Apple’s Vision Pro should always have been a wearable MacBook, and now it can be

We already know the Apple Vision Pro^[1] is far from perfect, but as a true believer in XR, I’m honestly pleased to see it having another crack at the hardware.

While the Vision Pro didn’t take the world by storm as many believed it would, Apple^[2]‘s involvement in XR brings some much-needed legitimacy to the space and seemingly lit a fire under its major rivals to up their efforts, like with Samsung^[3]’s soon-to-be-released XR headset, known currently as Project Moohan.

At the same time, Apple’s latest Vision Pro announcement^[4] – that a new model is launching with a powerful M5 chipset – currently fails to address what I’d argue was the biggest sin of the original.

No, not the price. The Apple Vision Pro should always have been a wearable Mac.

All the way back when the original Vision Pro was merely a few disparate leaks, one thing that piqued my interest was that it could sport an M-class chip – it ended up packing an M2 at launch.

These chips are reserved for Apple’s Macs and its most powerful tablets. So I, like several others, assumed the Vision Pro might be a laptop for your face.

This seemed to be further corroborated by reports – which were again proven true – the Apple headset would boast not one, but two chips. The M-chip would handle the actual heavy lifting, and a new distinct R1 would handle all the XR processes – meaning the M2, and now M5 could reserve their energy for handling apps, which could include those meatier macOS apps.

Alas, the Apple Vision Pro found itself instead being compared to a wearable tablet, given its vast selection of iPad software, rather than the MacBook for your face I had hoped it might be.

To add insult to injury, its Mac involvement was relegated to being simply a wearable display for your Apple laptop.

This, and the continued decision to separate visionOS and macOS, baffles me.

I know the headset isn’t cheap, and linking it more closely to macOS wouldn’t change that, but the cost would at least seem more justifiable. Macs cost more than iPads, so the step up to the headset seems less gigantic.

Yes, MacBooks and Macs don’t get to Vision Pro price heights without some serious spec upgrades being tacked on, but when you consider the spatial computing advantages – the ability to work in a 3D space, the cost savings of not needing to buy multiple monitors, and the novelty of the thing among others – it’s not quite so obviously absurd to imagine a large number of people choosing the headset over a new computer.

Also, because it’s bugging me, Apple calls it “spatial computing”, not “spatial tableting.”

Arguably, the M2 was more of an iPad chipset when the Vision Pro originally debuted, but this new M5 model is dropping alongside an M5 MacBook Pro^[5].

I’m not even asking for 3D macOS apps or anything snazzy, just put them on 2D floating windows like you would interact with them on your computer or when using your Vision Pro as a monitor.

I doubt Apple will do this, but I’m hoping I’m proven wrong. A Mac-less integration between visionOS and macOS feels like such a no-brainer – especially now.

Otherwise, I’m doubtful this round two bout of the Vision Pro vs the world will go any differently, and it makes me wonder how many more times Apple will keep dragging out its latest technological punching bag – I can’t imagine it’s too many more.

You might also like