Steve Jobs tells me about Vision Pro

Steve Jobs didn’t know that Apple would introduce the Vision Pro eleven years after his death. Yet, in an interview in 2005, he summed up in 30 seconds why a headset like this could work. At the time, the Apple founder spoke to Kara Swisher and Walt Mossberg about the iPod – and whether it would make sense to include video on such a device. He explained the problem of incompatible priorities: an MP3 player needs to be portable whereas movies need nice, big screens. You can’t have both. He then made a comparison which, 18 years later, fits like a glove:

«Headphones are a miraculous thing. You put on a pair of headphones and you get the same experience you get with a great pair of speakers, right? There’s no such thing as headphones for video. There’s not something I can carry with me, that I can put on and it gives me the same experience I get when I’m watching my 50-inch plasma display at home. Until someone invents that, you’re gonna have these opposing constraints.»

The aforementioned excerpt can be found at 2:30 in the following video.

Makes sense! The Vision Pro is to video what headphones are to audio. Apple has built exactly what Jobs wanted in 2005: headphones for video.

The analogy is so simple and apt at the same time, making me less sceptical about the whole thing. Until now, I was unsure whether Apple’s entry into AR would be a success. Whether the Vision Pro solves a problem. It seemed technically revolutionary to me, but not visionary in its application:

The reason for this assessment the morning after the keynote presentation was Apple’s marketing. The Californians mainly showed the headset being used at home. People sitting in their living room watching a film on a virtual TV. People standing in their office and working on a virtual monitor. The Vision Pro is presented as a replacement. Headset instead of home cinema. Headset instead of computer.

Apple’s AR chief Mike Rockwell even justified the high price by saying, «If you purchased a new state-of-the-art TV, surround-sound system, powerful computer with multiple high-definition displays, high-end camera and more, you still would not have come close to what Vision Pro delivers.» With this explicit and unfortunate comparison, Apple shoots itself in the foot.

TVs and workstations are in their own league, so it is impossible for the Vision Pro to compete with them – especially not the first generation, and maybe never at all. In the scenarios shown, few people will put up with the disadvantages of an AR headset compared to stationary devices. No matter how comfortable a headset is, it’s always less comfortable than not wearing a headset. And since Apple has so far failed to deliver visionary new options for home users, I see no reason why I should replace my monitor or TV with a Vision Pro. Especially not in the wide-open spaces that Apple showed me in the keynote presentation.

But the Vision Pro doesn’t have to be a replacement, just a supplement. The headset won’t shine for the private user at home, but on the go. For example, in situations which Apple presents as a side option at most, such as on a plane, in a hotel room or in a campervan.

Is that why I’m no longer sceptical? No. I’d have liked more conceptual innovation. Instead, the concept of the Vision Pro copies the Meta Quest Pro. But maybe fresh visions aren’t needed after all. It’s not like headphones invented listening to music. Perhaps all that is needed is a technically revolutionary implementation of an old idea. A platform where developers can flourish.

The AR technology is supposed to be Apple CEO Tim Cook’s big hit. It therefore seems ironic that his predecessor Steve Jobs, of all people, introduces me to the Vision Pro. I wonder if Cook knows the interview excerpt? Surely he must. I wonder if the comparison Jobs made will find its way into a marketing campaign? Probably not. Wasted potential. I don’t need a replacement for my TV or monitor. Headphones for video I want, though.