Technologies

Why Apple Vision Pro’s $3,500 Price Makes More Sense Than You Think

Commentary: Apple’s first headset is too expensive for most people. But there are a few reasons why it isn’t so farfetched.

Apple announced its long-awaited Vision Pro mixed reality headset at its Worldwide Developers Conference on Monday, signaling its first major new product in almost a decade. The problem? You’ll have to pay $3,500 to try it.

That’s a lot (even for Apple), sparking a deluge of Twitter memes and a collective groan from the audience present at Apple’s conference.

Behind those jokes, there’s a valid point. At $3,500, Apple’s Vision Pro costs more than three weeks worth of pay for the average American, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data. It’s also significantly more expensive than rival devices like the upcoming $500 Meta Quest 3, $550 Sony PlayStation VR 2 and even the $1,000 Meta Quest Pro.

It tops many other Apple products in terms of price too. Buying an iPhone 14 Pro Max, a 12.9-inch iPad Pro and an Apple Watch Ultra would still be cheaper than an Apple Vision Pro (although it comes fairly close.) Shipments of virtual and augmented reality headsets also plummeted in 2022, according to International Data Corporation statistics published in March, adding to the skepticism.

In an interview Tuesday with ABC News’ Good Morning America, Apple CEO Tim Cook acknowledged the headset’s price when asked if the average person would be able to afford it.

«I think people will make different choices depending upon their current financial situation,» he said.

To call Apple’s new headset expensive may be an understatement. But once you step back and look at the larger picture beyond the initial sticker shock, that eye-watering price starts to make a little sense.

Vision Pro’s price is comparable to a high-end Mac

Despite Vision Pro’s high price, it’s far from being the most expensive computer Apple sells. There’s another Apple computer that’s roughly double the price, the $6,999 Mac Pro, which just got its first major refresh since 2019 at WWDC on Monday. Apple’s modular desktop powerhouse is designed for professionals rather than everyday consumers, meaning it’s not intended for everyone.

mac pro device on a desk next to computer monitor — The new Mac Pro is $6,999.

Dan Ackerman/CNET

Even the MacBook Pro can get more expensive than most may realize once you configure it with high-end specifications. Like Vision Pro, a 16-inch MacBook Pro with Apple’s M2 Max processor, 32GB of unified memory and 1TB of storage will run you $3,499.

Years of research and development are also likely reflected in Vision Pro’s price. Since it’s an entirely different type of computer compared to the Mac, iPhone or iPad, Apple had to develop new technologies such as the R1 chip, which processes data from the headset’s 12 cameras, five sensors and six microphones. Mike Rockwell, vice president of Apple’s technology development group, even said during the WWDC keynote that the company filed over 5,000 patents during Vision Pro’s development. That effort certainly shows, according to CNET’s Scott Stein, who was impressed with the headset’s fidelity, video quality and interface.

«The engineering and depth of engineering in it is mind blowing,» Cook also said during the Good Morning America interview. «You’ve got more than a 4K experience in each eye. And, of course, it doesn’t come for free. It costs something to do that. «

That said, there’s a key difference that can make Vision Pro’s price more difficult to swallow compared with the MacBook Pro or Mac Pro. Both of those products are well established and have proven their usefulness to the creative professionals willing to pay for them. Vision Pro, however, is an entirely new product category that most people aren’t familiar with yet. It has yet to prove its value, and most people outside of Apple’s campus haven’t used it — except for select press that have gotten to try it in a demo controlled by Apple.

Microsoft’s HoloLens 2 is the same price as Vision Pro

microsoft-msft-hololens-2-1436-2 — Microsoft’s HoloLens 2

James Martin/CNET

Long before there was Vision Pro, there was Microsoft’s HoloLens, a head-mounted computer that also sought to change the way we work by overlaying digital graphics on top of the real world. The original HoloLens debuted in 2015 and the second version arrived in 2019 for $3,500 — the same price as Apple’s Vision Pro.

On one hand, that makes Vision Pro’s price more sensible. But there are some important differences between Apple’s new head-mounted computer and the HoloLens to consider. Take one look at Microsoft’s website for the HoloLens 2, and it’s clear the company sees this as an enterprise device more than a personal computer.

While the HoloLens may have initially been positioned as the next generation of computing, Microsoft is now primarily touting its usefulness in fields such as manufacturing, construction, health care, engineering and education. For companies and institutions, that makes purchasing a HoloLens 2 more like investing in a new piece of equipment rather than buying a new computer. Apple, however, seems to be targeting Vision Pro at everyday consumers that want a bigger canvas for working, watching movies and participating in FaceTime calls.

New tech gadgets usually get cheaper over time

apple vision pro headset on display at apple event — Apple’s Vision Pro headset

Scott Stein/CNET

First-generation technology products are typically expensive and limited compared with their successors. When the iPhone arrived in 2007, there was only one model and it started at $500, or roughly $749 in 2023 when adjusted for inflation. It included a paltry 4GB of storage, only one camera and just 15 apps. Even though Apple’s top-of-the-line iPhone 14 Pro will still cost $1,000 or more, Apple now sells several iPhones and different price ranges.

That includes the $429 iPhone SE, which has 16 times as much storage as the entry-level first iPhone, a significantly larger 4.7-inch screen compared to the original’s 3.5-inch display, a fingerprint reader and many other technologies that weren’t widely available back in 2007. And by 2023’s standards, the iPhone SE is about $320 cheaper than what Apple charged for the first iPhone.

Apple iPhone on display in 2007 — An original Apple iPhone on display during MacWorld in San Francisco, California, on Tuesday, Jan. 9, 2007.

Eric Slomanson/Bloomberg via Getty Images

A more direct comparison might be looking at the trajectory of virtual reality headsets. When the first Oculus Rift launched in 2016, it cost $599 and needed to be tethered to a powerful computer in order to work. But today’s Meta Quest 2 costs half the price at $300 and works wirelessly.

My point: Technology gets more affordable and more advanced over time. Don’t get me wrong, Vision Pro’s price will almost certainly prevent the current iteration of Apple’s headset from becoming as ubiquitous as the iPhone or Apple Watch.

However, that might not be the point — at least not right now. With Vision Pro, Apple is trying to establish what it believes will be the next major evolution of the personal computer. That’s a bigger goal than selling millions of units on launch day, and a shift like that doesn’t happen overnight, no matter what the price is. The version of Vision Pro that Apple launches next year likely isn’t the one that most people will buy.

Technologies

Apple CarPlay Ultra vs. Google Built-In: How the Next-Gen Auto Software Rivals Compare

Apple and Google are supercharging their car software experiences. Here’s how they differ.

I’d spent an hour driving a $250,000-plus Aston Martin up the Los Angeles coast when my hunger pangs became impossible to ignore, and as I’ve done many times before, I asked Siri (through Apple CarPlay) to find me a taco place. But then I did something no other car on the planet allows: I asked Siri to blast the AC and make the air colder. That’s because the 2025 Aston Martin DBX I drove was the first vehicle to come with Apple CarPlay Ultra, the upgraded version of the company’s car software.

Apple debuted CarPlay Ultra at WWDC 2025 last month, and this year’s version of the Aston Martin DBX is the first vehicle to launch with it (pairing with an iPhone running iOS 18.5 or later). As I drove the luxury crossover around, I fiddled with other features that aren’t available in regular CarPlay, from climate control to radio to checking the pressure on the car’s tires. Ultimately, Ultra gives deeper access to more car systems, which is a good thing.

That reminded me a lot of a new feature announced at Google I/O back in May: Google Built-In, which similarly lets users control more of a car’s systems straight from the software interface (in that case, Android Auto). When I got a demonstration of Google Built-In, sitting in a new Volvo EX90 electric SUV, I saw what this new integration of Google software offered: climate controls, Gemini AI assistance and even warnings about car maintenance issues.

But the name is telling: Google Built-In requires automakers to incorporate Android deeper into their cars’ inner workings. Comparatively, Apple CarPlay Ultra support seems like it won’t require car manufacturers to do nearly as much work to prepare their vehicles, just adding a reasonably advanced multicore processor onboard that can handle an increased task load. (Aston Martin will be able to add CarPlay Ultra support to its 2023 and 2024 lineups through firmware updates because they already contain sufficiently advanced CPUs.)

Both solutions reflect Apple’s and Google’s different approaches to their next versions of car software. Apple’s is lighter weight, seemingly requiring less commitment from the automaker to integrate CarPlay Ultra into their vehicles (so long as it has adequate processing power onboard), which will run through a paired iPhone. Google Built-In does require much more integration, but it’s so self-sufficient that you can leave your Android phone at home and still get much of its functionality (aside from getting and sending messages and calls).

Driving with Apple CarPlay Ultra: Controlling climate, radio and more

As I drove around Los Angeles in the Aston Martin with Apple CarPlay Ultra, I could tell what new features I would be missing once I stepped back into my far more humble daily driver.

At long last, I could summon Siri and ask it to play a specific song (or just a band) and have it pulled up on Spotify. Since Apple’s assistant now has access to climate controls, I asked to turn up the AC, and it went full blast. I asked to find tacos and it suggested several fast food restaurants — well, it’s not perfect, but at least it’s listening.

To my relief, Aston Martin retained the physical knobs by the gearshift to control fan speed, temperature, stereo volume and the car’s myriad roadway options (like driving assistance) in case the driver likes traditional controls, but almost all of them could also be altered in the interface. Now, things like radio controls (AM/FM and satellite) and car settings are nestled in their own recognizable apps in CarPlay’s interface.

Ultimately, that’ll be one of CarPlay Ultra’s greatest advantages: If you enter an unfamiliar vehicle (like a rental), you still know exactly where everything is. No wrestling with a carmaker’s proprietary software or trying to figure out where some setting or other is located. It’s not a complete replacement — in the Aston Martin’s case, there were still a handful of settings (like for ambient light projected when the doors open) that the luxury automaker controlled, but they were weaved into CarPlay so you could pop open those windows and go back to Apple’s interface without visibly changing apps.

The dependable ubiquity of Apple’s CarPlay software will likely become even more essential as cars swap out their analog instrument clusters for screens, as Aston Martin did. There’s still a touch of the high-end automaker’s signature style as the default screen behind the wheel shows two traditional dials (one for the speedometer, one for RPMs) with Aston Martin’s livery. But that can be swapped out for other styles, from other dials with customizable colors to a full-screen Maps option.

Each of the half-dozen or so dashboard options was swapped out via square touchpads smaller than a dime on the wheel next to the other touch controls. On the dual-dial display types, I swiped vertically to rotate between a central square (with Maps directions, current music or other app information) or swiped horizontally to switch to another dashboard option. No matter which one you choose, the bottom bar contains all the warning lights drivers will recognize from analog cars — even with digital displays, you’re not safe from the check engine light (which is a good thing).

Apple CarPlay Ultra doesn’t yet do everything I want. I wish I could also ask Siri to roll down the windows (as Google Built-In can — more on that later) and lock or unlock specific doors. If Apple is connected to the car enough to be able to read the pressure in each tire, I wish it could link up with the engine readout and be able to tell me in plain language what kind of maintenance issue has sprung up. Heck, I wish it could connect to the car remotely and blast the AC before I get in (or fire up the seat warmer), as some proprietary car apps can do. And while Apple Maps and Waze will be included at launch, Google Maps support is not, but it’s coming later.

These aren’t huge deficiencies, and they do show where CarPlay Ultra could better meet driver needs in future updates, notwithstanding the potentially dicey security concerns for using CarPlay Ultra for remote climate or unlocking capabilities. But it shows where the limits are today compared to Google’s more in-depth approach.

Google Built-In: Deeper car integrations — and, of course, Gemini AI

The day after Google I/O’s keynote was quieter back in May, as attendees flitted between focused sessions and demos of upcoming software. It was the ideal time to check out Google Built-In, which was appropriately shown off in a higher-end Volvo EX90 electric SUV (though not nearly as pricey as an Aston Martin).

As mentioned above, Google Built-In has deeper integrations with vehicles than what I saw in Apple CarPlay Ultra, allowing users to change the climate through its interface or access other systems, including through voice requests. For instance, it can go beyond AC control to switch on the defroster, and even raise and lower specific windows relative to the speaker’s position: cameras within the car (in the rearview mirror, if I remember right) meant that when my demonstrator asked to «roll down this window» pointing over his left shoulder, the correct window rolled down.

Google Built-In is also connected to Gemini, Google’s AI assistant, for what the company is calling «Google Live,» a separate and more capable version of the Android Auto assistant experience in cars right now. With a Live session, I could request music or directions much like I could with Siri — but my demo went further, as the demonstrator tasked Gemini with requests better suited for generative AI, such as asking, «Give me suggestions for a family outing» and telling it to send a specific text to a contact.

The demonstrator then asked Gemini for recipe advice — «I have chicken, rice and broccoli in the fridge, what can I make?» — as an example of a query someone might ask on the drive home.

Since you’re signed into your Google account, Gemini can consult anything connected to it, like emails and messages. It’s also trained on the user manuals from each car-maker, so if a warning light comes on, the driver can ask the voice assistant what it means — no more flipping through a dense manual trying to figure out what each alert means.

There are other benefits to Google Built-In, like not needing your phone for some features. But there are also drawbacks, like the need to keep car software updated, requiring more work on Google’s end to make sure cars are protected from issues or exploits. They can’t just fix it in the most current version of Android — they’ll need to backport that fix to older versions that vehicles might still be on.

This deeper integration with Google Built-In has a lot of the benefits of Apple CarPlay Ultra (a familiar interface, easier to access features), just cranked up to a greater degree. It surely benefits fans of hands-off controls, and interweaving Gemini naturally dovetails with Google’s investments, so it’s easy to see that functionality improving. But a greater reliance on Android within the car’s systems could be concerning as the vehicle ages: Will the software stop being supported? Will it slow down or be exposed to security exploits? A lot of questions remain regarding making cars open to phone software interfaces.

Technologies

A Samsung Tri-Fold Phone Could Be in Your Future, if This Leak Is to Be Believed

UI animations might have revealed the imminent release of a so-called «Galaxy G Fold» device with three screens.

Samsung has been showing off mobile display concepts with three screens at trade events such as CES for several years, but it might finally bring one to market soon if a leaked UI animation is any indicator.

As reported by Android Authority, an animated image from a software build of One UI 8 appears to show what some are dubbing a «Galaxy G Fold» device with three display panels. The screens would be capable of displaying different information or working in unison as one large display. The new phone model could debut as early as next week at Samsung’s Unpacked event on July 9 in Brooklyn.

Huawei released a tri-folding phone in February, the Mate XT Ultimate Design.

Some websites have gone into overdrive trying to uncover details on what Samsung’s new device might include and how much it may cost, with Phone Arena reporting that according to a Korean media report, it could be priced at about $3,000.

Samsung didn’t immediately respond to request for comment.