visionOS is getting better – albeit late
The Apple Vision Pro has been on the market for over a year – and has sparked a lot of discussion since then. At this year's developer conference (WWDC 2025), Apple has now presented a whole series of features with the new visionOS 2 update that many users would have already expected at its 2024 launch. It's good that things are moving – but I don't have to celebrate it.
I'm also happy about updates for my Vision Pro, and I don't want to downplay that for anyone. But from my perspective, many of these new features just seem like overdue improvements, not like major innovative leaps, as they are often portrayed in many social media posts.
Between genuine innovation and delayed correction
The real question for me is: Are many of these changes really progress – or rather the long-overdue opening of previously deliberately blocked features? Some features, like the photorealistic personas, are truly impressive technically and set standards – I don't want to play that down at all. But other functions like support for 360° Videos or external controllers have long been standard in the XR world. Apple deliberately held them back to strengthen its own ecosystem and is now releasing them – expecting applause for that is personally hard for me.
While the list of features is impressive, the overall picture shows that Apple is quietly correcting a number of decisions that have held the device back since its launch. And the price remains high at around 4,000 Euros. When other manufacturers deliver an update of this magnitude, it's a footnote at best – with Apple, it becomes a headline. And that's precisely what I personally can't quite understand.
New Features of Apple Vision Pro (WWDC 2025)
Multi-User Support: Finally, multiple user accounts can be created and managed on one device.
Support for 360° and stereoscopic video: Compatibility with cameras like the Insta360 is being established – a step towards standardization.
Controller Support (including PlayStation DualSense): For the first time, Apple is allowing the use of external controllers for games and simulations.
Optimized File Transfer: Apple has slightly relaxed its previously very restrictive handling of file access in visionOS. While direct file transfer via USB is still not possible, with visionOS 2, developers can now access local file systems within their apps more extensively. Furthermore, integration with the Files app has been improved, and FileProvider extensions are now fully supported for the first time – making third-party cloud services easier to use. For end-users, this means: a complete iCloud mandate no longer exists in every context, but many system-wide file management functions remain restricted.
New Developer APIs: Enhanced input capabilities and spatial interactions can now be integrated more deeply.
Improved Apple Personas (AvatarsFacial expressions, lip-syncing, and rendering quality have been visibly improved.
Apple Personas – Impressive, but isolated
The photorealistic Apple Personas are undoubtedly a technical highlight. They allow users to appear as lifelike avatars in meetings or presentations. The interplay of lip-sync, facial expressions, and eye movement is particularly impressive. But here too, the question arises: Where can I really use this feature?
In a Zoom meeting with camera feeds of other participants, a persona avatar without a lower body appears rather strange. The real strength only comes into play when all participants are using an Apple Vision Pro – which is rarely the case in practice. Thus, this impressive feature remains limited to a small user group.
And what about glasses wearers?
One aspect that has been discussed in tech circles, but in my opinion has received far too little critical attention overall, concerns the usability of the Vision Pro for people who wear glasses: In short, it is practically non-existent.
Anyone who wears glasses cannot easily use the headset. The design of the Apple Vision Pro simply leaves no room for regular glasses inside. Instead, you have to order special corrective lenses from Zeiss – which are not only expensive but also difficult to obtain in countries like Germany. This makes spontaneous use impossible and means that the device can often only be permanently assigned to a single person in practical use.
And even worse: Even someone trying to slip on regular glasses inside the Vision Pro risks damaging the delicate inner lining, which also cannot be replaced. So it's clear: even if glasses somehow fit, it's better to avoid doing so from a practical standpoint. Apple could have opted for a more inclusive design, especially at a price of around 4,000 Euros. Instead, they're turning a necessity into a paid special solution – which, in my opinion, is a questionable move that looks more like upselling than user-friendliness.
Unrealistic expectations of developers
Another example of this restrictive stance is the so-called Developer Strap – a USB-C cable that cost around 500 euros at launch and was necessary to connect the Vision Pro to a Mac. Many developers I've spoken with have said that this investment in hardware and time simply isn't worth it. And so, a classic chicken-and-egg problem has arisen: hardly any software because hardly any users – and vice versa.
XR breakthrough missed? A personal conclusion
What frustrates me about this whole Apple Vision Pro thing is that, in my opinion, it actually had the potential to be the big breakthrough for XR technology in the mainstream market.
We have now – a little over a year after the hype surrounding the launch – entered a phase of disillusionment. And for me, this disappointment isn't because the technology is bad, but because Apple made wrong decisions: restrictive hardware, elitist pricing, a proprietary system, and enormous hurdles for developers. These decisions have led to the device not really taking off with either developers or the broader public.
I don't want to take away anyone's joy in the Apple Vision Pro. I like the device too. But it simply falls far short of the potential it could have. I see great approaches, impressive technology, and also the effort to further develop the device. But in my opinion, much of that should have happened already at the device's launch.
