It’s expensive because you wont be locked into a system where you get constantly tracked with your data sold by facebook and also taking a cut from every single piece of software you buy on there which is often upto 60 dollars while the vision has like 1-3 dollar apps mostly free. The cheap price is just to get you into the door for the quest.
if they didn’t invent anything themselves, why do they have the best hand tracking, special positioning, eye tracking, displays, software, chips, i could go on. you would think stolen technology would be worse? no?
If it wasn’t their’s, how would they get the patents pushed and accepted? Even an Apple Lawyer is not going to be able to do anything against stolen patents.
That's how he makes money he gets paid by these companies to do this I don't think I've seen a video where he genuinely says not to buy a apple product because it's got problems heres he's just saying it's worth the price becuase the company will never lose money from a product being shit cause good luck getting apple to fix it without charging you 3x the price of the product
To be a little bit fair to apple, not that they deserve it, but the meta quest price is subsidized by the data they collect and apple, at least in theory, does not collect data to the extent that Facebook does
Apple charge so much because they know suckers will pay it. Eg their desktops costing 10s of thousands of dollars but the overall cost is 1/10th of the price.
Kinda like Nvidia's AI chips. Each one costs like 1 grand to produce, but they sell each unit at 10 grand, literally a 1000% upmarket, and people _still_ ordered the things in bulk!
@northernleigonare ----- Actually you are way, way off. Apple every quarter reports their profits. It's a simple matter to see what their net margin is which is 25%. Net margin includes all expenses like taxes, interest, R&D, software development, hardware design, processors, everything. So instead of earning 90% like you are saying, they are actually earning 25%. The bill of materials is just one component in the expense equation.
@@bruxi78230 that and Nvidia's consumer products like a 4060 or 4070 aren't nearly as scammy as an AI board. They're more expensive than they need to be sure, but it's not an unnecessary 1000% upmarket for no reason. And Apple isn't earning only 25%, remember, corporations _love_ to evade taxes and liability, and have many ways to do it. Probably closer to 35-40% profits.
@@Not_interestEd-yeah but individuals ain't buying them the majority of orders are companies that buy thousands of them at a time hoping to use them to make a profit. The apple vision pro is just throwing away money.
@cesramm1120 it's no different than the 90s 15k computer 😂 there's tons of "lower" quality that produce similar results, this is not space travel yet 😂😂
@@cesramm1120 I'm not going to Insult you or anything but rather teach you. Simply the apple vision pro is a scam. Its not VR its AR. its not very powerful and its not worth the price. The onboard tech is not even advanced. its simply cameras that track your hands and can tell were the Popup screen is so you can interact. its just a glorified VR headset. and its not even that good. same goes with all their devices. The 7000 dollar mac pro? Yea it gets outclassed by a desktop that costs half as much. apple doesn't do anything new they don't do anything special they just have a cult following of blind sheep that are willing to dish out 3500 dollars for a pile of junk.
Bro, consoles do the same thing. Sell at a loss/cost and make it up with software. Meta is smart. If it's too expensive, none buys it, if none buys it, none makes software for it, which means even fewer people buy it. Sell it cheap, more people buy it, more people buy it more people make software for it which has to be sold through your own market place. It's they didn't even invent this tactic and you claim they are not are a real company lmao
The fact is that consoles are more profitable because there isn't a sony or xbox phone. Apple is making far more revenue on their iphones. So much that their services is literally one of their biggest, if not their biggest source of income.
@@L2_Impartyeah but that's because people are stuck in their ecosystem. If you get an iPhone 1 for 700 buy movies apps and stuff that only work on iPhone then do the sam for the second iPhone which is 750 and they keep jacking up the prices next thing you know youre paying 1400 for a freaking phone because you paid for apps, music and movies that only work on Apple products. I know people who only own Apple products for that very reason. That's why they won't let it be open source.
It’s not just the tax. That cost, as far as I know, is just to manufacture. You also have to factor in the advertising cost and r&d cost. Correct me if I’m wrong.
Meta: We make quality affordable headsets that anyone can buy. Apple: We copied… made a headset. It’s 1500, plus another 2000+ for the software”. 4000 dollars please. Tech bros: Yeah, I think ima go with Apple on this one.
@@i_like_living Well Apple's hope is for them to basically make your phone and computer be around you and in your vision for the sake of convenience. Obviously, the Apple Vision Pro isn't convenient because it's heavy and has shit battery life, and Apple knows this. It's more experimental than anything. I know I probably sound like I'm contradicting myself, but comparing a device meant specifically for gaming to a device meant for...uh...not gaming isn't exactly fair. (And no, I don't think you should buy it at all. But I also don't think the comparisons to Meta's headsets are fair). Hopefully that made sense and I don't sound like a buffoon
@@famlrnamemssng you sound like you are contradicting yourself because that's what you are doing. You are tip toeing around the obvious (it's a scam) yet you try so hard to deny it
@@LuisSoto-fw3if it certainly isn’t worth spending $3,500, that I agree with, but it’s not a complete and total scam. It *is* a beautiful piece of engineering and if you’re trying to deny that then you just hate Apple. But yeah it’s pretty useless right now
Please justify the batterys weight and capacity (I have heard the battey is ass asf and weighs more then an iphone 15 (if we keep it in the pear space))
Also gotta think about the cost of employees but also would they be saving money by buying it in bulk? And I know that some businesses can get it in a certain way that makes it cheaper.
The thing about Meta Labs here is that they're sort of a skunkworks, I say this all the time. They can lose money because they're not expected to turn a profit right *now*, they're expected to ensure Meta's foothold in the future.
You can't list price parts value by the unit when a company acquires them in bulk. Unit price in Bulk = real value + production cost. Same with every other company.
@@deadrop6647 Same with every product. Changing the glass of an iphone front screen costs you 80dollars but it costs Apple 0.85cts each unit. Production value of an iphone is approx under 300 usd. Retail price 1.200
As others have stated, Meta business model is similar to game console. Sell the hardware cheap and make up the profit on the software. Which is what Apple should be doing if they want this "Vision" to succeed. If no one buys the hardware, then how will the software ever improve enough to entice new users?
Honestly, Pan, Satan and Buu really could have been the 3 for the first bit as it would explain why the groups so ineffective while also having a heavy hitter for fights.
but why are people still comparing it to the quest and such? they arent the same thing. the vision pro is an AR headset, akin to something like a hololens, whereas the quest is a VR headset. they arent the same and perform different functions and require different tech. 3500 is still a pretty insane price, but it cant be compared to a VR headset in terms of pricepoint. that makes no sense
Screw those the boss takes all the risk investing and overhead arguments. F*** 100% of them. Somewhere in that chain of making that product someone got f***** over and we all know it.
Na meta is trying to make a product that is available to the masses so they are taking on innovation tax to make the best system and allow for development of apps to appear more valuable
To be honest the r&d cost’s of the Apple Vision Pro is probably incredibly high so probably to make it back you need to markup the price per headset quite much becouse of the low volume
@@saltyboi9357 honestly I don’t think so people will buy it either way and 2,5 k is still a lot of money for most people and way more than they would ever spend on a headset so the sales won’t be that much more
quest1-3 is basically a game console... every game/app sold meta gets like 30% cut.. so they can sell at a loss if they make it up in app sales and the data of you they sell.
you can get a custom build, extremely high resolution, low form factor vr headset from bigscreen vr for a third of the price, and use the rest of the money you save to buy a pretty powerful computer.
I don't think they're really costing up the patents to meter the price. That's not what any company building luxury goods does. They just put out a price they think people would buy it at.
You know when you buy expensive stuff, you either bought the quality or the branding of said products, sometimes they coexist but sometimes you get the idea, remember those tape bracelets?
Well yeah, Meta sells headsets at a loss and (tries to) makes up for it from app store sales. Furthermore, Apple has to offset years of R&D cost with the headset price alone and only relatively low volume of units compared to the Many millions of Meta Quests sold. Don't get me wrong, the Vision Pro is very expensive, but I can somewhat understand where this number comes from. Still, personally, I'm not going to pay anything close to that price for a headset, let alone a first Gen one.
The only innovative thing that ever came out of Apple was the 3d touch display. That was it, it was unique and fun to use and was the only thing that added to my iPhone user experience but then I got hit with a massive repair cost for it as the screen glitched. Been an avid hater of Apple ever since.
LOL. What about assembly? You think they snap together like Lego? Packaging? Shipping? Marketing? Launch? R&D? Retail/online stores still exist? That’s before discussing general overhead, labour and transportation. I’m not a big Apple fan, but you quickly realize, they are one of the few companies that sell you products for your use. Everyone else sells you discounted products, for their use (Android have your sign over rights to your emails and photos.)
It’s a developer headset. The 2000 extra dollars is an investment for app developers to get in the market early for when Apple vr headsets become mainstream.
It’s not supposed to be a competitor to the quest it more of a competitor to the varyo xr2 a 7000 dollar headset with is extremely realistic and the Apple Vision Pro is very similar to it it’s actually a good deal might not seem like it but 3500 is not bad for how much technology is in it and the Apple Vision Pro isn’t even really for consumers it’s more met for game devs and big companies
@@Grim_Reaper053From what i've seen, Varjos tech still beats them in some departments when it comes to integration of objects in ar, detail clarity and such but in some ways i can see what you're going for, it's just apples marketing might've been a bit off if that's what they were going for. Varjos newest headset the xr-4 is also priced much closer at 4000 instead of 7000.
i reached a point where i hope apple keeps going batshit crazy with their prices like this, as long as there are people that want to be fcked over like this, then the only thing that the company is to blame is for not going even farther.
I paid 200$ for a lightly used 650$ wmr headset (the samusung odyssey (+?)) And love it other than the flaw of poor controller tracking if you dont keep the controllers in view of the cameras on the headset
It’s not supposed to be a competitor to the quest it more of a competitor to the varyo xr2 a 7000 dollar headset with is extremely realistic and the Apple Vision Pro is very similar to it it’s actually a good deal might not seem like it but 3500 is not bad for how much technology is in it and the Apple Vision Pro isn’t even really for consumers it’s more met for game devs and big companies
I’m guessing a lot of the money right now is going to development cost for the software, unlike every other VR company Apple has never made a VR operating system before, so they have to start from scratch
In my opinion, the Vision Pro is just about the biggest money, waster ever, because most of its tech isn’t even going for something important. It’s just augmented reality. For around $500 I can have a gaming console that is revolutionizing gaming as we speak.
it more of a competitor to the varyo xr2 a 7000 dollar headset with is extremely realistic and the Apple Vision Pro is very similar to it it’s actually a good deal might not seem like it but 3500 is not bad for how much technology is in it and the Apple Vision Pro isn’t even really for consumers it’s more met for game devs and big companies
Well it’s not like it’s just hardware to be fair. Software development also costs money to produce. But that still doesn’t mean it’s something worth buying.
Damn that's wild. I'd still rather wait for Simula VR -- same product but with a Linux based OS and you don't have to worry about Apple telling what you can and can't do with your property.
The thing is that they couldve priced it upto 1000 or even 1200 dollars and it would still have been justified just because of the 44% 'innovation' tax of apple but they didn't, they chose to price at a reasonable price so that more people can get it or simply cause they are not assholes
I'm an Apple fanboy but yeah that price is insane. The Vision Pro is a beautiful piece of technology but holy hell don't buy it, it's not worth the money
It's not 2000 dollars in profit per headset. They have to make back what they spend on marketing, engineering and design, Loss in manufacturing, etc. There's a whole hell of a lot more than just BOM costs in a products price
Two completely different approaches to how it’s sold. Apple priced the headsets in a way that is low volume but each purchase is an immediate profit, without the heavy reliance on services. Plus, the high price maintains the “expensive” stigma behind Apple products. Meta priced the headsets in a way that they can reach as many consumers as possible and work on turning each loss into a profit from services. Basically a “loss leader”, kinda like printer and ink. Investors and shareholders like one, consumers like the other.
![[UNCUT] "บอสณวัฒน์" แฉ! แหล่งซุกเงินแก๊งบอส ขยันผิดที่ไม่กี่ปีก็เข้าคุก l คนดังนั่งเคลียร์ l17ต.ค.67](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/BL56qIfXYZM/mqdefault.jpg)
It's expensive because it's Apple.
mac pro's price is crazy
You decided not to listen to facts 😂😂😂
@@RunForPeace-hk1cunah original dude is right
@@RunForPeace-hk1cuhes not lying
It’s expensive because you wont be locked into a system where you get constantly tracked with your data sold by facebook and also taking a cut from every single piece of software you buy on there which is often upto 60 dollars while the vision has like 1-3 dollar apps mostly free. The cheap price is just to get you into the door for the quest.
That much “Innovation tax” for nothing that they invented themselves is wild
The only thing apple made in the Vision Pro is the SoC or System on Chip
Daylight robbery
if they didn’t invent anything themselves, why do they have the best hand tracking, special positioning, eye tracking, displays, software, chips, i could go on. you would think stolen technology would be worse? no?
If it wasn’t their’s, how would they get the patents pushed and accepted? Even an Apple Lawyer is not going to be able to do anything against stolen patents.
@@edupe6185 They really havent a whole lot. 90s macs and the M chips are the only real innovation they have done
Please don’t justify the price by saying it’s a sensible “business decision”
i mean, scamming people is a very profitable business.
Yeah it’s a business decision rigged against our wallets
That's how he makes money he gets paid by these companies to do this I don't think I've seen a video where he genuinely says not to buy a apple product because it's got problems heres he's just saying it's worth the price becuase the company will never lose money from a product being shit cause good luck getting apple to fix it without charging you 3x the price of the product
To be a little bit fair to apple, not that they deserve it, but the meta quest price is subsidized by the data they collect and apple, at least in theory, does not collect data to the extent that Facebook does
@@lmitz what makes you think Apple takes less info?
2000$ profit is crazy
Boycott Apple thats insane
No its actualy less than 500 dolars because apple has to spend 1500 more to make another vision pro
@@abandonned9893?
No it's not profit , they have to do marketing and give share to middlemen , so profit is less than u think
Nope you also need to think about production, research, support, development of the os, etc
Apple charge so much because they know suckers will pay it.
Eg their desktops costing 10s of thousands of dollars but the overall cost is 1/10th of the price.
Kinda like Nvidia's AI chips. Each one costs like 1 grand to produce, but they sell each unit at 10 grand, literally a 1000% upmarket, and people _still_ ordered the things in bulk!
@@Not_interestEd-kinda like every nvdia physical product
@northernleigonare ----- Actually you are way, way off. Apple every quarter reports their profits. It's a simple matter to see what their net margin is which is 25%. Net margin includes all expenses like taxes, interest, R&D, software development, hardware design, processors, everything. So instead of earning 90% like you are saying, they are actually earning 25%. The bill of materials is just one component in the expense equation.
@@bruxi78230 that and Nvidia's consumer products like a 4060 or 4070 aren't nearly as scammy as an AI board. They're more expensive than they need to be sure, but it's not an unnecessary 1000% upmarket for no reason.
And Apple isn't earning only 25%, remember, corporations _love_ to evade taxes and liability, and have many ways to do it. Probably closer to 35-40% profits.
@@Not_interestEd-yeah but individuals ain't buying them the majority of orders are companies that buy thousands of them at a time hoping to use them to make a profit. The apple vision pro is just throwing away money.
unbelievable the amount of people that justify being robbed blind 😂😂
Your just not smart enough to understand how much goes into the vision pro
@cesramm1120 it's no different than the 90s 15k computer 😂 there's tons of "lower" quality that produce similar results, this is not space travel yet 😂😂
Yes Yes let the anger flow through you@@cesramm1120
@@cesramm1120your just not smart enough to understand how apple rips people off
@@cesramm1120 I'm not going to Insult you or anything but rather teach you. Simply the apple vision pro is a scam. Its not VR its AR. its not very powerful and its not worth the price. The onboard tech is not even advanced. its simply cameras that track your hands and can tell were the Popup screen is so you can interact. its just a glorified VR headset. and its not even that good. same goes with all their devices. The 7000 dollar mac pro? Yea it gets outclassed by a desktop that costs half as much. apple doesn't do anything new they don't do anything special they just have a cult following of blind sheep that are willing to dish out 3500 dollars for a pile of junk.
I would rather have a 4k gaming setup at that price
Vision Pro ain’t made for gaming
@@timnguyen4101it's not made for anything, it doesn't do shit
@@timnguyen4101 that make it worse ! The vision pro is not even good enough for work.
@@timnguyen4101ur right it’s a tech gimmick
@@timnguyen4101 and a 3.5k pc can do anything from work to gaming to video editing
When you're trying to convince yourself that it's worth it
Bro, consoles do the same thing. Sell at a loss/cost and make it up with software.
Meta is smart. If it's too expensive, none buys it, if none buys it, none makes software for it, which means even fewer people buy it.
Sell it cheap, more people buy it, more people buy it more people make software for it which has to be sold through your own market place.
It's they didn't even invent this tactic and you claim they are not are a real company lmao
The fact is that consoles are more profitable because there isn't a sony or xbox phone. Apple is making far more revenue on their iphones. So much that their services is literally one of their biggest, if not their biggest source of income.
@@L2_Impartyeah but that's because people are stuck in their ecosystem. If you get an iPhone 1 for 700 buy movies apps and stuff that only work on iPhone then do the sam for the second iPhone which is 750 and they keep jacking up the prices next thing you know youre paying 1400 for a freaking phone because you paid for apps, music and movies that only work on Apple products. I know people who only own Apple products for that very reason. That's why they won't let it be open source.
*no one
@@L2_Impart I don't understand your point
@@LuisSoto-fw3ifAbout half or less of Apple's profit portfolio comes from their ecosystem-related services and complementary accessories.
Apples best guarded secret are the guys who figure out how hard their customers want to be choked before passing out.
Apple was scaming with that Apple Tax.
Like your hat and shirt btw ,🇿🇦
"Be a real company" since when has apple ever done that 😂😂😂😂
A lot of patents doesn't equal a lot of tech, just means the company has a lot of lawyers.
for that price timmy boy better give me some futuristic head
And access to a satellite beam that can scratch my ass from outer space.
The reason that meta is making low profit is because everyone bought the Quest 2, so when the Quest 4 comes around, their business is gonna be booming
Bro, it's apple being apple. They're not trying to be a company. They're trying to know you for money.
Dystopian future tech
It’s not just the tax. That cost, as far as I know, is just to manufacture. You also have to factor in the advertising cost and r&d cost. Correct me if I’m wrong.
Meta: We make quality affordable headsets that anyone can buy.
Apple: We copied… made a headset. It’s 1500, plus another 2000+ for the software”. 4000 dollars please.
Tech bros: Yeah, I think ima go with Apple on this one.
Y'all don't realize that the Apple vision pro and Meta's headsets are two completely different things that serve different purposes
@@famlrnamemssngwhat purpose does the vision pro serve?
@@i_like_living Well Apple's hope is for them to basically make your phone and computer be around you and in your vision for the sake of convenience. Obviously, the Apple Vision Pro isn't convenient because it's heavy and has shit battery life, and Apple knows this. It's more experimental than anything. I know I probably sound like I'm contradicting myself, but comparing a device meant specifically for gaming to a device meant for...uh...not gaming isn't exactly fair. (And no, I don't think you should buy it at all. But I also don't think the comparisons to Meta's headsets are fair).
Hopefully that made sense and I don't sound like a buffoon
@@famlrnamemssng you sound like you are contradicting yourself because that's what you are doing. You are tip toeing around the obvious (it's a scam) yet you try so hard to deny it
@@LuisSoto-fw3if it certainly isn’t worth spending $3,500, that I agree with, but it’s not a complete and total scam. It *is* a beautiful piece of engineering and if you’re trying to deny that then you just hate Apple. But yeah it’s pretty useless right now
Please justify the batterys price ?
😂😂
Please justify the batterys weight and capacity (I have heard the battey is ass asf and weighs more then an iphone 15 (if we keep it in the pear space))
@@444knuffelmacno it doesn’t
@@StarChaser1879bro yes it's plain shit 2 hour of use and u go to like 20%
@@leonmatthew6557 because it uses power differently. Wattage vs amps vs voltage.
well at least quest doesn't want my bio metrics to sell to other companies !!!
Awesome hat 🇿🇦🏆
Apple has to be crazy for for this much mark-up , they did produce a good tech but with insane price,cmon .
Apple lovers would justify that company selling cat turfs in a box for $3500.
Also gotta think about the cost of employees but also would they be saving money by buying it in bulk? And I know that some businesses can get it in a certain way that makes it cheaper.
lol he is turning into an apple product salesperson!
Apple could charge 50 dollars for a pair of socks exactly the same pair as 2 dollar socks but people would still buy them.
Funny that you think they would be that cheap, more like $300 socks with bluetooth.
Its a low volume product category. Apple always puts insane markup on those. Like the moniter stands for design firms
Meta doesn't have a 20% tax, it's known that it's selling the Quest 3 at a loss.
You forgot to factor in shipping, warranty, advertising, etc.
It's hoping to make the profits back from selling games and apps.
Like Playstation.
The thing about Meta Labs here is that they're sort of a skunkworks, I say this all the time. They can lose money because they're not expected to turn a profit right *now*, they're expected to ensure Meta's foothold in the future.
I really like your Springbok cap and rugby shirt!!🇿🇦🇿🇦
the springbok merch 😭♥️
So 44% of the money you sink for the vision is for the apple branding basically?
You can't list price parts value by the unit when a company acquires them in bulk. Unit price in Bulk = real value + production cost.
Same with every other company.
So it would be even cheap for Apple to make
@@deadrop6647 Same with every product. Changing the glass of an iphone front screen costs you 80dollars but it costs Apple 0.85cts each unit.
Production value of an iphone is approx under 300 usd. Retail price 1.200
@@deadrop6647not really
@@StarChaser1879 are you kidding bulk buying parts can easily cut costs in half
@@StarChaser1879 are you implying bulk buying is expensiver than retail buying? Lmao
Like apple said it’s for developers to design apps and games for the later versions of the Vision Pros
As others have stated, Meta business model is similar to game console. Sell the hardware cheap and make up the profit on the software. Which is what Apple should be doing if they want this "Vision" to succeed. If no one buys the hardware, then how will the software ever improve enough to entice new users?
that $1500 doesn't account for labor, assembly, billet, R&D, packaging, shipping, legal, marketing, sourcing, etc
And for apple being .... Apple
Delusional lol
@@Necoy666That's a nice description of you.
Honestly, Pan, Satan and Buu really could have been the 3 for the first bit as it would explain why the groups so ineffective while also having a heavy hitter for fights.
but why are people still comparing it to the quest and such? they arent the same thing. the vision pro is an AR headset, akin to something like a hololens, whereas the quest is a VR headset. they arent the same and perform different functions and require different tech. 3500 is still a pretty insane price, but it cant be compared to a VR headset in terms of pricepoint. that makes no sense
isn't like standard 30% the cost of the item the commonly used practice when it comes to products?
Yeah but does the quest do what the vision can do? Not yet
Did they patent the scratchable screen
Awesome springbok jersey and cap
You forgot to mention R/D costs.
That's the innovation tax.
You mean copying something from others.
Screw those the boss takes all the risk investing and overhead arguments. F*** 100% of them.
Somewhere in that chain of making that product someone got f***** over and we all know it.
@@vibhawabandhubajpai54 That’s not how it works bud.
@@TheBigAEC Yeah i guess but in the video it sounded a whole lot like that ”innovation tax” is just the profit.
The quest 3 surely sells loads of games?
That is a LOT more to produce than i thought, wow.
whoever buys this either dont understand economics or likes donating to rich mega companies
Same thing with cars. You can pay double the cost spent from designing to producing the car bc running it low like the quest did is really risky
Na meta is trying to make a product that is available to the masses so they are taking on innovation tax to make the best system and allow for development of apps to appear more valuable
Well patents do cost so that may take a bit more, but that's still over 35 percent for the sweet apple tax.
To be honest the r&d cost’s of the Apple Vision Pro is probably incredibly high so probably to make it back you need to markup the price per headset quite much becouse of the low volume
They could definitely make more if they just dropped the price 1k
@@saltyboi9357 honestly I don’t think so people will buy it either way and 2,5 k is still a lot of money for most people and way more than they would ever spend on a headset so the sales won’t be that much more
Bruh they didn't create anything new
There wasn't any R&D.
@@thegoldenatlas753 there is literally a new R1 chip in and products that don’t have new things still need to be developed
@@thegoldenatlas753what are you even talking about. If they didn’t create anything new then where is the equivalent product
quest1-3 is basically a game console... every game/app sold meta gets like 30% cut.. so they can sell at a loss if they make it up in app sales and the data of you they sell.
you can get a custom build, extremely high resolution, low form factor vr headset from bigscreen vr for a third of the price, and use the rest of the money you save to buy a pretty powerful computer.
From the start I've been comparing it to Microsoft Hololens rather than the Quest line due to it's price point
Or the fact it also has to be asembled if u wanna buy the parts separate & build it yourself then go for it
I don't think they're really costing up the patents to meter the price. That's not what any company building luxury goods does. They just put out a price they think people would buy it at.
What's with the Springbok swag?
Apples Innovation tax is like paying for taxes for your house but you dont actually pay for your house..
You know when you buy expensive stuff, you either bought the quality or the branding of said products, sometimes they coexist but sometimes you get the idea, remember those tape bracelets?
Well yeah, Meta sells headsets at a loss and (tries to) makes up for it from app store sales. Furthermore, Apple has to offset years of R&D cost with the headset price alone and only relatively low volume of units compared to the Many millions of Meta Quests sold.
Don't get me wrong, the Vision Pro is very expensive, but I can somewhat understand where this number comes from. Still, personally, I'm not going to pay anything close to that price for a headset, let alone a first Gen one.
"Innovation Tax" Apple has come up with literally nothing innovative in 14 Years
Like apple could invent teleportation and you would still say the same broken line.
@@kingdelledroghe1957 Apple fanboys not being able to accept their own stupidity is actually so funny.
@@teimopukki4783 apple bad >:( , I'm so smart >:)
@@kingdelledroghe1957 All you have to do is look at every Apple product.
The only innovative thing that ever came out of Apple was the 3d touch display. That was it, it was unique and fun to use and was the only thing that added to my iPhone user experience but then I got hit with a massive repair cost for it as the screen glitched. Been an avid hater of Apple ever since.
honestly that's valid 2x overhead is less than the standard in the tech industry, cant forget the like 13000% markup on beats by dre
LOL. What about assembly? You think they snap together like Lego? Packaging? Shipping? Marketing? Launch? R&D? Retail/online stores still exist? That’s before discussing general overhead, labour and transportation. I’m not a big Apple fan, but you quickly realize, they are one of the few companies that sell you products for your use. Everyone else sells you discounted products, for their use (Android have your sign over rights to your emails and photos.)
It’s a developer headset. The 2000 extra dollars is an investment for app developers to get in the market early for when Apple vr headsets become mainstream.
The quest is mostly their own tech so I see why it's less expensive. They've been going crazy with their prototypings.
It’s not supposed to be a competitor to the quest it more of a competitor to the varyo xr2 a 7000 dollar headset with is extremely realistic and the Apple Vision Pro is very similar to it it’s actually a good deal might not seem like it but 3500 is not bad for how much technology is in it and the Apple Vision Pro isn’t even really for consumers it’s more met for game devs and big companies
@@Grim_Reaper053From what i've seen, Varjos tech still beats them in some departments when it comes to integration of objects in ar, detail clarity and such but in some ways i can see what you're going for, it's just apples marketing might've been a bit off if that's what they were going for. Varjos newest headset the xr-4 is also priced much closer at 4000 instead of 7000.
Moral of the Story: Apple products are NEVER worth it if you want to buy something super worth it
i reached a point where i hope apple keeps going batshit crazy with their prices like this, as long as there are people that want to be fcked over like this, then the only thing that the company is to blame is for not going even farther.
it's still not in Turkey but if it comes to here, don't be suprised when you see a 500K TL price tag due to taxes.
God dang those dots on the vision pro is creeping the fuck out of me
Nice whoop band strap!
The Quest platform is a semi-loss leader product. The endgame is the VR-data of the users they can sell.
Comparatively to headsets of a similar specification, (Varjo headsets) it’s actually cheap as hell with better standalone performance.
I paid 200$ for a lightly used 650$ wmr headset (the samusung odyssey (+?)) And love it other than the flaw of poor controller tracking if you dont keep the controllers in view of the cameras on the headset
Also my cpu is 7 generations old now and still punches good frames
Also this is the base model, like a Vision Pro could easily cost over 4000 dollars to you
Apple makes everything expensive even though it isn't so the quest is better also you can't wear it while driving
It’s not supposed to be a competitor to the quest it more of a competitor to the varyo xr2 a 7000 dollar headset with is extremely realistic and the Apple Vision Pro is very similar to it it’s actually a good deal might not seem like it but 3500 is not bad for how much technology is in it and the Apple Vision Pro isn’t even really for consumers it’s more met for game devs and big companies
if they divided the base price of the vision pro by 10, i might consider buying it
you aint getting shit for 350 dollars
Are you south African ???
Godspeed to your son. Saw it from ztt
I’m guessing a lot of the money right now is going to development cost for the software, unlike every other VR company Apple has never made a VR operating system before, so they have to start from scratch
Development, marketing, production, shipping, labor cost left the chat
In my opinion, the Vision Pro is just about the biggest money, waster ever, because most of its tech isn’t even going for something important. It’s just augmented reality. For around $500 I can have a gaming console that is revolutionizing gaming as we speak.
it more of a competitor to the varyo xr2 a 7000 dollar headset with is extremely realistic and the Apple Vision Pro is very similar to it it’s actually a good deal might not seem like it but 3500 is not bad for how much technology is in it and the Apple Vision Pro isn’t even really for consumers it’s more met for game devs and big companies
Gaming consoles are revolutionising gaming? The PC did all of that
@@keonxd8918 Yeah, I retract that part, Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony aren’t really doing much right now, and you’re right PC is the best.
That's the price when you need something that just works
they need to recoup the R&D as well as make a profit.
Well it’s not like it’s just hardware to be fair. Software development also costs money to produce. But that still doesn’t mean it’s something worth buying.
It will be easy to pick out idiots in public now.
Damn that's wild. I'd still rather wait for Simula VR -- same product but with a Linux based OS and you don't have to worry about Apple telling what you can and can't do with your property.
The thing is that they couldve priced it upto 1000 or even 1200 dollars and it would still have been justified just because of the 44% 'innovation' tax of apple but they didn't, they chose to price at a reasonable price so that more people can get it or simply cause they are not assholes
3.5k is reasonable price?
The $2,000 is just profit it’s also because there’s a hidden import tax which is always a lot of money
Apple fans attempting to justify the pricing is wild 💀
he didnt tho
Ikr 😂😂😂😂😂
I'm an Apple fanboy but yeah that price is insane. The Vision Pro is a beautiful piece of technology but holy hell don't buy it, it's not worth the money
iphone pro max is 100$ and u think vision pro is 1.5??
Patents and R&D aren't included in the BOM you showed
My broer, hoekom se jy $ instead of R want ek sien Dan jys van die kasie (south africa 🇿🇦) ❤😅
I am not an expert, but isn't Apple the one who manufactures the interior parts and gives them the price they want?
Yeah Meta is just smart about it. Stick with tech tips
It's almost like the material fixed cost isn't the only cost
Meta wasn't going for max short-term profit like Apple. They were going for user adoption of xR and market share, which they have succeeded at.
It's not 2000 dollars in profit per headset. They have to make back what they spend on marketing, engineering and design, Loss in manufacturing, etc. There's a whole hell of a lot more than just BOM costs in a products price
No idea if it's true, but I saw a tiktok that talked about 1 iphone taking about 10$ to make including everything from materials to labor
Two completely different approaches to how it’s sold.
Apple priced the headsets in a way that is low volume but each purchase is an immediate profit, without the heavy reliance on services. Plus, the high price maintains the “expensive” stigma behind Apple products.
Meta priced the headsets in a way that they can reach as many consumers as possible and work on turning each loss into a profit from services. Basically a “loss leader”, kinda like printer and ink.
Investors and shareholders like one, consumers like the other.