The Apple Vision Pro buyers and owners thread (2 Viewers)

[Ronald Epstein]

​

 

[Edwin-S]

​

Enough people with 3500+ bucks to spend on a VR/AR headset?

 

[Sam Posten]

lol:

 

[DaveF]

A fun thread discussing all the Apple Watch features that were announced and promoted and disappeared as they figured out what a watch is useful for.

This is to point out that today’s first aVP isn’t what we’ll be buying in five years as the normal Vision Pro. (If it exists as a product in five years)

Jensen Harris (@jensenharris) on Threads

Apple Vision Pro is going to see a LOT of software changes before they settle into what actually works for the platform and how people are using it. Don't believe me? Here were some of the marquee features of watchOS 1 and the first Apple Watch:

www.threads.net

 

[Greg.K]

I would no longer buy any consumer device based on Disney announcing support of it. Not after what they did to 3D TV support. As for this supporting 3D, I will look at it when it can play the 3D films I have sitting uselessly in my collection, not on a database that can be discontinued at any time. The bonus would be PC support.

I can stream 3D Blu-ray rips from my Plex server (over DLNA) to the Quest 2 using the BigScreen app. The quality of the Quest 2's screen and the weight of the headset don't make for the best movie watching experience, but it's nice to know that it can be done.

Hopefully they or someone else release an AVP app at some point (if Apple lets them).

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Apple fans are starting to return their Vision Pros

That 14-day return window is fast approaching.

www.theverge.com

A great device like this needs gaming and more things to do with it before people become bored. In time, this will be an issue Apple will address I'm certain.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Allow me to get on my soapbox for a moment about what I perceive to be a rather disturbing problem that in the end, could hurt the honest Apple consumer...

One of the reasons why Vision Pros are being returned to Apple is because there are people who bought it merely to experience the device with little confidence that they were going to purchase it.

But it gets more disturbing...

Many of the returns, according to a similar article by Digital Trends, are from YouTube vloggers who simply bought the device to do a review and boost their subscriber count, intending to return the device within the 14-day window.

About two years ago, when the AirPods Max was released, one YouTube vlogger came under fire for doing a review, on launch day, where he featured all five colors, trying each one on to show the difference, and then proclaiming that he bought them only for review purposes and was planning to go back to the store later that day to return them all.

This kind of crap goes on all the time. Had I no morals, I could have tried to create my own YouTube channel and make money by purchasing every Apple product on launch day, doing a review, and then returning it for a refund. Any of you reading this can take that idea and run with it. I don't feel comfortable doing it.

I suppose there is nothing Apple can do about it without hurting honest consumers. To take away the 14-day return policy would be a devastating move.

Maybe Apple doesn't care. The YouTube reviews only bring them exposure and hype. They can sell the returned hardware through their refurbished program, still making a significant profit at a slightly reduced cost to the consumer.

I think it's a bad practice but something tells me it has become more normalized than I realize.

 

[Edwin-S]

Allow me to get on my soapbox for a moment about what I perceive to be a rather disturbing problem that in the end, could hurt the honest Apple consumer...

One of the reasons why Vision Pros are being returned to Apple is because there are people who bought it merely to experience the device with little confidence that they were going to purchase it.

But it gets more disturbing...

Many of the returns, according to a similar article by Digital Trends, are from YouTube vloggers who simply bought the device to do a review and boost their subscriber count, intending to return the device within the 14-day window.

About two years ago, when the AirPods Max was released, one YouTube vlogger came under fire for doing a review, on launch day, where he featured all five colors, trying each one on to show the difference, and then proclaiming that he bought them only for review purposes and was planning to go back to the store later that day to return them all.

This kind of crap goes on all the time. Had I no morals, I could have tried to create my own YouTube channel and make money by purchasing every Apple product on launch day, doing a review, and then returning it for a refund. Any of you reading this can take that idea and run with it. I don't feel comfortable doing it.

I suppose there is nothing Apple can do about it without hurting honest consumers. To take away the 14-day return policy would be a devastating move.

Maybe Apple doesn't care. The YouTube reviews only bring them exposure and hype. They can sell the returned hardware through their refurbished program, still making a significant profit at a slightly reduced cost to the consumer.

I think it's a bad practice but something tells me it has become more normalized than I realize.

APPLE is a trillion or near trillion dollar company that overcharges their customers for the privilege of owning a brand name. A few YouTube reviewers buying their products for a review and then returning them is hardly even felt on their bottom line. I seriously don't get the sympathy for transnational corporations that only see people as wallets or handbags to mine as much coin out of as.possible.

I'd rather they buy the product and return it and give an honest review than them getting it for free then claiming that getting it for free does not bias their review. A reviewer claiming that makes me laugh.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Allow me to get on my soapbox for a moment about what I perceive to be a rather disturbing problem that in the end, could hurt the honest Apple consumer...

One of the reasons why Vision Pros are being returned to Apple is because there are people who bought it merely to experience the device with little confidence that they were going to purchase it.

But it gets more disturbing...

Many of the returns, according to a similar article by Digital Trends, are from YouTube vloggers who simply bought the device to do a review and boost their subscriber count, intending to return the device within the 14-day window.

About two years ago, when the AirPods Max was released, one YouTube vlogger came under fire for doing a review, on launch day, where he featured all five colors, trying each one on to show the difference, and then proclaiming that he bought them only for review purposes and was planning to go back to the store later that day to return them all.

This kind of crap goes on all the time. Had I no morals, I could have tried to create my own YouTube channel and make money by purchasing every Apple product on launch day, doing a review, and then returning it for a refund. Any of you reading this can take that idea and run with it. I don't feel comfortable doing it.

I suppose there is nothing Apple can do about it without hurting honest consumers. To take away the 14-day return policy would be a devastating move.

Maybe Apple doesn't care. The YouTube reviews only bring them exposure and hype. They can sell the returned hardware through their refurbished program, still making a significant profit at a slightly reduced cost to the consumer.

I think it's a bad practice but something tells me it has become more normalized than I realize.

It’s funny you mention that now because yesterday or this morning the New York Times had an article about how many online retailers are starting to enforce the fine print in their “free returns” policies and that customers who have been abusing the policy by doing massive amounts of returns that are obviously not in good faith are being denied the ability to place future orders.

Apple wasn’t one of the companies cited in the article but if Apple starts noticing that specific accounts seem to buy a new product at every single launch and then return 100% of those products, they may start caring. Or they may enforce that returns need to be in new condition - returning unopened is one thing because it can be easily resold but they may at some point decide to stop being so nice about used product. Of all the major tech retailers, Apple can probably most easily make the claim that if you want to try the new product, you can come to one of their free demo/workshop sessions at their stores to do so.

On the other hand if they feel that all of these online reviews benefit their bottom line despite taking the hit on returns, they’ll keep looking the other way.

But more generally, the days of online retailers not caring about return volumes are probably near an end.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Josh,

You bring up a point I had not considered...

All Apple purchases are done via your Apple ID. If not at the point of purchase, then at the time of registering and accessing the device.

Apple is probably keeping tabs on accounts that show an elevated amount of returns. I would think they would quickly become aware of who is abusing the return policy in the very same way that Amazon is cracking down on individuals who consistently return items. Everything is tied to an account.

And, Edwin I agree that there should be no sympathy for a trillion-dollar company like Apple, I think it strikes a nerve on a moral basis if this has become the new norm for YouTube reviewers to obtain expensive products only to return them for the sake of making revenue. And, yes, you could very well say those reviews will be more honest than those from the "shills" we regularly see.

 

[Sam Posten]

I mean that was inevitable. Most of those articles are bullshit. But judging the device by the handful of narcissist influencers conspicuously consuming and returning seems like a bad move

 

[Sam Posten]

 

[Ronald Epstein]

This is an excellent demo video

There is no denying that AVP is geared toward productivity and outshines every other VR/AR headset out there for that purpose.

As far as what Mark Zuckerberg has to say, I think he should have kept his envious comments to himself, but I'll wholeheartedly agree that his headset is the best out there for its purposes and price point.

 

[Edwin-S]

From what I can gather from listening to some these reviews is ir has been released too early as a consumer product. The headset is still mainly a tool for developers.

And, Edwin I agree that there should be no sympathy for a trillion-dollar company like Apple, I think it strikes a nerve on a moral basis if this has become the new norm for YouTube reviewers to obtain expensive products only to return them for the sake of making revenue. And, yes, you could very well say those reviews will be more honest than those from the "shills" we regularly see.

I find the most useful reviews are by people who buy the device and keep it in order to provide updates to their reviews as a device matures or from people whose job it is to review products as part their employment.

I don't think all reviews by Youtube reviewers who buy and return products valuable. I mean there is a guy who goes by the name Quantum TV who employs that strategy for his TV reviews. His reviews are worthless. I'm surprised he can still buy TVs, since he returns so many of them after "reviewing" them.

For a good TV review, a person should look at something like Vincent Tao's HDTV Test site.

 

[Edwin-S]

Nowadays almost anything on the internet really has to be looked at as "reader beware", unless it comes from a site that has a lo g track record of accurate information.

 

[Robert Saccone]

I just learned that if you buy Dial M for Murder from the Apple, you get the 3D version to watch on the Vision Pro. The neat thing is Hitchcock shot it for 3D but by the time it was released 3D was already on the decline so it has been rarely seen as is intended Is my understanding.

 

[Sam Posten]

Haven’t watched yet but Snazzy is usually solid

 

[DaveF]

Many of the returns, according to a similar article by Digital Trends, are from YouTube vloggers who simply bought the device to do a review and boost their subscriber count, intending to return the device within the 14-day window.

I was wondering how many of these returns were just “influencers” returning the hardware having got their early videos and tiktoks out.

 

[DaveF]

APPLE is a trillion or near trillion dollar company that overcharges their customers for the privilege of owning a brand name.

You do realize you’re saying this to a bunch of Apple customers who spend our hard-earned money on what we have decided is a good value, and not because we’re dumbasses taken in by a logo?

I mean, you know that right? Because this is actually a pretty insulting comment to me and others in this forum.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I just learned that if you buy Dial M for Murder from the Apple, you get the 3D version to watch on the Vision Pro. The neat thing is Hitchcock shot it for 3D but by the time it was released 3D was already on the decline so it has been rarely seen as is intended Is my understanding.

It’s also on 3D Blu-ray, if you are so equipped. Hitchcock uses mostly depth staging to make us, the audience, feel like voyeurs within a private space. I find it very effective.

You do realize you’re saying this to a bunch of Apple customers who spend our hard-earned money on what we have decided is a good value, and not because we’re dumbasses taken in by a logo?

I mean, you know that right? Because this is actually a pretty insulting comment to me and others in this forum.

The same member disparaged any reviewer reviewing a product they didn’t pay for themselves, which can be taken as a highly inflammatory insult towards the entire HTF review staff. I suppose any newspaper reviewer attending a press screening is on the take if we follow that rationale to its logical conclusion.