Eddie Burback is an entertainer first and foremost but here is an example where he tries to give his serious opinions on something. He’s not necessarily wrong about anything, but at the same time...
Eddie Burback is an entertainer first and foremost but here is an example where he tries to give his serious opinions on something.
He’s not necessarily wrong about anything, but at the same time I think it’s important to realize that the things that in theory should make it worth $4000 is the stuff he simply doesn’t care about. Yes, it has entertainment software, but the things that make it more compelling than the competition is the work-related stuff and the things that (in theory) make it easier to collaborate with people and how it can be used to operate with other Apple devices. Nonetheless I think he is right when he doesn’t recommend it; it’s quite simply not a product that everyone needs. As it is, its niche.
I also have the suspicion he didn’t do the face capture for the FaceTime avatar correctly; I noticed that the demonstration video has the model’s hair pulled back.
I haven't really followed the headset closely, but I haven't seen much that would make it compelling in a typical work environment. Maybe for some niche jobs, or paired with specialized simulation...
I haven't really followed the headset closely, but I haven't seen much that would make it compelling in a typical work environment. Maybe for some niche jobs, or paired with specialized simulation training, but I haven't seen anything that makes me think a big corporate office is going to outfit their teams with them.
What features would make it compelling as a work device?
One of my friends works at Meta on Workplaces, the area where Zuck was most desperate to make VR/AR a thing and even with free headsets and strong encouragement by management, nobody there wanted...
One of my friends works at Meta on Workplaces, the area where Zuck was most desperate to make VR/AR a thing and even with free headsets and strong encouragement by management, nobody there wanted to wear headsets at work.
There are definitely applications in certain jobs for AR and that's why MS Hololens still exists and until very recently, Google Glass too. But mostly, nobody wants to or benefits from sitting at a desk wearing a headset, especially not all day. Even the most comfortable headsets are still not as comfortable as not wearing a headset. Having meetings in VR, which is one of the most-touted 'benefits', is mostly not so good as to make the effort worth it. Zoom isn't perfect but it's good enough.
That's been my assessment, as someone who would buy my team things if I thought they would actually help. I do see value in AR in certain situations or for simulation training. But for your...
That's been my assessment, as someone who would buy my team things if I thought they would actually help. I do see value in AR in certain situations or for simulation training. But for your typical office job, I just don't see it.
Mostly the ability to create a large virtual Mac monitor. If you work in an open office with no dedicated desks, this can let people get more monitor space wherever they go. Also, roles with lots...
Mostly the ability to create a large virtual Mac monitor. If you work in an open office with no dedicated desks, this can let people get more monitor space wherever they go. Also, roles with lots of travel will benefit from the extra monitor space.
It helps if you think of it as noise canceling headphones for your eyes. If you have trouble focusing or work in hectic environments, you can control how much you can see beyond your apps. You can fade out the passthrough to a virtual environment or apply a filter to the passthrough to get whatever kind of lighting you want.
Is that worth $3500? That really depends on who you are and how much you dislike the problems this can solve. This still has an App Store that isn't fully developed, so while it may not be right for you today, it could be useful to you down the line.
The big drawbacks I read about there is the inability to share what you put up on your headset. So it might be useful for solo creatives, etc, but with a regular monitor you can show people what...
The big drawbacks I read about there is the inability to share what you put up on your headset. So it might be useful for solo creatives, etc, but with a regular monitor you can show people what you are doing easily in person or over zoom.
That’s such a temporary drawback, though. That could be fixed in a software update. It already allows you to share the display via FaceTime or screen mirroring. Shared virtual spaces are next,...
That’s such a temporary drawback, though. That could be fixed in a software update. It already allows you to share the display via FaceTime or screen mirroring. Shared virtual spaces are next, guaranteed.
It already does this, though. You’re pretending like you “can’t show someone what you’re doing like you can with a monitor” but that’s not true. You can.
It already does this, though. You’re pretending like you “can’t show someone what you’re doing like you can with a monitor” but that’s not true. You can.
I'm not pretending that at all. Someone else pointed out that it can screen share apps with FaceTime, etc, and I said that was good to know. You said the virtual space sharing will be added in an...
I'm not pretending that at all. Someone else pointed out that it can screen share apps with FaceTime, etc, and I said that was good to know.
You said the virtual space sharing will be added in an update, and I said I don't approve expenses based on what the equipment might do.
I specifically asked for work place applicability that would justify doubling the equipment cost per employee. I'm not criticizing it as a general consumer device, or a cool piece of technology. I'm simply asking a question based on the comment above that it had benefits for work. And I see that for niche positions, but not as a general use device.
It is niche. It’s not something everyone needs. It would be a massive waste of funds to give this to an accountant or a secretary. The key thing about it is that it basically acts as a...
It is niche. It’s not something everyone needs. It would be a massive waste of funds to give this to an accountant or a secretary.
The key thing about it is that it basically acts as a multimonitor setup but with benefits of all of the screens being virtual. The “it just works with your Mac” thing that Burback cant use is another key feature that would make it desirable for the people in the niche. I’d check out MKBHD’s review for a better example of how one can use it for work purposes because there are a ton of tiny benefits that are difficult to explain without seeing it.
I read the NYT review and the big let down they discussed is that you can't share what you have on the headset with others. Which really limits the utility as an advanced monitor. So maybe for...
I read the NYT review and the big let down they discussed is that you can't share what you have on the headset with others. Which really limits the utility as an advanced monitor.
So maybe for solo creatives, but doesn't seem a useful devices for general administrative workers.
That’s not true. You can mirror the display to any Apple product, including the iPhone, and you can also SharePlay the display to anyone else via FaceTime (which now works on all devices,...
That’s not true. You can mirror the display to any Apple product, including the iPhone, and you can also SharePlay the display to anyone else via FaceTime (which now works on all devices, including non-Apple ones).
The only thing you can’t do is share the same space with another Vision Pro user so they can see what you see in 3D space (but they can see your view through the same mirroring/SharePlay functions). This will almost certainly be added in a future update but doesn’t seem like something necessary for launch when the chances of 2 people both having these is low right now.
That's good to know about the screen sharing. However, for a corporate use case FaceTime isn't very helpful I don't think. In the context of my question, why would I as a business manager buy...
That's good to know about the screen sharing. However, for a corporate use case FaceTime isn't very helpful I don't think. In the context of my question, why would I as a business manager buy these when it would effectively double my equipment costs per employee.
Screen sharing is already done well enough, so the only real differential seems to be the virtual spaces, which aren't sharable. They might be in the future, but I buy equipment based on what it does today, not what I hope it can do tomorrow. And most of my environments are Teams, Zoom, or Google meet, not FaceTime.
This still seems like a niche product in a business setting, while the person I originally replied to mentioned that the majority of the appeal was to professional users. While I can see some appeal for simulation users, lone creatives, etc, it doesn't seem to offer much value to a corporate environment.
It sounds to me like you’re inventing scenarios and use cases for the AVP for which it’s not intended and then acting like it’s a fault of the device that it doesn’t do that. The benefits of the...
It sounds to me like you’re inventing scenarios and use cases for the AVP for which it’s not intended and then acting like it’s a fault of the device that it doesn’t do that.
The benefits of the Vision Pro are the for the individuals using them, not the teams attempting to collaborate in these specific situations. The AVP has Teams and Zoom and the others and you can collaborate just as well as you can with a normal computer and you don’t have to do anything extra. Outside of that, there are plenty of benefits for a working employee. The only way it doesn’t “offer value to a corporate environment” is if you ignore that a corporate environment is still a group of individuals being individually productive.
I don't know that I've mentioned much on the way of scenarios. I asked a question about how it is helpful in a work environment, because the person I replied to said it has value in that realm....
I don't know that I've mentioned much on the way of scenarios. I asked a question about how it is helpful in a work environment, because the person I replied to said it has value in that realm. The only specific scenarios I've mentioned have been things where I see value, like simulation training, which is something my organization does.
But what I haven't heard is a justification to double the equipment costs for an employee outside of niche scenarios.
If there are widely applicable use cases that create real differential value for the cost, I'm happy to learn about them. I just haven't seen any in this thread. What I have seen is a lot of explanations of screen sharing, which is already well addressed with cheaper, more general purpose tools.
You made a statement about not being able to show people what you were doing. I pointed out that that wasn’t correct. Then you pivoted to this question about work environment while limiting what a...
You made a statement about not being able to show people what you were doing. I pointed out that that wasn’t correct. Then you pivoted to this question about work environment while limiting what a “work environment” entails. You got explanations about screen sharing because that was the use case you brought up.
You may not personally find value in being able to set up a workspace that is not limited by physical constraints but that doesn’t mean that others won’t find value in that.
I shared what I read from a NYT review, which discussed the inability to share things. You then replied to me on multiple comment chains about that one thing. I acknowledged your clarification....
I shared what I read from a NYT review, which discussed the inability to share things. You then replied to me on multiple comment chains about that one thing. I acknowledged your clarification.
But my original question to the comment OP was what work situations the headsets are useful for. I oversee a large organization. I'm always interested in emerging tools. I don't see where the Apple headset would help my organization outside of some specific situations, i.e., not worth the expense as a standard equipment option. But I'm open to learning about use cases, especially around fostering collaboration with remote and hybrid workers.
I never said the device has zero value, just that I don't think I could justify doubling my equipment cost per employee for what value it does offer, outside of niche use cases.
There really isn't any gotcha here. I'm not trying to impune the device. Someone said it had value in the work realm and I asked follow up questions. That is all.
I feel like the only viable workplace usage for AR headsets would be in a job where you are always on the move but also in need of information. A typical usecase would be warehouse work,...
I feel like the only viable workplace usage for AR headsets would be in a job where you are always on the move but also in need of information. A typical usecase would be warehouse work, transporting goods from point A to point B. But I feel like before AR headsets get good enough for works in that environment to wear them, they'll be automated out completely anyway.
It would need more development, but simulated training could have a lot of good applications. Simulated surgery, AR for plane assembly, etc. Maybe as party of training for safety operations in...
It would need more development, but simulated training could have a lot of good applications. Simulated surgery, AR for plane assembly, etc. Maybe as party of training for safety operations in dangerous environments like oil rigs.
Things where you want to give the person annoted overlays, or help simulate dangerous situations. But for a typical monitor replacement, it seems a bit much.
I don't know if simulated surgery would be better than how we do it now, which is practical study where the junior doctor assists a senior experienced surgeon on an actual person during surgery...
I don't know if simulated surgery would be better than how we do it now, which is practical study where the junior doctor assists a senior experienced surgeon on an actual person during surgery until eventually the roles flip and the senior doctor assists the junior doctor and then eventually you know how it works.
Safety training for dangerous operations that I could see happening. Plane assembly it seems more viable to fully automate humans out of the process than to implement AR into the workprocess.
I work with folks who train for field surgery and natural disaster response, so not traditional surgery. I'm thinking maybe it could augment our facilities that simulate the noise and chaos of a...
I work with folks who train for field surgery and natural disaster response, so not traditional surgery. I'm thinking maybe it could augment our facilities that simulate the noise and chaos of a natural disaster. But I'm not sure what they are capable of.
Imagine having a triple 4K monitor setup anywhere any time. All you need to carry with you is a VR headset and human input devices (in the case of the Vision Pro, probably also a MacBook to pair...
Imagine having a triple 4K monitor setup anywhere any time. All you need to carry with you is a VR headset and human input devices (in the case of the Vision Pro, probably also a MacBook to pair with the headset). All of this easily fits in a backpack.
I think I've heard that there's a limit to the number of virtual screens synced with a Mac. It was one or two, IIRC, so a triple monitor setup wouldn't be possible with it. Though the last time I...
I think I've heard that there's a limit to the number of virtual screens synced with a Mac. It was one or two, IIRC, so a triple monitor setup wouldn't be possible with it.
Though the last time I checked MacBooks were limited to a single external monitor, so it's not really possible with that hardware in any case.
But the nice thing about the Vision Pro is that it is the computer, so you don't need a macbook to pair with it, at least in theory. You don't even need an HID, though a bluetooth keyboard would probably make the experiance a lot nicer.
Well the Vision Pro is a glorified iPad. I’d rather use a MacBook. I heard from someone that works at Apple that the one screen limit won’t be there forever. But they don’t work in that department...
Well the Vision Pro is a glorified iPad. I’d rather use a MacBook.
I heard from someone that works at Apple that the one screen limit won’t be there forever. But they don’t work in that department so wouldn’t necessarily know for sure.
The Vision Pro is limited to one Mac monitor, but Macs support multiple monitor setups. It depends on which one you choose, but MacBook Pros can support 3 external displays.
The Vision Pro is limited to one Mac monitor, but Macs support multiple monitor setups. It depends on which one you choose, but MacBook Pros can support 3 external displays.
One of my current issues with headsets are that they are actually bulkier than computers. They may have more compact hardware and be lighter than a laptop, but laptops squish it all down into an...
One of my current issues with headsets are that they are actually bulkier than computers. They may have more compact hardware and be lighter than a laptop, but laptops squish it all down into an almost two dimensional package. Headsets in their most compact form still take up three dimensions. While the actual computational part of the Vision Pro is very compact, having the facial interface and the speaker pods attached makes it awkward to transport.
The Vision Pro in the official Apple case will fit in a backpack, but only if you leave everything else at home.
I definitely see the appeal. From a work perspective, maybe people who travel a lot and work with confidential material that you don't want visible on a laptop on a plane or other public setting....
I definitely see the appeal. From a work perspective, maybe people who travel a lot and work with confidential material that you don't want visible on a laptop on a plane or other public setting. But at $3500 I didn't think it is justifiable for the average desk jockey who doesn't travel much, and either works in an office or at home.
This is one of the greatest videos I have seen in a while. Someone's opinion was hammered home so effectively in an artistically interesting manner and with some jokes in between to keep up the...
This is one of the greatest videos I have seen in a while. Someone's opinion was hammered home so effectively in an artistically interesting manner and with some jokes in between to keep up the levity. The only drawback is that I think he could speak a little faster when he reads his script, I had to watch the thing 1.25 playback rate, but that's a minor nitpick and a very personal one at that.
I don't think he's wrong. VR/AR headsets are still niche products and the only use with mass appeal I have seen so far is basically beat saber; i.e. home workout for people who really don't like moving, and that's it. Apple Vision is not really meant for that and I struggle to understand what the use for it is going to be. I think from a productivity perspective the best thing you can use it for is in combation with an already fairly expensive macbook as a way to get extra screens in, but... Why wouldn't you use extra screens then?
Someone here in the thread described it as "noise cancelling headphones for your eyes" for those who work in open plan offices but is a) your company really going to spend the cash to get every employee one and b) if not are you really going to drop like 4 grand (I always forget that american prices are pre tax man get your shit together) for the job you probably hate because they make you work in an open plan office?
It's better than lugging screens around if you travel. I'm a weirdo but I like my job and like the open plan office (granted, it's an office with 4 people in it).
Why wouldn't you use extra screens then?
It's better than lugging screens around if you travel.
the job you probably hate because they make you work in an open plan office
I'm a weirdo but I like my job and like the open plan office (granted, it's an office with 4 people in it).
When I hear the term open plan office I usually imagine whole floors, not rooms with 4-6 people in them. As for travel, you're right, this thing is good for travel. Time will tell if people are...
When I hear the term open plan office I usually imagine whole floors, not rooms with 4-6 people in them. As for travel, you're right, this thing is good for travel. Time will tell if people are more productive using this + a macbook or just a macbook.
A wonderfully funny and insightful video. I did not expect to walk away so contemplative after laughing so much throughout, thanks for sharing.
Eddie Burback is an entertainer first and foremost but here is an example where he tries to give his serious opinions on something.
He’s not necessarily wrong about anything, but at the same time I think it’s important to realize that the things that in theory should make it worth $4000 is the stuff he simply doesn’t care about. Yes, it has entertainment software, but the things that make it more compelling than the competition is the work-related stuff and the things that (in theory) make it easier to collaborate with people and how it can be used to operate with other Apple devices. Nonetheless I think he is right when he doesn’t recommend it; it’s quite simply not a product that everyone needs. As it is, its niche.
I also have the suspicion he didn’t do the face capture for the FaceTime avatar correctly; I noticed that the demonstration video has the model’s hair pulled back.
I haven't really followed the headset closely, but I haven't seen much that would make it compelling in a typical work environment. Maybe for some niche jobs, or paired with specialized simulation training, but I haven't seen anything that makes me think a big corporate office is going to outfit their teams with them.
What features would make it compelling as a work device?
One of my friends works at Meta on Workplaces, the area where Zuck was most desperate to make VR/AR a thing and even with free headsets and strong encouragement by management, nobody there wanted to wear headsets at work.
There are definitely applications in certain jobs for AR and that's why MS Hololens still exists and until very recently, Google Glass too. But mostly, nobody wants to or benefits from sitting at a desk wearing a headset, especially not all day. Even the most comfortable headsets are still not as comfortable as not wearing a headset. Having meetings in VR, which is one of the most-touted 'benefits', is mostly not so good as to make the effort worth it. Zoom isn't perfect but it's good enough.
That's been my assessment, as someone who would buy my team things if I thought they would actually help. I do see value in AR in certain situations or for simulation training. But for your typical office job, I just don't see it.
Have a great day!
Mostly the ability to create a large virtual Mac monitor. If you work in an open office with no dedicated desks, this can let people get more monitor space wherever they go. Also, roles with lots of travel will benefit from the extra monitor space.
It helps if you think of it as noise canceling headphones for your eyes. If you have trouble focusing or work in hectic environments, you can control how much you can see beyond your apps. You can fade out the passthrough to a virtual environment or apply a filter to the passthrough to get whatever kind of lighting you want.
Is that worth $3500? That really depends on who you are and how much you dislike the problems this can solve. This still has an App Store that isn't fully developed, so while it may not be right for you today, it could be useful to you down the line.
The big drawbacks I read about there is the inability to share what you put up on your headset. So it might be useful for solo creatives, etc, but with a regular monitor you can show people what you are doing easily in person or over zoom.
That’s such a temporary drawback, though. That could be fixed in a software update. It already allows you to share the display via FaceTime or screen mirroring. Shared virtual spaces are next, guaranteed.
I buy equipment based on what it does, not what I hope it will do in the future.
It already does this, though. You’re pretending like you “can’t show someone what you’re doing like you can with a monitor” but that’s not true. You can.
I'm not pretending that at all. Someone else pointed out that it can screen share apps with FaceTime, etc, and I said that was good to know.
You said the virtual space sharing will be added in an update, and I said I don't approve expenses based on what the equipment might do.
I specifically asked for work place applicability that would justify doubling the equipment cost per employee. I'm not criticizing it as a general consumer device, or a cool piece of technology. I'm simply asking a question based on the comment above that it had benefits for work. And I see that for niche positions, but not as a general use device.
It is niche. It’s not something everyone needs. It would be a massive waste of funds to give this to an accountant or a secretary.
The key thing about it is that it basically acts as a multimonitor setup but with benefits of all of the screens being virtual. The “it just works with your Mac” thing that Burback cant use is another key feature that would make it desirable for the people in the niche. I’d check out MKBHD’s review for a better example of how one can use it for work purposes because there are a ton of tiny benefits that are difficult to explain without seeing it.
I read the NYT review and the big let down they discussed is that you can't share what you have on the headset with others. Which really limits the utility as an advanced monitor.
So maybe for solo creatives, but doesn't seem a useful devices for general administrative workers.
That’s not true. You can mirror the display to any Apple product, including the iPhone, and you can also SharePlay the display to anyone else via FaceTime (which now works on all devices, including non-Apple ones).
The only thing you can’t do is share the same space with another Vision Pro user so they can see what you see in 3D space (but they can see your view through the same mirroring/SharePlay functions). This will almost certainly be added in a future update but doesn’t seem like something necessary for launch when the chances of 2 people both having these is low right now.
That's good to know about the screen sharing. However, for a corporate use case FaceTime isn't very helpful I don't think. In the context of my question, why would I as a business manager buy these when it would effectively double my equipment costs per employee.
Screen sharing is already done well enough, so the only real differential seems to be the virtual spaces, which aren't sharable. They might be in the future, but I buy equipment based on what it does today, not what I hope it can do tomorrow. And most of my environments are Teams, Zoom, or Google meet, not FaceTime.
This still seems like a niche product in a business setting, while the person I originally replied to mentioned that the majority of the appeal was to professional users. While I can see some appeal for simulation users, lone creatives, etc, it doesn't seem to offer much value to a corporate environment.
It sounds to me like you’re inventing scenarios and use cases for the AVP for which it’s not intended and then acting like it’s a fault of the device that it doesn’t do that.
The benefits of the Vision Pro are the for the individuals using them, not the teams attempting to collaborate in these specific situations. The AVP has Teams and Zoom and the others and you can collaborate just as well as you can with a normal computer and you don’t have to do anything extra. Outside of that, there are plenty of benefits for a working employee. The only way it doesn’t “offer value to a corporate environment” is if you ignore that a corporate environment is still a group of individuals being individually productive.
I don't know that I've mentioned much on the way of scenarios. I asked a question about how it is helpful in a work environment, because the person I replied to said it has value in that realm. The only specific scenarios I've mentioned have been things where I see value, like simulation training, which is something my organization does.
But what I haven't heard is a justification to double the equipment costs for an employee outside of niche scenarios.
If there are widely applicable use cases that create real differential value for the cost, I'm happy to learn about them. I just haven't seen any in this thread. What I have seen is a lot of explanations of screen sharing, which is already well addressed with cheaper, more general purpose tools.
You made a statement about not being able to show people what you were doing. I pointed out that that wasn’t correct. Then you pivoted to this question about work environment while limiting what a “work environment” entails. You got explanations about screen sharing because that was the use case you brought up.
You may not personally find value in being able to set up a workspace that is not limited by physical constraints but that doesn’t mean that others won’t find value in that.
I shared what I read from a NYT review, which discussed the inability to share things. You then replied to me on multiple comment chains about that one thing. I acknowledged your clarification.
But my original question to the comment OP was what work situations the headsets are useful for. I oversee a large organization. I'm always interested in emerging tools. I don't see where the Apple headset would help my organization outside of some specific situations, i.e., not worth the expense as a standard equipment option. But I'm open to learning about use cases, especially around fostering collaboration with remote and hybrid workers.
I never said the device has zero value, just that I don't think I could justify doubling my equipment cost per employee for what value it does offer, outside of niche use cases.
There really isn't any gotcha here. I'm not trying to impune the device. Someone said it had value in the work realm and I asked follow up questions. That is all.
I feel like the only viable workplace usage for AR headsets would be in a job where you are always on the move but also in need of information. A typical usecase would be warehouse work, transporting goods from point A to point B. But I feel like before AR headsets get good enough for works in that environment to wear them, they'll be automated out completely anyway.
It would need more development, but simulated training could have a lot of good applications. Simulated surgery, AR for plane assembly, etc. Maybe as party of training for safety operations in dangerous environments like oil rigs.
Things where you want to give the person annoted overlays, or help simulate dangerous situations. But for a typical monitor replacement, it seems a bit much.
I don't know if simulated surgery would be better than how we do it now, which is practical study where the junior doctor assists a senior experienced surgeon on an actual person during surgery until eventually the roles flip and the senior doctor assists the junior doctor and then eventually you know how it works.
Safety training for dangerous operations that I could see happening. Plane assembly it seems more viable to fully automate humans out of the process than to implement AR into the workprocess.
I work with folks who train for field surgery and natural disaster response, so not traditional surgery. I'm thinking maybe it could augment our facilities that simulate the noise and chaos of a natural disaster. But I'm not sure what they are capable of.
Imagine having a triple 4K monitor setup anywhere any time. All you need to carry with you is a VR headset and human input devices (in the case of the Vision Pro, probably also a MacBook to pair with the headset). All of this easily fits in a backpack.
I think I've heard that there's a limit to the number of virtual screens synced with a Mac. It was one or two, IIRC, so a triple monitor setup wouldn't be possible with it.
Though the last time I checked MacBooks were limited to a single external monitor, so it's not really possible with that hardware in any case.
But the nice thing about the Vision Pro is that it is the computer, so you don't need a macbook to pair with it, at least in theory. You don't even need an HID, though a bluetooth keyboard would probably make the experiance a lot nicer.
Well the Vision Pro is a glorified iPad. I’d rather use a MacBook.
I heard from someone that works at Apple that the one screen limit won’t be there forever. But they don’t work in that department so wouldn’t necessarily know for sure.
The Vision Pro is limited to one Mac monitor, but Macs support multiple monitor setups. It depends on which one you choose, but MacBook Pros can support 3 external displays.
One of my current issues with headsets are that they are actually bulkier than computers. They may have more compact hardware and be lighter than a laptop, but laptops squish it all down into an almost two dimensional package. Headsets in their most compact form still take up three dimensions. While the actual computational part of the Vision Pro is very compact, having the facial interface and the speaker pods attached makes it awkward to transport.
The Vision Pro in the official Apple case will fit in a backpack, but only if you leave everything else at home.
But if you never take it off, you never need to carry it!
I definitely see the appeal. From a work perspective, maybe people who travel a lot and work with confidential material that you don't want visible on a laptop on a plane or other public setting. But at $3500 I didn't think it is justifiable for the average desk jockey who doesn't travel much, and either works in an office or at home.
This is one of the greatest videos I have seen in a while. Someone's opinion was hammered home so effectively in an artistically interesting manner and with some jokes in between to keep up the levity. The only drawback is that I think he could speak a little faster when he reads his script, I had to watch the thing 1.25 playback rate, but that's a minor nitpick and a very personal one at that.
I don't think he's wrong. VR/AR headsets are still niche products and the only use with mass appeal I have seen so far is basically beat saber; i.e. home workout for people who really don't like moving, and that's it. Apple Vision is not really meant for that and I struggle to understand what the use for it is going to be. I think from a productivity perspective the best thing you can use it for is in combation with an already fairly expensive macbook as a way to get extra screens in, but... Why wouldn't you use extra screens then?
Someone here in the thread described it as "noise cancelling headphones for your eyes" for those who work in open plan offices but is a) your company really going to spend the cash to get every employee one and b) if not are you really going to drop like 4 grand (I always forget that american prices are pre tax man get your shit together) for the job you probably hate because they make you work in an open plan office?
It's better than lugging screens around if you travel.
I'm a weirdo but I like my job and like the open plan office (granted, it's an office with 4 people in it).
When I hear the term open plan office I usually imagine whole floors, not rooms with 4-6 people in them. As for travel, you're right, this thing is good for travel. Time will tell if people are more productive using this + a macbook or just a macbook.