9 ms·
Vision Pro’s Big Reveal
- putzdown 3y agoIntriguing little bit of poetry here. But this I don’t quite understand: “It shows us a time when entering a virtual world required a gizmo. That’s the past, not the future.” In what sense is entering a virtual world without a “gizmo” a present or future reality? Are they talking about imagination, with “virtual” used in an unusual (from a tech perspective) way?
- throw74775 3y agoA lot of postmodern thought results in the formation of cults, in which people occupy a virtual world inside their own minds.
- Apocryphon 3y agoHow about a metamodernist cult instead- what if the future is a gizmo-mind hybrid? That’s right, I’m talking about the Neuralink.
- throw74775 3y agoPresumably the endgame for Neuralink is to give people direct perception of the truth, as determined by TruthGPT from the content on Twitter.
- bryan0 3y agoyeah this also confused me. sounds like he's talking about meditation and psychedelics.
- retskrad 3y agoThe Vision Pro is probably the most advanced consumer tech available and it's by far the best AR/VR headset. However, it's DOA. It's going to flop and Apple knows it but they know that they need to release it now to let developers and users show them what it's true purpose will be. The real deal will be the AR glasses, not these big ski goggles that nobody wants to wear.
- inconceivable 3y agolmao it's not even available yet, how can it be doa?
- 0l 3y agoIt's a saying - https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/dead_on_arrival https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/dead_on_arrival (definition 4)
- inconceivable 3y agoyeah buddy i'm american, i'm familiar with the concept of doa. the point is it hasn't ARRIVED YET. here's one for you - what happened at the announcement is called an eta. estimated time of arrival. not arrival, not doa. eta.
- dpflan 3y agoCan you elaborate on the product line evolution you are envisioning?
- tough 3y agoVision Pro -> Big chunky snowboard glasses Vision -> Just regular ol glasses with all the tech miniaturised after a couple pro versions
- notaustinpowers 3y agoI envision the Vision Pro as a consumer testbed of tech while they work to miniaturize the technology. IE: LIDAR in iPhone 12 Pro, ARKit to transition devs into thinking about AR applications, etc. Raise to wake on iPhone 6S to prepare for FaceID in the iPhone X. I can envision an Apple Vision Air 4 or 5 years from now that's a pair of glasses with transparent micro OLED lenses. OpticID technology embedded in the interior lens frames. 2 wide angle cameras set in the top corner temples (like Snapchat's Spectacles) to track your environment and your hands at the same time. LIDAR and IR in the bridge of the nose for depth perception. Battery tech in the temple arms behind your ears. An onboard future R1-type chip running processing for all the sensors. All paired to an iPhone running a future M2-type chip that powers the computations for the headset. I envision that as the future Apple wants to deliver, and I think they can. But I believe the Vision Pro is to get society comfortable with the idea of a screen in front of their eyes, cameras on our faces, and acclimated to a new way of interacting with this sort of technology.
- ramesh31 3y agoSpatial computing will be the dominant paradigm for the vast, vast majority of all history once it is nailed down. The mouse/keyboard/monitor paradigm will be a small footnote in the early history of HCI once it is obliviated. Apple, as always, is showing the rest of the industry the way forward here.
- bee_rider 3y agoThe keyboard is hard to beat, in terms of precise (for a human), high bandwidth (for a human) input. Maybe AI will get so good that we won’t need to be precise and high bandwidth. Hell, maybe it will just guess exactly what we want based on grunting and pointing. But we’re a ways off from there. Mouses and monitors, I could imagine losing.
- ako 3y agoSpeech recognition is getting to a point where keyboards can be replaced for certain cases. And there are many situations where keyboards are not an option.
- Ancapistani 3y agoSpeech recognition is only viable today when the user is in quiet surroundings and not near other people. You can't use it while you have a conversation with someone, for instance. Like it or not, a large part of today's device usage is concurrent with other "meatspace" interactions. It may be possible if someone implements very good subvocalization recognition. It's possible - I've used military headsets that allow near-silent audio communication - but it takes practice to use effectively, and I really don't see it as a viable mass-market tech.
- LegitShady 3y agoI think the opposite. Even the lack of controllers is a downside for the apple vision. Controllers allow for multiple simultaneous modes of complex inputs that gestures don't and don't rely on being in the view of a camera. Making controllers optional for activities that don't need complex inputs would have been better.
- m3kw9 3y agoThis guy is missing something and a bit myopic. The Visions real vision is convenience. No more holding the phone to absorb content, everywhere entertainment, immersive experiences, everything always available. The device is no where near the ideal form of just a light weight glasses, or even contacts. Between here and the future it will get more and more portable.
- surgical_fire 3y agoYes, instead of holding a fairly small screen that is very light and fits in my pocket, I can have the "convenience" of strapping some fucking huge goggles to my head so I can enjoy that sweet motion sickness. All for the convenient price of 3.5 grand. I just don't think this is DoA because Apple fans buy any crap Apple releases, no matter the price. It will become a nice iPaperweight though.
- socialdemocrat 3y agoI have long been skeptical of AI/AR because I also don’t feel like being strapped in like that. But I can see this as being useful for dedicated tasks: surgeons, building or repairing a PC, inspecting a buildings. It will be more of a professional tool than consumer tool I think.
- surgical_fire 3y ago> But I can see this as being useful for dedicated tasks Possibly, but Oculus already exists, and has existed for a while. Did this market materialize? Honest question, I don't follow Meta/Oculus news closely.
- 01acheru 3y agoI have no opinion on this device or the Oculus, the thing I can say is that the Oculus is not an AR device, only VR.
- 3y ago
- parl_match 3y ago> It shows us a time when entering a virtual world required a gizmo "When"? You mean, the present, like how I'm reading this article?
- johnwheeler 3y agoThis is such moronic thinking. It's cliche by now
- chasing 3y agoIt’s a tool. Don’t want the tool? Don’t use it. There are absolutely going to be use-cases for it, even if Baudrillard would prefer we all just use our imaginations. Who needs a car when all we need is to just stroll amongst the trees and let nature fuel our imaginations? Because I need to get to the airport on time and with a bunch of luggage.
- whywhywhywhy 3y agoRight why talk about anything ever everyone just sit in silence.
- fnordsensei 3y agoBuddha approves of this message
- dev_tty01 3y agoTalking is great. Unfortunately much of the verbal spewing here on HN the last few days is just condemning, calling it stupid, making blanket statements like "no one will buy this" or other forms of diatribe with only personal bias as a basis for opinion. Many of the people criticizing clearly didn't see the presentations. Is there non-trivial risk of market failure? Of course. They are trying to create a computation and entertainment focused AR device. That is new. It is inherently risky to create new markets. Is it also possible that they have executed this so well that people may find it very compelling and buy it? Yes, that may be true. Only time will settle this question, so making extreme conclusory statements is just silly. Real, open-minded discussions of the tradeoffs of the tech have unfortunately been in relatively short supply this week. Some folks have made interesting and thoughtful comments and I for one have enjoyed them very much. Kudos! More of that please.
- surgical_fire 3y ago> Talking is great. Unfortunately much of the verbal spewing here on HN the last few days is just condemning, calling it stupid, making blanket statements like "no one will buy this" or other forms of diatribe with only personal bias as a basis for opinion. Then let's talk, but only if the talking is to gush about Apple and its toys. If you are negative, just shut up.
- Dah00n 3y agoThe investors seem to know the deal.
- hyperthesis 3y agoThis is the argument for books against TV.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- endisneigh 3y agoI’m sure this will succeed. Unlike the quest it’ll be able to use millions of existing iOS and iPadOS apps. The cost is a hard pill to swallow but at the end of the day even $500 for a quest 3 is expensive and people will buy that too.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- mekkkkkk 3y agoHasn't there always been a fraction of intellectuals that question any departure from "base reality"? I wouldn't be surprised if cave painters caught the odd side-eye from the old guard of the tribe. Maybe this time it's different, but it's hard to take it seriously.
- pointlessone 3y agoThis feels like contrarianism overdone. Philosophical rambling that completely fails to consider practical side of the product. Can you with your inner eye watch a movie? Will it be the same movie as in the cinema? Can you with your inner eye see a topological map of your city? Will it be as accurate as any actual map? The virtual camera in our head can only present what’s already in our mind. And as accurately as our mind allows. It can not present whatever other people want to show or what requires greater precision than our brain can muster. I’d be thoroughly impressed if you could have anything close to a spreadsheet in your mind representing financial reports from the past decade with the same precision. Regarding presence. I was very excited about a virtual big screen in a forest. OP presents it as excessive and utterly pointless but have you been to a cinema ever? I, for one, almost always get distracted by strangers rustling their popcorn or staring into their phone at full brightness two rows down. And at home I can’t get imax-equivalent size screen. One can criticize Vision Pro (and AR/VR in general) for its dorkiness, price, disconnect, or whatever but it’s completely wrong to dismiss it as absolutely useless. There are very real use cases that can not be fulfilled or closely emulated either by other types of devices or by other practices that don’t use any tools.