The Vision Pro Slam Dunk
It took a lot of work, but I finally did it. I finally booted up my Vision Pro to watch the first full NBA game shot in the "Apple Immersive" format. It was... very cool. With some very real caveats. And it seemingly points to the future of the device itself. You don't even have to really squint to see it.
Honestly, given the dearth of content over the first two years of the Vision Pro's lifespan, I'm sort of shocked that Apple pulled this off. Just going by how long it has taken Apple to release short highlight footage from other sporting events, I would have assumed we would start getting full games weeks (or months!) after they first aired. The fact that they not only turned around this Lakers vs. Bucks game right after it was played, but showed it live to the small subset of folks in the right market (or with the right VPN setting), is rather incredible.1 Again, given Apple's previous cadence with such content, I would have thought this would be a 2027 or 2028 thing. I'm not trying to be a jerk, that's just how painfully slow they've been with releasing this type of content!
At the same time, such content is clearly – clearly – the way to move the needle when it comes to the Vision Pro. Granted, plenty of other hurdles remain – more on those in a bit – but if they want people to actually be excited about not just buying, but actually using the device, they need content people are excited about watching! It's not rocket science, it's behavioral science. It's human nature. So it's good to see Apple hustle here to at least try to drum up interest in the device.
While I obviously didn't watch it live, Jason Snell did, and in his thoughts for Six Colors on the experience, he described it as "surprisingly... normal?" I agree with that. After the initial "wow" factor wore off of being transported to Los Angeles with Crypto.com Arena wrapped around you, it felt like... you were watching a basketball game. It wasn't exactly like watching it on TV, but it also wasn't exactly like watching it in person. It was sort of... in-between.
Depending on the vantage point, it sort of veered between the television experience and the in-person experience. And that was the most jarring element of watching it – Apple kept cutting between those vantage points. You had no say over the matter, you were just zoomed from one area of the arena to another on the whim of the producers. It wasn't as jarring as it was in those aforementioned short highlight clips of other sporting events because you did get to linger longer in each spot given that the entire experience (meaning, the entire game) was just over two-hours long. Still, during the actual game, the cuts between cameras behind the basket depending on where the action was happening was... weird. You were forced to reorient yourself constantly on the fly. I sort of got used to it as the game went on, but it's still felt a bit like a brain teaser – especially the cuts between the same perspective just on opposite ends of the court.
Ben Thompson clearly hated this aspect, as his fun Stratechery rant going after Apple for not understanding their product makes clear. All he wanted was a single vantage point, ideally court side, where you were planted and never left. That would, he argues, be actually immersive. Because it wouldn't make you do the constant mental calisthenics I describe above. I don't disagree, but I also don't think that's all Apple should do. I think that should be an option.2
My feedback would be an extension of this: give us options for how we want to view the game. You can have the option to watch it court side. Or the option to watch it from behind the basket. Or the option to watch it in the press booth. Or the option to have a couple other vantage points in the crowd; you know, to feel actually immersed. And the option to cut between these views as you, the viewer, saw fit. Or the current and only option to have someone else make those calls!
Obviously, this wouldn't be the most immersive experience possible because it would break the wall of illusion since there are not options to immediately cut between vantage points in real life. But again, I don't view this as a replacement of going to a real life game. It's a more immersive version of television. In some ways, it can be better than either, but in others it will be worse. It's just a new, cool format. Apple should lean into that.
In a way, it's the same initial takeaway I had after getting the Vision Pro two years ago. For years, the world had wondered when Apple would create their own television set. And famously, some of Steve Jobs last words to his biographer Water Isaacson before he passed away pointed to him finally "cracking" the problem for Apple. As I wrote in February 2024:
Again, as noted above, Jobs clearly wasn't talking about the Apple TV set top box. It sure sounded like another product, *an actual television set*. But what if everyone was reading that too literally and he did mean something *entirely* different. A true game-changer, Apple-style. Something like a *new kind* of television. One which seamlessly syncs to all of your devices via iCloud. One with no need for remotes. One with the simplest user interface you could imagine...
One you wear, perhaps. "Headphones for video" as it were.
I know, it's a bit of a stretch. But nevertheless, that is what Apple has stumbled upon here. Well, that's not fair. I think Apple knows exactly what they have from a content-perspective with the Vision Pro, I just think they're muddying the message with all of the other stuff they're trying to showcase. And in part, they may feel like they have to because the device is $3,500.
As mentioned, given how long it has taken Apple to get up-to-speed on the content front for Vision Pro, I'm no longer sure they knew what they had with the product when it launched (which it should not have, at least not fully, in its current state). But I think these NBA games, alongside the first concert footage, and the first (short) movie actually shot for Vision Pro, and even, oddly, 3D movies (which Apple keeps pushing heavily in the Vision Pro Apple TV app), makes it perfectly clear. This is a content consumption device. This is their television set.
Back to the game, I definitely preferred the mid-court, scorer's table angle. It was a bit low, but fun to see Bucks' coach Doc Rivers and Lakers' coach JJ Redick stalk the sidelines, getting awfully close at points. That vantage point also had some blindspots – such as when a player is taking a corner 3 – and that's in part why I would like a multi-vantage-point option.
The camera angle behind the basket was too high for my taste. But I assume they also don't want to destroy their undoubtedly expensive cameras! But it's from these lower angles where you can tell just how big LeBron James is. And just how much bigger Giannis Antetokounmpo is than LeBron!3
It was interesting to mostly not cut away from the floor during time-outs when the rest of those watching remotely would obviously go to commercial. This made it more like being at the arena, but augmented by some commentary at points. It was also fun to watch the halftime activities and half-court-shots-for-money this way. Though there was some just pure "dead time" when you would just look around – again, just like being at the actual game, but clearly with more voyeuristic feeling.4 Presumably if this format does take off, commercials will be shoved into such crevices eventually.
I appreciated the inclusion of a virtual scoreboard when you looked down at the court because while looking up to the actual scoreboard in the area works, it also highlights just how heavy the Vision Pro is!
Speaking of... the biggest problem Apple actually has with the Vision Pro remains just how much of a pain it is to put on and use. As both a sports and Apple fan, I should have jumped at the opportunity to view this content the second I could. But I waited because I knew I would have to make sure the Vision Pro was charged, and that it was a time my family wasn't around because putting despite Apple's comically misguided attempts to make using such a device in public less awkward with some extremely awkward looking eyes, it's a device best used alone.
That said, if Apple does nail this format – and yes, brings the cost of the Vision Pro down eventually – I could see this becoming an interesting way to watch a game with someone. Unlike with a movie, it's natural to talk to friends/family during a game, and wouldn't it be cool if you had two different vantage points and you could tell the other person to "check the action out from here"? Or to watch a replay from another angle they witnessed live? Etc. The fact that all of this could be done without people being in the same room – and it would probably be less awkward that way! – is potentially even more interesting.
My multi-angle idea also opens up some re-watchability options that don't typically exist for sports. Granted, most people still aren't going to rewatch a game they've already seen, but die-hard fans probably would from a different angle than the one they chose the first time if it was a good game. And again, watching replays from different angles of your own choosing would be pretty killer in-game.
Anyway, I come away after watching this Lakers/Bucks game thinking that Apple is actually closer to figuring this out, at least on the content side, than I would have thought going into it. Yes, there are obviously things they need to tweak, but those seem like relatively straightforward fixes – well, as straightforward as it can be to record and stream live from five or six different immersive cameras around a venue. Ben Thompson wants something simple – his static, fully immersive view from one vantage point – but I want something a bit more: options. And I think my desire more closely matches what the masses might want – and that includes the option for this more "packaged" telecast that's more like traditional TV too, BTW. The bigger issue remains the masses ever getting near a Vision Pro with its price point and general inconvenience.
But those things can change too over time if Apple sticks with it. Meta seems to be backing away from the space now, but I wonder if Apple can't sort of do an end run around the Quest here. Because there's no way this type of experience will be available on mere Smart Glasses any time soon. Apple has the money and patience to make this work for the Vision Pro. And so the biggest thing holding them back may be the rights to all of this content.5 But as the leagues make moves to take over more control of such rights themselves, there's a window for Apple here.6
Now they just need to make a version of the Vision Pro where I can actually drink a beer while watching a game while fully immersed. Thank god for long neck beer bottles, I guess?
M.G. Siegler
M.G. Siegler
M.G. Siegler
M.G. Siegler
M.G. Siegler
1 Given the small Vision Pro user base and the restricted live markets here, how many people do we think actually watched this live? A few hundred, max? ↩
2 Ben had similar feedback around the immersive Metallica concert, wanting just to be in the crowd like real life. But I would much prefer to next to the band on stage, something not possible in real life! (And yes, the option to see it from the crowd too. And backstage. Etc.) ↩
3 There's no way Giannis isn't 7-feet, right? He's listed as 6'11", but come on, these vantage points show he's much taller than 6'9" LeBron... ↩
4 One of the more interesting elements would be when you'd see, say, a security guard just off to the side using their phone. Or a person sitting near you just drinking a beer. All things you could at the game itself but again, weird that they can't possibly know you're focused on them in that moment... ↩
5 Just think of the money to be made here though. If you could sell both one-off and season "tickets" to these games. $20 a game? More? Concerts $50? ↩
6 And that's presumably why Apple prefers more encompassing rights in their own sports rights deals. How long until all MLS games are available to stream in Apple Immersive on the Vision Pro? What about F1? ↩