When Apple Vision Pro launched in early 2024, it kicked off serious enterprise interest in spatial computing for office productivity. The pitch was compelling: why limit yourself to two physical monitors when you could have dozens of virtual screens floating in space around you?

Two years later, I’ve been using spatial computing devices regularly for work, and I’ve talked to dozens of knowledge workers doing the same. The experience has been… mixed. There are genuine productivity gains in specific scenarios, but the technology isn’t replacing traditional computing for most tasks anytime soon.

What Actually Works

Spatial computing is genuinely valuable for tasks that benefit from having multiple information sources visible simultaneously without physical desk space constraints.

I do a lot of research work that involves comparing documents, tracking references across multiple sources, and maintaining context across different information streams. Being able to have eight or ten documents visible at once, spatially organised, is legitimately useful.

The key is spatial organisation. With physical monitors, you’re limited to arranging windows in 2D space. With spatial computing, you can position windows at different depths and angles, creating a more intuitive information architecture.

I’ve developed a habit of placing reference materials in my peripheral vision—specs, documentation, background research—while keeping active work documents central. This reduces the cognitive cost of context switching because I don’t need to minimise windows or switch virtual desktops to check something.

For my specific workflow, this saves probably 15-20 minutes per day of window management overhead. Not revolutionary, but measurable.

The Fatigue Problem

Wearing a headset for extended periods is physically tiring in ways that sitting at a desk isn’t. The weight on your face, the pressure points, the heat buildup—all become noticeable after about 90 minutes.

I initially tried to use spatial computing for full workdays. After about a week, I had persistent headaches and neck tension. I’ve since settled into a pattern of 60-90 minute sessions for tasks that benefit from spatial computing, then switching back to traditional displays for everything else.

Other people I’ve talked to report similar limits. Some can go longer—two or three hours—but I haven’t met anyone who’s comfortably working eight-hour days in a headset.

This fundamentally limits how spatial computing can be integrated into office work. It’s a tool for specific sessions, not an all-day computing environment.

The Social Isolation Factor

Wearing a headset in an office is socially isolating. People can’t make eye contact with you, they don’t know if you’re aware of them approaching, and there’s an implicit “do not disturb” signal that discourages casual interaction.

Some headsets have passthrough video that lets you see the physical world, but it’s not the same as natural vision. There’s latency, there’s distortion, and peripheral awareness is reduced. You miss a lot of social cues.

For individual contributor roles where deep focus is valuable, this might be fine or even beneficial. For collaborative roles or management positions, it’s problematic.

I know one manager who tried using spatial computing for regular work but found that it damaged team cohesion. People stopped approaching her with quick questions or informal updates because she seemed unapproachable with the headset on.

She now only uses it for specific tasks like budget planning or strategy documentation that require extended focus and don’t benefit from interruption.

Input Methods Still Lag

Hand tracking has improved significantly, but it’s still not as precise or fast as a keyboard and mouse for most tasks. Voice input works for some things, but it’s awkward in shared office environments and doesn’t handle technical writing well.

Most spatial computing setups for productivity work still rely on physical keyboards and either hand tracking or physical controllers for navigation. This hybrid approach works but feels inelegant.

I’m fastest when I’m using a traditional keyboard for text input and hand gestures for window manipulation. But that means I need a clear desk space for the keyboard, which reduces some of the spatial flexibility benefits.

The ergonomics are still being figured out. Where does your keyboard sit relative to virtual screens? How do you avoid neck strain when looking down at a physical keyboard then up at virtual displays?

The Application Gap

Most productivity software isn’t designed for spatial computing. You’re running traditional 2D applications in a 3D environment, which works but doesn’t take full advantage of the medium.

There are some spatial-native applications emerging—3D modelling, architectural visualisation, data analysis tools that represent information spatially—but standard office work still mostly uses traditional software.

This means you’re often just replicating a multi-monitor setup in virtual space rather than doing anything fundamentally new. That has value, especially if you’re working remotely or have limited desk space, but it’s not transformative.

The most interesting productivity gains I’ve seen come from applications specifically designed for spatial interaction. A data analysis tool that lets you arrange and manipulate visualisations in 3D space. A project management application that creates a spatial representation of task dependencies.

These spatial-native applications are still rare, but they hint at where the technology could go once developers start designing for the medium rather than porting existing software.

Remote Work Applications

Spatial computing makes more sense for remote workers than office workers. If you’re already isolated in a home office, the social downsides disappear. And if you don’t have space for multiple physical monitors, virtual displays provide capabilities you couldn’t otherwise access.

Several remote workers I’ve spoken with use spatial computing as their primary work environment specifically because they don’t have the desk space for a multi-monitor setup. The headset gives them a more capable workspace in a smaller physical footprint.

For distributed teams, spatial meeting environments are more engaging than traditional video calls. Being represented as an avatar in a shared virtual space creates a different kind of presence than gallery view on Zoom.

I’m not convinced these virtual meetings are better than in-person meetings, but they’re probably better than video calls for certain types of collaboration.

The Privacy Advantage

One unexpected benefit: spatial computing provides complete visual privacy. No one can see what you’re working on unless they’re in the headset with you.

For work involving confidential information, this is genuinely valuable. I know people in finance and legal who use spatial computing specifically because it lets them work on sensitive materials in shared spaces without visual security concerns.

The irony is that you’re sacrificing social connection for security, but for some roles and contexts, that trade-off makes sense.

What Needs to Improve

The technology still has clear limitations. Weight and comfort need improvement for longer sessions. Battery life needs to extend for full workday use. Applications need to be designed for spatial interaction rather than ported from 2D. Input methods need to become more natural and efficient.

Social integration is a harder problem. Even if the hardware gets lighter and more comfortable, wearing a headset in a collaborative office environment creates barriers that are difficult to overcome.

The Realistic Use Case

After two years, my sense is that spatial computing is valuable for specific productivity tasks—research, data analysis, complex document comparison, design work—in focused sessions of 60-120 minutes. It’s also useful for remote workers who need multi-display capabilities in limited physical space.

But it’s not replacing traditional computing for general office productivity anytime soon. The physical and social overhead is too high for all-day use, and most productivity software isn’t designed to take advantage of spatial interaction.

Spatial computing is a specialised tool that augments traditional computing for specific scenarios. That’s useful, but it’s not the revolution that early marketing suggested. The technology will keep improving, but the fundamental constraints around physical comfort and social interaction will be harder to solve than the technical challenges.