4 ms·

I 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

I 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.

ramesh31 3y ago
> Making controllers optional for activities that don't need complex inputs would have been better. This is basically the case though. Vision isn't a walled garden toy device like Quest. It's a full blown general purpose computer with an M2 chip. Any peripheral that works with macOS/iOS will work with it. I have no doubt the third-party controller market will be robust, and I can even see Apple releasing their own for specialized applications like gaming.
- LegitShady 3y ago
  it will be a walled garden ios device, instead of a "walled garden toy device like quest", which could be hooked up to a PC. And there's no reason to assume random peripherals will work. Apple hasn't said it, no one has shown any, and there's no reason to think apple will let random third parties make compatible devices while they at the same time try to make sure you use guaranteed apple usb-c cables to get regular data rates from their devices. Basically, it will be a walled garden device (btw the quest could still play steamvr) just ios instead of oculus/meta, and the lack of controllers isn't some special achievement that is empowering third party creators, its a bad decision on apple's part because they simplified the experience to the point where complex interaction is worse.