Decoding Apple Vision Pro’s Value Equation

Although I was a bit late for my demo appointment, the Apple Store staff assured me that I could still test the device. The store was not particularly busy on a Tuesday morning, anyway. All the demos were conducted in a medium-sized meeting room that could accommodate four customers simultaneously.

About ten minutes after my prescription was measured and face scanned, the staff presented an Apple Vision Pro (AVP) device elegantly nestled in a wooden oval tray, reminiscent of a minimalist restaurant serving dish. The device came with a pair of magnetic Zeiss lenses and an M light seal. Placing it on my head required minimal effort. I could barely heard the words of the assisting staff amidst the clamor of three other louder voices. Regardless I managed to navigate the device on my own, and the experience began to shape my perception of its value.

Deconstruct AVP’s value equation

In his Amazon Best Seller “$100M Offers”, Alex Hormozi outlined a value equation:

VALUE = Dream Outcome x Perceived Likelihood of Achievement / 
Time Delay x Efforts & Sacrifice

To deliver value, the entire industry of AR/VR/XR/Spatial computing has made a collective effort on each of the above elements. Industry practitioners began educating users by depicting a dream outcome many years ago. Remember Magic Leap’s whale CG demo?

Or more recently Mark Zuckburge’s Metaverse presentation?

While envisioning such dreams requires little more than science fiction fantasizing and writing skills, increasing the perceived likelihood of achieving has been a long-haul effort. Over the years, each generation of AR/VR devices from companies like Meta, HTC, Microsoft, and Pico has contributed to building users’ confidence. After receiving feedback from users, metaverse builders improve their offerings, effectively reducing the time delay.

When it comes to user efforts and sacrifice, most products were bounded by the inherent challenges stemming from the convergence of complex underlying technologies, which aimed to recreate human senses and human-computer interaction (HCI) systems in an alternative world. Users had to acquire new skills, such as setting up external base stations during the early days of outside-in tracking or guardian zones to prevent collisions with physical objects. Prior to Optical See-Through (OST) and Video See-Through (VST), users had to willingly isolate themselves, making it impossible to answer calls or read messages without removing the headset. Although users embraced the intuitive concept of hand tracking when it was introduced, they still had to invest effort in learning the gestures the device recognized.

The AVP stands on the shoulder of the giants, even though Apple has reportedly filed over 5,000 patents for it. Apple has made significant strides in designing a product that minimizes user effort and sacrifice while introducing it in a way that hides complications well in plain sight.

One can easily experience this effortlessness in a demo. The digital crown, like the Home button on an iPhone, continues the familiar turning mechanism found on the Apple Watch. From there, I was able to quickly get to a bunch of applications I used often on other Apple devices.

The AVP introduces a novel interaction that requires calibrating the user’s eyes and hands. Hands detection was straightforward, while eye calibration involved focusing on six dots 3 times in the dark, ambient, and bright background. Gesture practice was cleverly embedded throughout the calibration process, requiring users to tap their thumbs and index fingers together to indicate when they had fixated on a dot. It took me less than a minute to complete, and the result was flawless human-device interaction.

Utilizing one’s eyes to make a selection and pinching fingers to activate it feels natural. This eye-hand coordination is described as

…..part of the mechanisms of performing everyday tasks; in its absence, most people would not be able to carry out even the simplest of actions such as picking up a book from a table.

Thus, the AVP ingeniously harnesses a mechanism inherent to most users, despite being one of the most challenging feats in spatial computing. (Note that the AVP also offers a set of simple gestures designed specifically for the vision-impaired).

In addition to pinching figures, users can also reach out to touch and select items on the virtual screens. Since most users are accustomed to touch screens, it makes sense to offer a similar experience in the virtual environment.

My first moment of truth at the AVP demo

Apart from efforts, early adopters usually need to make sacrifices, which often range from dealing with low-resolution displays and small field of view to contending with short battery life and limited mobility. However the AVP’s high (if not arguably retina-level) resolution display, space-filling background option, external battery, and see-through features push the boundary of acceptability, and we can expect further improvement in the future.

It is also worth noting that while users don’t need to put in much effort or make any sacrifices, developers face a steep learning curve. Therefore, developers should start familiarizing themselves with the technology as soon as possible if they plan to create native applications. Photos and videos are now incorporating vectors, tempting viewers to immerse themselves in the content. Unlike traditional movie theatres and stadiums with limited (best) seating, audiences using the AVP can all have front-row seats in the best viewing box. Working in this space pushes the physical limits of the real world, sending regular users into multi-screen environments that were once exclusive to engineers.

In short, the AVP demo delivered tremendous value at my first moment of truth. It reinforced my belief that the dream of being immersed in a space that interacts with the physical world is not only possible but also very likely to become a reality soon. Although the first-gen reference device costs an eye-watering $4–5K, the transition to this new computing platform requires almost no change of behavior. In my opinion, consumers will be willing to purchase the device when the cost and weight are brought down (without sacrificing quality). The loyalty of users (in terms of usage and repeat purchases) will depend on the performance of frequently used applications and new possibilities that the device opens up, though.

Build competitiveness into the value equation

What does the deconstruction of AVP’s value equation tell us? Let’s delve deeper into this. Taking a closer look at the equation, a mathematical mind will quickly determine that the value can potentially be infinite if the product or service offers users an immediate fulfillment of the dream outcome (e.g. a service that arranges dinners with one’s favorite singer) or if it costs little effort or sacrifice on their part (e.g. coding a website using natural language or enjoying the convenience of free product returns).

Time delay

In the fast-paced world of software development, the mantra of “building a feedback loop and iterating fast” is essential for success. Rome isn’t built overnight, but the expectation can be well-managed and kept high if you handle perception well. That’s why SaaS businesses compete on time to market for features valuable to customers. A dream outcome could be a lofty hope or, a lot of times, rescue from troubles and pain points. The earlier a product or service gets users out of the pain, the more valuable it is to them.

Yet addressing pain points in today’s business landscape is not as straightforward as it once was. Gone are the days when a single solution could provide relief in isolation. Pain points are now intertwined with various elements such as workflow, delivery channels, and crafting tools.

We have seen a surge in AI-powered products designed to assist marketers with tasks such as writing copy, creating presentation decks, and generating images. While these individual products can provide value, they often struggle to compete with offerings that integrate these features into a comprehensive platform. By providing seamless integration with popular platforms, products can offer end-to-end solutions that streamline workflows and improve user productivity.

Effort & sacrifice

Managing the divider section of the Value Equation involves making subtractions. While adding a new feature or introducing a new product may sound appealing, it’s essential to consider whether it necessitates additional effort or compromises from the user.

Like many others, I’ve been experimenting with various Chat-GPT-like chatbots lately. Among these, Perplexity stands out as a next-gen search engine that has the potential of replacing Google as it addresses two major pain points for me: hallucination and wait time.

Almost all Large Language Models (LLMs) are prone to hallucination, which requires users to blindly trust them or perform their own due diligence, adding to the burden of using AI or compromising integrity. Perplexity, on the other hand, provides footnotes for all the information used to compose a response to a query, allowing users to quickly access sources of information hence saving significant time.

Another example is Google’s autocomplete feature, which is integrated into many of its products, including Search, Docs, and Gmail. It was introduced earlier than any of the AI tools available today, but it has been so successful that users have happily adopted it because it speeds up the writing process without requiring any change to user behavior. Today it has become an industry standard, and writing tools without it can feel slow and awkward, even if they offer AI-assisted writing capabilities.

Speaking of GenAI, the opportunities do not only rest with consumer or enterprise-facing end products but also middleware and tools that minimize user effort and sacrifice. For example, a prompt assistant can convert the user’s rough descriptions into well-versed prompts that the model understands and delivers high-quality results.

On the other hand, products such as Wii or Segway exemplify why expecting users to alter their behavior or learn new skills is not a wise strategy, regardless of their initial success. They failed to gain long-term popularity. A better approach to product development and go-to-market messaging is from the angle of how to remove one more thing from the crowded plates of users. Less is more, as the saying goes.

Apple Store: an exemplar of minimalism