3 ms·
Ask HN: Are any of the AR features of the Vision Pro useful?
* All of the rooms in which the Vision Pro is demonstrated are beautiful, spacious, and clutter free. I don't doubt the people that the people who will purchase Vision Pro have beautiful and spacious rooms, but I do doubt they're clutter free. And even if they are clutter free, I would assume people would prefer a new background to look at vs a room they see every day, and would switch to full VR mode almost always.
* The ability to converse with someone with a digital version of your eyes being displayed to them seems useful for conversations that last at-most 5 seconds. After that, people will demand you take off your Vision Pros and converse with them face-to-face.
* The demoed avatar version of you for Facetime lives smack dab in the middle of Uncanny Valley. I would not Facetime with someone using Vision Pro if another option was possible, or substantial improvements were made to make the avatar more realistic
* External use of the 3d camera - The demo shows what appears to be a dad interacting with his kids while wearing the headset and capturing a moment using the 3D camera. Later he watches the 3D video he captured, reliving that moment. They could just call this feature the "Noncustodial Parent" feature, because absolutely no one is going to wear Apple Ski Goggles TM while interacting with their children, unless they are extremely desperate to draw out a few special moments into a year's worth of memories.
- MacsHeadroom 3y agoPeople won't even own this device for a year. It's silly to ask these questions now, before we can even test the device. If you don't see $3,499 of value in the feature set then don't buy one. Detailed reviews and in-store demos will come next Winter.
- lwansbrough 3y agoUltimately I think aside from individual entertainment, the whole idea suffers from the same pitfalls of the HoloLens from 8 years ago. I don’t see the advancement needed to make interactions fluid. It’s still the same awkward flicking and snapping. This tech is still _quite_ distinguishable from magic. I think in order to truly achieve a magical experience it will take a technological leap similar in scale to the invention of the semiconductor. It’s just not worth the hassle and until it materially improves reality, it will be a vanity. I don’t think Steve Jobs would have settled for this product.
- rektide 3y agoAgreed that there is an absolutely colossal leap required. Computers can detect the shape & state of a room, but actually giving users interesting & meaningful experiences that befit the environment is a colossal challenge. Starting with cosmetics is I think a good first step. Take a room & add some vines & flora. Create a variety of sci-fi style embellishments that can be added. Just getting the immersion right, without purpose, I think is a necessary-ish step that has to lead; it shows that the computer can really functionally play with space. From the capabilities we can start to explore what is useful & helpful. It's mostly floating text, but I think Vernor Vinge's Rainbow's End still has some of the best food-for-though, as it's so heavily networked.
- fuzzythinker 3y agoAgree on the tech needs a big leap. Disagree on how big that leap is. The tech is like the first ipad -- bulky, huge bezels, poor cpu/gpu; or iphone -- similar drawbacks plus poor 3g connectivity, rendering the most useful app - GMap pretty much useless. But Jobs still released them knowing the tech will catch up in years, not decades.
- apricot13 3y agoI didn't get the impression it was really designed for every day life mostly business and life admin and relaxing at home eg movies and gaming on the sofa. That memory of the kids is more likely to be captured whilst wearing the vision pro for another purpose and being interrupted. I doubt anyone is going to be 100% digital avatar all the time but I want that feature as a non vision pro user! Sometimes you need to be on camera but your not interacting with the call it would be perfect for that!