Another Vision Pro knock-off is coming to town, and this time it even has the ‘Vision’ name.

While not a household name, China’s Vivo is known for its sensible, mid-range smartphones, regularly ranking it in the top five smartphone creators by market share.

Now, at the Boao Forum for Asia in China’s Hainan Province today, the company showed off its first entry into the XR segment: Vivo Vision.

In a press statement, Vivo says the move comes as a broader push to pursue both robotics and XR devices, referring to Vivo Vision as “a significant milestone in vivo’s exploration of mixed reality technology.”

Image courtesy GSM Arena

While Vivo Vision is expected to be officially unveiled in mid-2025, specifics are still thin on the ground, with notable question marks surrounding the MR headsets specs, operating system, release date, global availability, price—pretty much everything besides the device’s externals.

A display model was present at Vivo’s booth at Boao Forum for Asia however, revealing the company is taking more than a few design cues from Apple Vision Pro, including its unique headstrap design, digital crown button, and magnetically-tethered external battery.

SEE ALSO
'Skydance's BEHEMOTH' Adds Over 700 Fixes in Second Major Patch, Now Live on All Platforms

Notably, Vivo’s fleet of smartphones run modified versions of Android, with Funtouch OS used as its global-facing OS, and Origin OS used for those shipped in China.

As Vivo’s first XR device, it’s possible the company may attempt the same feat with Google’s upcoming Android XR OS, which is being launched with Samsung’s upcoming mixed reality, ‘Project Moohan’, which is said to release sometime this year, although that’s pure speculation for now.

This marks a growing trend of look-alike Vision Pros arriving from Chinese manufacturers, with the first notable arriving from Play for Dream; its MR headset not only stole the show at CES 2025 earlier this year, but also garnered high praise from former Quest engineer Amanda Watson, who called it “absolutely the best all around HMD demo I saw on the floor today.”

Newsletter graphic

This article may contain affiliate links. If you click an affiliate link and buy a product we may receive a small commission which helps support the publication. More information.

Scott Hayden
Well before the first modern XR products hit the market, Scott recognized the potential of the technology and set out to understand and document its growth. He has been professionally reporting on the space for nearly a decade as Editor at Road to VR, authoring more than 4,000 articles on the topic. Scott brings that seasoned insight to his reporting from major industry events across the globe.
  • guest

    Yeah, this could finally be a device for the people. One that's not dependent on those app stores.

    • g-man

      You mean like every PCVR headset?

    • Arno van Wingerde

      " not dependent on those app stores." because no apps in the first place? If this thing can be compatible to Steam then OK, otherwise: nice HW, w/o/ SW…

  • g-man

    Sure let’s copy Apple’s uncomfortable design with no top support lol

    And what’s with companies aping each others’ names? Wouldn’t you want to differentiate your product?

    • foamreality

      Nobody cares what ist called, so why not give a similar name to the thing its meant to be like. Like when Aldi calls its own brand Mars bar Titan. I like it. No BS. We both know they are targeting vision pro admirers who want something cheaper and they are letting us know, clear and concise.

    • Christian Schildwaechter

      TL;DR: Nobody intuitively understands what a Samsung Odyssey+ or Pimax Crystal Super is, while toothbrush, lightbulb or hearing aid convey meaning even to the uninitiated, which is helpful as long as most people are in this category.

      For a Head Mounted Display, "Vision" is a more descriptive name than Quest, more associated with gaming. "Play for Dream" is a case of "instructions unclear", while "Shiftall MeganeX 8K" hints at an urgent need to overcompensate something (and worse when misread). Most companies use abstract name/numbering schemes like "PlayStation 1-5", but also "Xbox/Xbox 360/Xbox One/Xbox Series X/S" (derived from "box running DirectX games", a temporary title that stuck) or "AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395", often more confusing than helpful.

      In contrast Apple (mostly) picks literal descriptions. Started with Apple I-III, then the Mac(intosh), named after an apple (!!!) fruit variety (???) All notebooks are Mac-/Power-/iBooks, the latter part of the iMac/iPod/iPhone/iPad phase (i initially for internet, the 1997 iMac integrated a modem), which caused people to expect iGoggles/iGlasses HMDs. iPods (???) were music players, with the pod for music living on in AirPod headphones that also follow a sub-scheme of everything Air being light. Everything Pro is more expensive, Max more than Pro, Ultra more than Max (???). Newer products got even more literal with Apple TV, Apple Watch and now Apple Vision (Pro). [Apple Computer also renamed itself to Apple Inc., as nowadays computer generate less than 10% of the revenue.]

      Descriptive naming helps with introducing unfamiliar devices to new users, similar to early MacOS X using skeuomorphic design with apps looking like physical notebooks, address books, envelopes or calculators, green meaning go/on, read meaning stop/off, only changed to a more abstract style once people had gotten used to it. As most humans still have never tried any HMD and little to no idea what those are all about, naming these devices XYZ Vision might actually help with adaption, even if it is not a very creative, distinctive name. But neither was calling a phone iPhone or a watch Apple Watch. And HTC already followed suit by mostly rebranding the Vive Focus 3 to Vive Focus Vision.

  • Christian Schildwaechter

    There's more of these to come, thanks to the power of commoditization. Pretty much everyone except Apple is basing their standalone HMDs on Qualcomm's reference platform, which makes it rather easy to release your own headset. Qualcomm's reference HMD is produced by XR contract manufacturer GoerTek, who also produce pretty much all the standalone HMDs for Meta, HTC etc., removing the need for a company to first build up their own production expertiese.

    This already happened with the XR2 Gen 1. Most people will only be aware of the Quest 2 and Pico 3/Neo 3/Neo 3 Link/G3/4/Pro/Enterprise and maybe HTC Vive XR Elite/Focus 3/Focus Vision using this SoC, but there are also the AjnaLens AjnaXR/Enterprise, iQIYI Qiyu Dream/Dream Pro/3, Lenovo Legion VR700/ThinkReality VRX, Lynx R1, YVR 1/2 and many more, literally dozens. Some of these are from rather large companies, for example iQIYI is sort of a Chinese Netflix and offered the Quest 2-like "Adventure Dream" as part of a video/virtual cinema subscription for roughly half the price of the already cheap Quest 2. vr-compare_com is a great source for exotic headsets you have never heard of before.

    Most of these never make it out of China, but they are all very similar, mostly using components readily available from GoerTek plus Qualcomm's Android version and OpenXR stack. So just based on the fact that the Vivo Vision was announced by a Chinese phone manufacturer I can reasonably speculate on the following specs:

    – Qualcomm XR2+ Gen 2
    – BOE 2.5K/3.5K microOLED
    – GoerTek Pancake lenses
    – 8-12 GB RAM
    – Android AOSP based OS in China (lacking access to Google Play Services required for Android XR)
    – Android XR outside of China (once Google makes it available)

    Simply because that's what everyone will be using, with some picking more expensive Sony or later eMagin/Samsung microOLEDs instead.

    • Coolnesscat

      Hey hows it going i had an emgin z800 back in the day lets talk ;)

    • Jose Ferrer

      If all the Standalone HMDs commoditize to the Android XR OS with the Qualcomm-GoerTek route (except Apple) we will see devices like this one everywhere and at every price. The logical store for standalone apps/games will be then Play Store. And the store for PCVR games will be Steam.
      So, if all hardware and XR/VR software go to others, what it would be left to Meta?

      • Christian Schildwaechter

        TL;DR: even if Quest as a platform would lose to AndroidXR, Meta could still stay/become a main XR platform with Horizon Worlds turning into a metaverse, which was their goal anyway. They still have a lot of options.

        MRL (not Meta) could end up like Palm or Blackberry. A decade before the iPhone, Palm handhelds dominated mobile apps and BlackBerry mobile messaging, but then failed to react to more flexible smartphones, leading to their demise and the current Apple/Google mobile duopoly.

        Similarly Meta seems stuck in the VR gaming niche, lacking access to non-gaming apps/devs and media services like Apple TV+ with 4K streams, 3D movies and Immersive Video. They try to adapt to slow growth and changed user behavior, now pushing free-to-play on Quest and Horizon Worlds, esp. the mobile phone version, to counter Epic turning Fortnite into a very profitable "metaverse" social space. They invest heavily into AI that also drives their RayBan smart glasses with better mass market acceptance than the gaming focused Quest.

        Meta itself benefits from commoditization, replacing some custom designs with GoerTek components to reduce cost according to late 2024 reports, and hopes that GoerTek (and others) will release their own HMDs by 2030. Ideally running Horizon OS, but so far no 3rd party HMDs appeared, with AndroidXR making it even less likely. They are trying to transitioning from a hardware/OS platform provider taking a share from software sales to a cross-platform/-vendor "multiverse" making money from in-world-transactions.

        Selling hardware was always only a stopgap to establish a Meta platform, escaping the clutches of Apple and Google. This probably wasn't about the 30% app store sales fees. These barely impact Meta generating 97.8% of its revenue from ads, while platform rules like Apple forcing Facebook to ask users for tracking permission cost Meta more money than their whole XR venture. In the last few years EU/US regulatory bodies (pushed by Epic) solved some of this for Meta by forcing Apple/Google to allow 3rd party stores.

        Establishing Horizon Worlds on web, iOS/Android phones, and visionOS/AndroidXR/HorizonOS HMDs could still satisfy Meta's goals, even if their big (and expensive) bet to early on establish a very large XR platform drawing in Android/iOS developers didn't work out. Meta still has lots of options to stay a mayor XR player, and enough resources to keep trying. In 2024 they generated USD 62bn net income from USD 165bn revenue, mostly from Facebook/Instagram ads, and that after spending another USD 10bn+ at MRL. So far Horizon Worlds doesn't look like a huge success though, more like another, very expensive long term bet.

        • Kfir Even

          Google and Apple have a massive advantage over Meta because they have well-established ecosystems with millions of apps available on their platforms. If either of them releases a good XR headset or glasses at a competitive price, it could be game over for Meta. Luckily for Meta, so far, it doesn’t seem like Apple or Google fully understand what a "good headset at a good price" really means.

          Also, Meta Horizon is just an MMO game—nothing special. Meta's implementation is poorly executed and not very fun, so I wouldn’t count on it being meaningful.

          • guest

            No, they are both being forced into the upmarket VR graveyard just to have the higher resolution to make their crappy legacy 2D apps look readable and have their devices be used as little movie theatres for 2D movies!

          • Christian Schildwaechter

            If either of them releases a good XR headset or glasses at a competitive price

            They won't, at least not for a couple of years. The announced 4K ShiftAll Meganex 8K, Play for Dream and Pimax Dream Air all start at USD 1900, probably because the rumored price of Samsung's Project Moohan was USD 2000+. They all use more expensive tech than Meta and actually try to make some money, which is why nobody is even bothering with releasing a device priced to compete with Meta selling at production cost. Not even Meta manages to sell a USD 500 Quest 3, users mostly stuck to the Quest 2 in 2023 and Quest 3S in 2024.

            Pay-to-win has been Meta's strategy from day one, and unless someone comes up with a killer app that sells non-Meta headsets, this still gives them a couple of guaranteed years as the top selling (as in units) XR company. They'll throw more money at the problem, pushing smart glasses and everything they can find, so that when/if the day comes where XR turns popular, and the economies of scale that drove down Android smartphone prices apply to AndroidXR too, taking away Quest's price advantage, something else will keep users on Meta's platform.

            Or at least they'll try. They are currently trying with Horizon Worlds, and while so far this doesn't look like a particularly promising approach, at least this time they are sticking to it and try to improve it. Instead of just shutting it down and launching another social VR space with different features, annoying those actually using the current one, like they did several times in the past.

      • guest

        Uh, just how do all the Standalone HMDs commoditize to the Android XR OS if Google Play Services required for Android XR? Do you have any idea what is required to be certified for Google Play Services? Its never going to happen.

        • Christian Schildwaechter

          Google Play Services are required to get access to the Google Play Store, so any Android phone with the Play Store installed managed to qualify. Which is pretty much every phones sold outside of China and a few other countries where Google Play Services are simply not available.

          So this is not really a challenge, the main problem is that it gives pretty much all software revenue to Google, which is why Quest/Horizon OS will not be made AndroidXR compatible, or get access to flat Play Store apps.

    • NicoleJsd [She/Her]

      That’s great and all but what are the buyers going to play?

      It’s not like there’s anything outside of meta and quest OS standalone

      • Christian Schildwaechter

        The first batch of these will be rather expensive, targeting enthusiasts and PCVR streaming or productivity use. Last year HTC re-released the 2021 2.5K Vive Focus 3 as the cheaper (USD 999) Focus Vision, mostly identical besides more RAM, better passthrough and a new USD 150 DP-input option, arguing that most Focus 3 were used for PCVR streaming anyway.

        AndroidXR will follow the Android model, with Google providing the OS and keeping all software sales, while others make money from selling hardware with profit. This working pretty well for smartphones makes AndroidXR the (longterm) most attractive platform to develop/port existing games for. Just like most Pico games are Quest ports, the first round of standalone AndroidXR games will again be ports, made financially feasible by everything using Android and OpenXR, and Unity as the dominant VR game engine covering most remaining differences.

        HorizonOS will dominate VR gaming for years, as others will first stick to the profitable high end focussed on productivity use, media consumption, PCVR streaming plus a couple of game ports. Similar to Apple, Google will position AndroidXR HMDs as smartphones with giant, virtual screens, offering tools to integrate XR features into flat Android apps/games as a gradual low risk path towards XR for Android developers, attacking Meta and its large Quest library more from the side. Whether this can longterm make AndroidXR a more attractive target for game developers than HorizonOS thanks to a larger overall audience remains to be seen.

  • NicoleJsd [She/Her]

    Jeebus stop being such an apple fanboy. I am deep in their ecosystem too with almost every single device but I can admit their shortcomings

    The more the merrier

    • Nevets

      Well said.

  • xyzs

    lol, no shame.
    the chinese are market predators.