It sure sounds like anyone in a household can use it but if anyone has a different eyeglass corrective lens prescription (very likely unless everyone still has 20/20 vision) from the primary user it’s a very substandard experience.

They showed in the demo the switching lenses was easy as they are magnetic.

Likely the upfront issues would be getting everyone their personalized lenses, but actually using seems like it would be easy.

They’d better sell a good storage solution for those lenses too otherwise they’re going to get lost or mixed up easily

Apple already does laser engraving for products bought in the online store. For the price point of this thing, they can probably move engraving into the retail stores (not long ago, I bought a laser engraver for my hobby 3D printer for a few hundred bucks -- they're not expensive, certainly not by Apple Store standards).

As for getting lost, Apple already has their AirTag technology. While I don't know if that's already in these lenses, it doesn't seem like it'd be difficult to add.

Even if they’re magnetic and easy to swap, it sounds a LOT clunkier than just handing someone an iPad. People are going to lose the lenses all over the place.

Heck, my dad loses his phone multiple times a week, necessitating a quick phone call to track it down. Are the lenses going to include built-in AirTags so people can locate them?

So how do you propose you make a good experience for people who need prescription glasses?

I don’t have a proposal. I’m skeptical of the entire market for this product. I’m taking a wait-and-see approach and I’m looking forward to reading one-year followups from early adopters.

Heck, I’m even skeptical of the iPad. I own one and I use it so seldomly that I have to charge the thing up from 0 every time I use it. But I recognize that a lot of people love them as consumption devices and a few as creation tools for some niche purposes, such as digital painting.

I suck at optics, and optics is a hard topic, so I say it will full humility: I’m always surprised that headset manufacturer can’t correct for most of these vision issues in software.

i don't think that is at all possible.

I think you'd need to be able to control the direction of each photon coming out of the screen, so that it landed in the intended place on the retina after going through the misshapen cornea/lens. That's basically what a corrective lens does. Doing it dynamically for each thing we call a pixel indeed sounds like science fiction.

you could do it with lasers, using lasers to draw directly on the retina. I don't think there would be any way to do this with a pixelarray type screen.. maybe if you could map each pixel to a point on your retina and then modify the rendering .. maybe. the concept reminds me of a generative art piece that Kyle McDonald built: https://www.fastcompany.com/90167836/disco-meets-computer-vi...

Essentially pile up a bunch of mirrorballs. Point projectors at it. Then map where each pixel from each projector ends up on the walls/ceiling/floors.

And my sons bought their own PS4s because they wanted to play online games against each other at the same time and not have to share it.

I think it is just a weird coincidence, but in this thread price and share-ability seem to be negatively correlated.

Consoles, AppleTV, and iPads are at the lower end of the price range here, right? (Well, you can get an expensive iPad of course).

Laptop are expensive but personal, phones… definitely personal, tend to be a little more expensive maybe?

I dunno, it isn’t a straight line correlation but I don’t think the fact that the Vision Pro is expensive tells us much.

In have a Rift CV1, I enjoyed showing it off to people and got some party-game type things (Keep Talking And Nobody Explodes is great for showing the device off). But I don’t use it much solo, and I’ve shown it off to all my friends already, so I don’t use it much. Don’t get me wrong, it was fun, but it hasn’t integrated into my daily life.

If I were Apple—word of mouth is good, but I’d hope the Vision Pro becomes something that sort of gets embedded in people’s lives to the point where they don’t care to show it off (either because it becomes personal like a laptop, or because it becomes boring like a monitor).

I agree. I’m much more likely to allow someone to borrow a $329 low end iPad than my $1300 iPhone 12 Pro Max.

Your comment is greyed out as if it was downvoted a bit, which seems quite bizarre to me.

I think we’re pretty clearly talking about a small number of contrary data points, here? I’m not trying to prove a general trend at least, just point out that we should at least double check the assumption that expensive implies shared.

If someone is really invested in that idea I’d love to see an argument for it, rather than silent downvotes.

I haven't downvoted but your first post point out that it's negatively correlated. It seems to non correlated. An example is a car shared by family.

I know plenty of middle class parents who bought their teenagers an old beater because they didn’t want them driving the car they needed to get to work or their expensive car.

Wrecking your first car is almost a teenage rite of package.

Again we are talking about people who are willing to spend $3500 on a headset. Not exactly the demographic of people who are “sharing a family car” and that don’t statistically have separate cars for the parents and don’t either buy their kids a car or subsidize them in some way to help them buy their own.

I know I never let either one of my sons drive my car alone and I bought myself a new car and handed my older one down to my older son and bought my younger son a car before he had a license.