6 ms·

I prefer no outward-facing display if that can make Vision Pro cheaper.

ramboldio 3y ago
I have to try it out to see whether it's worth it. But since the display can be fairly low-resolution, I don't except that it adds a lot of cost. Weight would be a bigger concern to me..
- mickdarling 3y ago
  My concern is primarily power draw. For a device with only a 2 hour battery, every erg matters.
  - wahnfrieden 3y ago
    It uses slow refresh like new iphones
  - Geee 3y ago
    It's not on all the time. Only when you interact with people.
    - gnicholas 3y ago
      Hm, doesn't it use the outward-facing display at all times, to display your status (whether you're fully immersed, are able to see others, or are recording a video, etc.?) I'm sure there's more processing required to show the eyes, but it's still illuminating the display when it's showing these other states. These could be done via simple LED indicators, saving some energy.
      - ricardobeat 3y ago
        Considering the amount of processing, rendering, sensors, eye tracking and 10x higher resolution displays all happening inside the headset, it's unlikely that the external display consumes enough power to affect battery life significantly. It would probably only save a few minutes at most.
  - dangus 3y ago
    While the displays are significant areas of power draw, for this product I don't think they're the low-hanging fruit. This is a device that's performing a whole bunch of computation in real time: video, lidar, infrared, eye tracking, and then it has to drive two 4K+ displays, one for each eye, with 3D-accelerated content being rendered at all times. Go to an AR web page on your phone and start playing around with 3D objects in your space and you'll notice your phone getting significantly warmer and drawing more power. The Vision Pro is doing this literally all the time. Also, the camera and sensor work that is tracking your eyes has to happen whether or not there is an outward-facing display. Apple makes a watch with a display that is always on, and their phones have high resolution OLEDs that can stay on for over 13 hours (iPhone 14 Pro Max 150 nits brightness doing continuous 5G web browsing).
- dangus 3y ago
  How heavy is an OLED panel? Isn't it like a piece of flexible plastic? Early reviewers seem to say that the metal construction of the Vision Pro seems to be contributing a lot to its weight. Most other headsets are all plastic.
woah 3y ago
Apple isn't generally in the habit of cutting corners
- jackmott42 3y ago
  They cut headphone jacks to save space. No reason you can't cut a pointless outer display to save space too!
  - wahahah 3y ago
    The 7 had space for a jack (see StrangeParts retrofitting one); they removed it purely for sleekness (and money).
- ec109685 3y ago
  The first iPhone only had 2G, the first iPad was super slow, and first AppleWatch had unusable apps. They’re always evaluating if they can cut a corner.
drcode 3y ago
in apple's eyes, that would make you a VR zombie apple has decided VR zombies hurt their brand & they won't allow it
- layer8 3y ago
  This is funny, because to my eyes their main marketing image for the Vision Pro (dark-skinned woman) makes a face like a dazed zombie.
- billconan 3y ago
  the world is biased against us introverts by forcing us to socialize. you see, we wear a noise cancelling headset to pretend to be working, in order to avoid unwanted socialization.
  - oh_sigh 3y ago
    Look on the bright side, maybe you can hack the vision pro to emulate direct eye contact in a conversation, when in reality you're scrolling hn comments.
    - guhidalg 3y ago
      Honestly not a bad idea. You could even fall asleep and continue to display blinking eyes with no one catching on.
haswell 3y ago
I think that more than anything, the inclusion of this feature is a hint about where Apple intends to take this product, and that they want to send a crystal clear message that this device is meant for interacting with other people. And it seems this is such an important aspect of the product that they're willing to reduce the addressable market from a cost perspective. This, to me, is what makes this product intriguing. And it makes me think that Apple's real goal is something closer to a pair of glasses, and they just know they can't get there without a long series of iterations.
- JohnFen 3y ago
  > that they want to send a crystal clear message that this device is meant for interacting with other people. But that display increases the "creepy factor" by orders of magnitude.
  - haswell 3y ago
    This product isn't in the public's hands yet, so I think it's a bit early to conclude that it's categorically creepy. But even if it ends up being a bit creepy, a) I think Apple is well aware of that and b) again I think this highlights how important they think it is to send the message from day 1 that solving for isolation is a top priority and intrinsic to their end-goal.
    - JohnFen 3y ago
      > This product isn't in the public's hands yet, so I think it's a bit early to conclude that it's categorically creepy I was just going by the materials that Apple has released. It's true that I haven't personally seen the device in action in real life. But what Apple has shown certainly triggers a "creepy factor" in me. Whether or not this is an issue for many people, and whether or not Apple will address it, isn't really relevant. What I've seen right now creeps me out a bit.
      - haswell 3y ago
        > Whether or not this is an issue for many people, and whether or not Apple will address it, isn't really relevant Why/how is this not relevant in a broader sense? Or are you just saying this isn’t relevant to you personally?
dangus 3y ago
I think it's one of the most important features of the design. Apple is trying to get VR/AR users out in public so that it can be a mainstream device. In the long run, adding a second screen isn't that expensive, and the cameras that capture the video of your eyes already have to be inside the system to perform eye tracking. If smartphone manufacturers can make folding phones with second screens for under $1000 I think that the outward-facing display is not the lowest hanging fruit for cost reduction.

I have to try it out to see whether it's worth it. But since the display can be fairly low-resolution, I don't except that it adds a lot of cost. Weight would be a bigger concern to me..

mickdarling 3y ago
My concern is primarily power draw. For a device with only a 2 hour battery, every erg matters.
- wahnfrieden 3y ago
  It uses slow refresh like new iphones
- Geee 3y ago
  It's not on all the time. Only when you interact with people.
  - gnicholas 3y ago
    Hm, doesn't it use the outward-facing display at all times, to display your status (whether you're fully immersed, are able to see others, or are recording a video, etc.?) I'm sure there's more processing required to show the eyes, but it's still illuminating the display when it's showing these other states. These could be done via simple LED indicators, saving some energy.
    - ricardobeat 3y ago
      Considering the amount of processing, rendering, sensors, eye tracking and 10x higher resolution displays all happening inside the headset, it's unlikely that the external display consumes enough power to affect battery life significantly. It would probably only save a few minutes at most.
- dangus 3y ago
  While the displays are significant areas of power draw, for this product I don't think they're the low-hanging fruit. This is a device that's performing a whole bunch of computation in real time: video, lidar, infrared, eye tracking, and then it has to drive two 4K+ displays, one for each eye, with 3D-accelerated content being rendered at all times. Go to an AR web page on your phone and start playing around with 3D objects in your space and you'll notice your phone getting significantly warmer and drawing more power. The Vision Pro is doing this literally all the time. Also, the camera and sensor work that is tracking your eyes has to happen whether or not there is an outward-facing display. Apple makes a watch with a display that is always on, and their phones have high resolution OLEDs that can stay on for over 13 hours (iPhone 14 Pro Max 150 nits brightness doing continuous 5G web browsing).
dangus 3y ago
How heavy is an OLED panel? Isn't it like a piece of flexible plastic? Early reviewers seem to say that the metal construction of the Vision Pro seems to be contributing a lot to its weight. Most other headsets are all plastic.

woah 3y ago

Apple isn't generally in the habit of cutting corners

jackmott42 3y ago
They cut headphone jacks to save space. No reason you can't cut a pointless outer display to save space too!
- wahahah 3y ago
  The 7 had space for a jack (see StrangeParts retrofitting one); they removed it purely for sleekness (and money).
ec109685 3y ago
The first iPhone only had 2G, the first iPad was super slow, and first AppleWatch had unusable apps. They’re always evaluating if they can cut a corner.

drcode 3y ago

in apple's eyes, that would make you a VR zombie apple has decided VR zombies hurt their brand & they won't allow it

layer8 3y ago
This is funny, because to my eyes their main marketing image for the Vision Pro (dark-skinned woman) makes a face like a dazed zombie.
billconan 3y ago
the world is biased against us introverts by forcing us to socialize. you see, we wear a noise cancelling headset to pretend to be working, in order to avoid unwanted socialization.
- oh_sigh 3y ago
  Look on the bright side, maybe you can hack the vision pro to emulate direct eye contact in a conversation, when in reality you're scrolling hn comments.
  - guhidalg 3y ago
    Honestly not a bad idea. You could even fall asleep and continue to display blinking eyes with no one catching on.

haswell 3y ago

I think that more than anything, the inclusion of this feature is a hint about where Apple intends to take this product, and that they want to send a crystal clear message that this device is meant for interacting with other people. And it seems this is such an important aspect of the product that they're willing to reduce the addressable market from a cost perspective. This, to me, is what makes this product intriguing. And it makes me think that Apple's real goal is something closer to a pair of glasses, and they just know they can't get there without a long series of iterations.

JohnFen 3y ago
> that they want to send a crystal clear message that this device is meant for interacting with other people. But that display increases the "creepy factor" by orders of magnitude.
- haswell 3y ago
  This product isn't in the public's hands yet, so I think it's a bit early to conclude that it's categorically creepy. But even if it ends up being a bit creepy, a) I think Apple is well aware of that and b) again I think this highlights how important they think it is to send the message from day 1 that solving for isolation is a top priority and intrinsic to their end-goal.
  - JohnFen 3y ago
    > This product isn't in the public's hands yet, so I think it's a bit early to conclude that it's categorically creepy I was just going by the materials that Apple has released. It's true that I haven't personally seen the device in action in real life. But what Apple has shown certainly triggers a "creepy factor" in me. Whether or not this is an issue for many people, and whether or not Apple will address it, isn't really relevant. What I've seen right now creeps me out a bit.
    - haswell 3y ago
      > Whether or not this is an issue for many people, and whether or not Apple will address it, isn't really relevant Why/how is this not relevant in a broader sense? Or are you just saying this isn’t relevant to you personally?

dangus 3y ago

I think it's one of the most important features of the design. Apple is trying to get VR/AR users out in public so that it can be a mainstream device. In the long run, adding a second screen isn't that expensive, and the cameras that capture the video of your eyes already have to be inside the system to perform eye tracking. If smartphone manufacturers can make folding phones with second screens for under $1000 I think that the outward-facing display is not the lowest hanging fruit for cost reduction.