own the first various devices released to the market, will buy.

Apple did not say the word “metaverse” in the presentation, which is closely related to Facebook, the company renamed itself Meta to clearly indicate the direction in which it is moving. Apple representatives didn’t even say “virtual reality”, they talked about “spatial computing”, the idea was to supplement the surrounding reality, not transport users to a completely new universe isolated from reality.

Apple was a latecomer to the VR headset market, years after companies like Facebook or Microsoft, but one of the reasons was that many of the technical issues had not been resolved. Vision Pro also does not solve everything, but the first signs point to a technically excellent gadget.

In the presentation, Apple representatives insisted that those who will use headphones will not be isolated in virtual reality, but will always be in touch with the real reality that surrounds them, and will be able to immediately see when a person approaches them. while using the programs. What’s more, bystanders can also see the eyes of the Vision Pro helmet wearer.

Major publications in the US were able to briefly test these virtual reality headsets and concluded that Apple has created the best terminal in the category, which is comfortable and has an image of exceptional quality.

Apple hopes that people who buy Vision Pro will watch movies, chat with friends or use various entertainment programs in augmented and virtual reality. For example, users will be able to watch movies like Avatar, visit various locations virtually, and chat with friends or family via FaceTime.

It’s been compared to a computer on your face or to a huge, high-definition TV you’re looking at. Not surprisingly, Apple often used words like “revolutionary” or “awesome” as they do with each release.

For Apple, the launch of Vision Pro represents a calculated risk, but even if sales are extremely weak, it will not be a disaster for a company that derives more than half of its turnover from the iPhone. Apple’s future will not be affected even if only a few thousand VR headsets are sold in the coming years.

Apple’s market capitalization was $500 billion when Tim Cook took over the company in 2011. Now it is about 2.9 trillion dollars.

All of the mini-reviews praised the image quality and processing quality of these virtual reality headsets, which have an external battery connected by a cable that the user keeps in their pocket. The promised autonomy is two hours.

The first people who tested the headphones were delighted with the 3D image, resolution, processor speed and many other details.

The verdict is unequivocal: headphones are a spectacular and impressive gadget, but the price is fantastically high, and it is not at all certain that such a gadget is needed by the market. Will anyone be able to resist watching a two hour or so movie with these headphones instead of watching an ultra high definition TV? Will people want to browse the web with them in front of them instead of using the iPhone they’re used to?

Will there be enough content to shell out that much money? Will there be a ‘killer app’, an app so successful that it will make users give up their money? (extremely many). They will find out the answers in 2024.

Compared to Meta (Facebook), Apple’s strategy is quite different. Meta sells much cheaper, less sophisticated VR devices, but will show users ads. Apple comes with an extremely expensive and high-performance “gadget” and relies on its ecosystem, which works very well.

The fact is that Apple has not had the opportunity NOT to enter this field of VR headsets, and the company is not taking much risk financially because it has almost unlimited resources.

The American press often uses a phrase when talking about various AR and VR headsets: “a solution in search of a problem.” Is there really a need for something like this in the market? Will such headphones really be bought for tens of millions a year (against 10 million today?). This seems very unlikely.