This feels like contrarianism overdone. Philosophical rambling that completely fails to consider practical side of the product. Can you with your inner eye wat

This 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.