Technology

59402 readers

2516 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

133

Here's why the $3,500 Apple Vision Pro headset is so expensive (www.cnbc.com)

submitted 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) by catculation@lemmy.zip to c/technology@lemmy.world

97 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The $3499 Apple Vision Pro reportedly costs $1542 to make.

Edit: Archive link https://archive.ph/u4BCi

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 5 points 8 months ago (3 children)

The Quest 3 is capable of the same stuff and is only $500.

[–] CptEnder@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Adding the Valve Index is a another high end model that does all this and more for $1000.

The big difference is the Apple's AR features

[–] june@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

I’d agree with you, but the index isn’t a standalone device. Pack all the computing power into the index and the price is going to skyrocket.

Edit to add: index doesn’t have eye or hand tracking.

[–] dodeca@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

They already did, the VIVE XR Elite, and its $1000.

[–] june@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

What? That’s… an entirely different headset? Not even the same manufacturer. There’s also some fairly significant differences between them. The person I replied to said that the Index does all the same stuff that the Vision Pro does which is empirically incorrect.

[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Every single reviewer is saying that the quality of the VR and specially the AR blows any competition out of the water. I highly doubt your comment is true.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The quality is better but it still does "the same stuff". A PC with a 1080p display and Nvidia 3050 does the same stuff as a 4k display and an Nvidia 4080.

[–] PeroBasta@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

Some titles may run at higher FPS on the 3050 build XD

[–] ferralcat@monyet.cc 1 points 8 months ago

It costs 10x more. It sure as hell better do things better than the quest.

[–] Nyxon@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I have both and the Quest 3 is definitely not capable of the same stuff.

Kevin Sorbo and Kevin Costner are capable of the same stuff too but there is a clear difference in performance and value.

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

I get the point but you could have picked at least one good actor instead of two mediocre ones. Sorbo vs Spacy. Big difference in both acting ability and how shitty they are as people.

[–] Nyxon@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I get your point too. Kevin Sorbo was the name that came to my head first, for some reason, and Kevin Costner followed. TBF though, Kevin Costner has won 2 Academy Awards, one for Best Director (Dances with Wolves in 1991) and has been nominated for a best actor award. He does have a long list of industry accomplishments in various roles. Kevin Sorbo doesn’t have anything close to that. I’m not a big fan of Kevin Costner but objectively speaking he is accomplished in his career.

Kevin Spacey wouldn’t have been better though, with his rapey background and all that, wouldn’t feel right putting him forward as something to aspire to.

Maybe Kevin Sorbo and Kevin Kline would have been a better comparison.