Meta’s wearables keep winning while Apple’s Vision Pro struggles

It’s a tale of two headlines in the wearable-technology game. On Wednesday, The Information reported that Apple has “sharply scaled back its Vision Pro production since the early summer,” and the company could stop making its existing version by year-end.

The reason: few people are buying the $3,500 headset. After a splashy February 2024 launch, interest in the Vision Pro evaporated. Counterpoint Research noted that Vision Pro sales plunged 80% from Q1 to Q2 2024, and the number of apps released for the Vision Pro dropped from 300 in February to 89 in March, declining every month since. Supply-chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo also noted in April that Apple had cut its 2024 Vision Pro shipments to 400,000 to 450,000 units, after the company had initially projected to sell 700,000 to 800,000 units or more.

Meta, meanwhile, has been crushing the wearable-tech game.

Counterpoint Research reported that Meta had a 74% market share of headsets in Q2 2024, and the social-media giant sold 3 million Quest 3 units, which were priced at $499 and $649 at their October 2023 release, through the first three quarters after the device’s launch, vs Apple’s 370,000 sales.

However, Meta’s biggest recent hit has been its partnership with Ray-Ban. On Monday, TechCrunch reported that Meta’s smart glasses have been outselling traditional Ray-Bans in international markets, and they are the top-selling product in 60% of all Ray-Ban stores across Europe, the Middle East, and Africa. This comes a month after EssilorLuxottica, Ray-Ban’s parent organization, inked a long-term deal with Meta to continue collaborating on next-generation eyewear products.

Why has Apple struggled while Meta has been so successful?

Let’s start with the latter: Meta’s two products, the Quest and its Ray-Bans, offer two totally different value props. The Quest is primarily a gaming and entertainment tool. While users can “work” from their Quest devices, most users play video games, watch shows and movies, or do immersive activities like learning new skills, and, importantly, it’s treated as an entertainment device, separate from their real world.

The Ray-Bans, on the other hand, seamlessly integrate with the real world. First, they look like normal sunglasses, unlike the Vision Pro or Quest, which are clunky on your face, so there’s little friction involved with wearing them in public. Functionally, they also integrate with simple, real-world tasks: users can make calls, send texts, take photos, and ask their sunglasses questions about their environment. Basically, the Meta Ray-Bans are normal sunglasses that happen to be able to handle common tasks you use your phone for while walking around.

Apple’s problem was that it tried to sell its headset as a luxury product without establishing consumer demand. Sure, you can “work” from a Vision Pro, but it’s still less effective than simply using a laptop if you’re in public, or a computer with monitors in the office.

Additionally, it just… looks weird. We all saw the videos of folks using their Vision Pros on the subway and while walking around earlier this year, and they looked awkward. Unlike the Meta Ray-Bans, which are nondescript, the Vision Pro is really, really descript.

If the Vision Pro is less effective for working than a computer, and it’s cumbersome to wear in public, you’re left with an entertainment headset that costs 7x more than a similar competitor. After the novelty of a new product wears off, if you can’t differentiate, customers are going to opt for the cheaper option.