Brave New World: Can Apple’s Vision Pro live up to the promise?
Here at Waveform, our mantra is Digital-First. Human Centred. Outcome Focused. This is both an articulation of the space we operate in and how we serve our clients. But it is also an expression of what should be the ultimate aim for any digital product, service or experience. And brands should be mindful that what they offer must target the needs of the people behind the screens. (Rather than present solutions to problems that don’t exist in the race to innovate).
Having now watched, rewatched and watched again Apple’s ‘And One More Thing…’ from WWDC, I thought this was a useful prism with which to order and share my thoughts on the announcement of the long-rumoured Apple Vision Pro. And to reflect on where it looks to be firing on all cylinders and where some more finessing pre-launch is needed…
Digital First? Without doubt. For better or worse, and whether you are working, socialising, or consuming content, Apple’s new Vision Pro device requires that you allow your entire reality to be mediated by an Apple OS. I don’t think it is trite to suggest that using one is akin to living inside an iPhone, iPad or MacBook. Indeed, the whole platform is built on the software engineering and codebase that powers these devices.
And, whilst I was expecting the initial hands-on previews to temper expectations of the digital experience promised by the slick marketing presentation. All I have read to date suggests, that apart from a few minor gripes from the pixel peepers around video compression and small black spots in their field of view, the demo videos are a relatively accurate reflection of the UX. Seasoned tech commentators, notably Marques Brownlee described some of the experience as being ‘magical.’ And as a veteran tech influencer, this is significant. It brings to mind the futurist Arthur C Clark who said: “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic”. There is already a broad consensus that this is the best implementation of consumer VR ever. It should be no surprise that Apple as a $2tn juggernaut means business and has learnt from some of the missteps and false starts of the vanguards in this space: Meta, Steam, Byte Dance and HTC/Vive. Apple rarely creates product categories but, when it does choose to muscle its way in, it has a habit of forcing a step change that others have to contend with. The benefit, in this case, is that it vitalises a nascent category and forces mainstream consumers to pay attention. Moving XR on from the curiosity it has been to date for most.
So Extended Reality (XR) is nothing new, but what raises the stakes here is how integrated Apple is into so many of our lives via iOS, iPadOS, MacOS, WatchOS or iCloud. VisionOS is one more piece of an ecosystem that has the gravitational pull of a black hole. If you are an existing Apple customer this is an added reason why you won’t escape. And just as much of a reason to immerse yourself, and stay immersed, in Apple’s vision of XR. Some will embrace this wholeheartedly, but I am not sure how I feel about this just yet. I have a passion for the digital space and its potential to make people’s lives easier, simpler, and more enjoyable. I am fascinated by the XR market too. But, to date, the challenge has been how to keep engagement up, Meta has publicly acknowledged that selling their Quest Virtual Reality (VR) headsets is not the main issue it faces with 20m+ sold to date. Meta’s main problem is keeping people using the devices which is presenting them with a big challenge as they gear up to launch new devices. As such, the stakes have felt low as XR has been for many a parlour trick that you dip in and out of rather than lose yourself in. Apple’s implementation, I suspect, will not have these engagement issues as it is an extension of an already evolved digital experience that has insinuated itself into our lives. And if adoption ends up being anything like the iPhone (and trust me I am sure Apple’s ambitions are this lofty) then this has profound philosophical and sociological implications.
Outcome-focused? Again, undoubtedly yes. This is where I was really impressed. Apple has created laser-like focus on removing friction and delivering value for users. Both are things which Meta has really struggled to communicate via its Quest product line and Metaverse ambitions. Yes, the Quest looks cool for games, but remind me why else would we want to use it?
Part of the wow factor is down to the execution of Vision Pro, the overall hardware package is several steps ahead of any offering from current competitors. But where the presentation really shone was providing great use-cases that demonstrated that Apple understood the Jobs to be Done and desired outcomes of users and then precisely articulated how the device can create value and justify early adoption. Some examples:
An ‘infinite’ desktop canvas
Integration across the Apple ecosystem
Handoff from other Apple devices
Enhanced collaboration
The largest personal cinema screen imaginable
Immersive content experiences
Recording and viewing 3D videos
Lifesize panoramic photos
The effect of these stacking benefits on most keynote viewers was probably similar to my own: Shut Up And Take My Money. And many use cases were explicitly designed to reframe the price as ‘reasonable’, $3499 almost sounds like a bargain for your very own cinema screen (a concept with the potential for mass appeal), less so for a non-essential VR device. Few of these are new ideas though and ones which you can access through existing devices at far lower price point. But Apple delivered a compelling case for Vision Pro with such consummate ease, and focus on value creation, it makes you wonder why a business with the resources and communications clout of Meta has so far failed to capture our imagination with similar applications. Equally, Meta is fundamentally an ads business, whereas Apple has a rich heritage of delivering hardware with a purpose, be it entertainment, creativity, and productivity, so Meta is very much learning on the job.
If there is a criticism to be made of the Vision Pro pitch it is that it lacked focus, there are lots of great things you can do with this device but what one thing does it excel at? I didn’t get a clear sense of what Apple feels is the killer app.
But is it human-centred?
The product fundamentals look strong, and they have taken a human-centred approach to mitigating issues with existing solutions. Especially in terms of the considered way they have used pass-through Virtual Reality (VR) and high-quality cameras and screens to bring together the best of VR and Augmented Reality (AR).
Apple’s solution uses a recording of real space with virtual elements overlaid. (Whereas VR is an entirely virtual simulation and AR is an overlay of virtual elements on the real world). Apple have simulated AR but really Vision Pro is a VR product (not that they would tell you that, as they prefer to compete in a category of one).
The core friction with VR is your lack of presence when using it. And for AR it is the lack of immersion that comes from a very limited field of view. Apple’s implementation means that, despite wearing two 4K screens on your face, the cameras inside and outside the headset ensure you remain connected with the external world and the virtual overlay feels more convincing than any other product to date. In short, it is clever, forward-thinking, and disruptive.
So human-centred design principles have been applied to move the category forward and remove pain points for users. But is it truly human-centred? Well, I would argue not quite yet for several reasons which leapt out at me as I watched the presentation:
The EyeSight feature (a screen on the front of the device which projects your eyes onto the device so people in your immediate vicinity can engage with you) takes us into uncanny valley territory. To me it looks hideous, and I can’t see the implementation staying put as is in future product iterations. Although the underlying intent of bridging the gap between user and the external world is a very valid aspiration.
When I first saw the presentation address how ‘great’ Facetime is with Vision Pro I wondered well what does the user look like on a Facetime call? The answer may have been an extra from a DaftPunk video. But not quite. With a bit of digging, I figured out that Apple can turn you into a semi-realistic animated digital avatar (see above point re the uncanny valley). And there was me thinking that video calling was about bringing people closer together. Turning you into a digital replica of yourself for a video call does not feel human-centred it is placing a digital barrier between people. The tech and animation may get better over time but this feels like an otherwise intractable product limitation
Interestingly from what I saw none of the senior execs delivering the keynote on Vision Pro wore a Vision Pro. Did Steve Jobs ever walk out on stage without an iPod or iPhone? Hell no. To me this feels odd and a tacit admission that ability of the Vision Pro to act as a bridge between the real world and a virtual world the product is still a work in progress. The subtext appeared to be, it’s fine for the content-consuming masses to tune in turn on and drop out with a Vision Pro, but the exec team are keeping their powder dry. Why? Because as we all know it would have looked ridiculous. Regardless, they were not prepared to lean-in to the vision they were trying to sell. I look forward to seeing if this changes in the run-up to launch.
By far the worst element of the presentation was when they showed a parent playing with his children and taking a 3D video by, you’ve guessed it, wearing a Vision Pro. I found it disturbing that this version of family-time, with the parent wearing a headset, could be presented as acceptable, and even desirable behaviour. He was capturing video for posterity by detaching himself from his immediate surroundings. I would challenge anyone to watch this and not wonder if they had just stumbled across a Black Mirror out-take. And as any parent will know this situation is predicated on a fallacy; there is no way small children would let their dad use something that cool without immediately demanding a go. I know this from experience, my positively Antediluvian Google Cardboard VR headset is like catnip for my kids.
To sum up, yesterday was probably the biggest product reveal from Apple since the iPhone launch. I am so excited to see its potential unleashed as the developer community gets behind it and the platform evolves. But the execution already looks good, in a way that iPhone Mk1 just didn’t. And as such it feels transformational for the category and computing more generally. Meta’s share price has jumped 6% today and for good reason as Apple has finally made XR relevant and it is now well placed to be the solid no. 2 that Android is in the mobile space. But it needed Apple to light a fire under the market it felt it owned.
Regardless of the promising start, and how Apple looks to have left the competition in its wake, it still feels like first gen tech. And there are plenty of issues to work through to make this a truly human-centred product (even removing the external battery pack would be great), imbue Vision Pro with real purpose and a killer-app. As well as hopefully side-step some of the more dystopian implications of widespread adoption. Setting aside the mind-bending implications for interactive entertainment and content consumption can you imagine how fun a Vision Pro would be if it was mandated by your employer in place of a laptop? No, me neither.
So, as exciting as it is, I won’t be an early adopter, and not just because of the price (interesting Tim Cook told Good Morning America that the price was ‘thirty-four ninty nine’ rather than ‘thirty-five hundred dollars’ - sounds better doesn’t it?) The real reason I will be late to market is that people buying in at the start of an entirely new platform are really buying a devkit and participating in unpaid user testing. I will be hanging back on the sidelines waiting for the plain old Vision or make that a Vision SE, that the ‘Pro’ nomenclature foreshadows. And when, presumably, some of these fundamental kinks have been ironed out. And in the meantime will be hoping that Apple has enough of a human-centred perspective to keep ‘Spatial computing’ as an amazing companion to current mobile and desktop computing and not a wholesale replacement.
