So it's tiring to use and to set up and you can't actually touch virtual things.

I would also add the price. Of course Vision Pro is an extreme example, but every time I look at Oculus glasses, they seem pretty pricey if I also consider their actual usefulness (which I can only assume from the reviews and reading others' experiences) - they still look like an interesting toy which would be fun for a week, but after that it sounds like a chore. Maybe that is not true, of course, I'm only assuming. But then the companies will have to show the opposite...

I was never convinced of the uses for XR, if that's the right term where you superimpose 3d on the real world. The only possible way I can see it working is with lightweight glasses such that you then don't have to take them off to do other things while you're in the office. If you need to put a headset on then you might as well change your entire setting around you and the real world is irrelevant.

I mention this because I would assume any headset with only VR will probably be a better product since it doesn't need to worry about the XR use cases. Maybe the VisionPro would have been a much better experience if they just dropped all of those features.

I've been skeptical about XR headsets for years, but this post makes some really interesting points that I haven't seen discussed much, like:

"While XR devices like VisionPro do re-create home and office setups and allow for vast screen real estate, they lack a true sense of location. Evolution shaped our brains to operate differently depending on whether we’re traveling or at home. Researchers call this the encoding specificity principle—our memories link closely with the environment where they were first formed."

IE, even if the VisionPro wasn't as heavy as a sushi plate, it would still have fundamental problems!