Roger’s $0.02 - Apple Vision Pro Violates The Steve Jobs Rule

Steve Jobs was many things. A businessman, inventor, and thinker. He melded together his eclectic life experiences to fashion his philosophy of technology design. It’s something he encapsulated in a 1977 brochure slogan for Apple computers; “Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.” Jobs believed the key to that design process was understanding the customer (user) experience first and working backward from that. It’s a design element that I feel is lacking from the Apple Vision Pro. Everything from the need for a semi-custom fit to the inability to describe a knockout reason to own one seems to violate Steve Jobs’ product design philosophy.

When Jobs worked on the Apple Lisa, it was meant to be a more user-friendly machine that dispensed with the command line and its need for a multitude of arcane commands in favor of a GUI. That focus on accessible personal computing ultimately resulted in the Macintosh. A machine that was marketed as “a computer for the rest of us”. When Jobs developed the iPod, it was about simplifying your music listening experience. No cumbersome disc or tape media. Just a hard drive that stores your music digitally with an intuitive interface. When Jobs conceptualized the iPhone, it was about making a smarter phone that didn’t require a cumbersome keyboard or stylus for data entry. You just needed a finger and your thumbs to do everything. In each case, the products were simple to understand for the average person. I would say most of them could be easily described in a couple of sentences. After Jobs’ passing, each new product Apple introduced roughly followed the same path. Devices like the Apple Watch and Air Pods were simple to explain, and they allowed people to have exceptional experiences.

In all those instances, you could easily figure things out. Yes, you would need to dig deep into online support or visit a message board to help with the more sophisticated functions. But for the most part, you didn’t need to be hand-held through the device’s basic operation. The key element is that those devices didn’t feel like they intruded into your life, but were a part of it. Not so with the Apple Vision Pro. Its most glaring violation of keeping things simple and effective is the fact that you have to wear the device. Unlike wearing glasses, I doubt you’ll ever get to the point where the headset feels like it isn’t there. Eileen Rivera, host of the Apple Vision Show, has mentioned the headset gets heavy after an hour. In fact, the most common complaint is the headset is uncomfortable for longer periods of time. I’m also curious about the user comfort issue with people who require high-index corrective lenses like me. Not only do I suffer from myopia, but I also have pronounced astigmatism which causes distortions. I’ve used headsets like the original Quest but find I have to take them off after my eyes get tired using their supplied array of inserts in a review unit. Which leads to my biggest gripe. To get an Apple Vision Pro to work as intended, you need to get fitted, not unlike a tailored suit, which makes the experience more difficult than one would want. Coupled with the $3500 price tag, the AVP comes off as neither accessible nor affordable to every person, a key element in Steve Jobs’ vision of Apple’s products.

The worst violation of Steve Jobs’ design philosophy is the lack of a clear use case for the Apple Vision Pro. With the Macintosh, it was a computer you didn’t need to read a binder full of instructions to learn how to use. With the iPhone, it was carrying around a miniature computer connected to the Internet in your pocket that you could easily navigate with just your fingers. For Apple Vision Pro it’s what; a virtual office, a virtual movie theater, a virtual landscape? I have no doubt the visual experience with the headset is sublime, but what application would I find so compelling that I’m willing to shut out the real world for an hour or so, and spend the equivalent of a down payment on a car? Apple can’t even really say. It’s a bunch of vagaries of seeing things like you’ve never seen them before. As if a personal IMAX screen is what will make people flock to the sanctity of Apple’s latest baby. I’m a firm believer that AR/VR could be the future of human/machine interfaces, but right now, the price of admission for the AppleVision Pro  hasn’t reduced the barrier to entry or make it any more affordable.