3 ms·

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 cl

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?
      - JohnFen 3y ago
        Yes, to me, personally. I should have made that more clear. Sorry.
        haswell 3y ago
        Makes more sense and thanks for clarifying.
  - fullspectrumdev 3y ago
    Pretty much everyone I have spoken to about the thing has been like “that’s fucking creepy”. A few have hoped you can display something else on it - like cat eyes or something to make it less fucking weird.
    - ricardobeat 3y ago
      Face filters in video were considered extremely creepy 3 years ago.
  - acomjean 3y ago
    When google glass came out, there was the question of if you want to talk to someone who has a camera running at all times, (recording?). Its weird how perspective shifts. Of course in some places if its recording all the time it might be in some weird wire taping situation.
    - omegaworks 3y ago
      Google is also in the market of using every bit of data it can possibly record of you to show you ads.
      - smoldesu 3y ago
        It's a shame I don't trust Apple not to do the same anymore. If the advertisement creep into MacOS is any indication, the Vision Pro might have more pop-ups than the Quest.
    - JohnFen 3y ago
      > Its weird how perspective shifts. It's not clear that it has shifted yet. It wasn't clear that Google Glass would be rejected until people started wearing them publicly.
- saurik 3y ago
  Huh. To me it massively decreases the "creepy factor", as the idea that someone is watching me when I can't see their eyes looking at me is where the creepiness originates... the only thing we normally interact with where that happens with people are mirrored sunglasses, and those are themselves often associated with cops and (if you even consider this a separate category ;P) creeps.
  - deanCommie 3y ago
    At least you KNOW they're not interacting with you. With the exterior glass projection you THINK you're making eye contact with them, while both of you are looking at screens through cameras. dystopian!
    - haswell 3y ago
      This scenario seems functionally similar to a FaceTime call or other form of video communication. Both parties know they’re not literally gazing into each other’s eyes, but the technical medium creates a pretty decent long distance approximation of doing just that. A video call will never replace the real thing, but I don’t think I’d say it’s dystopian. And I don’t find the tech in this headset all that different, the exception being that there isn’t a 2nd set of cameras and screens on the non-headset side of the conversation. On the other hand, maybe it is dystopian, but if so, I’d argue that dystopia is already here and has been for awhile.
      - JohnFen 3y ago
        > This scenario seems functionally similar to a FaceTime call or other form of video communication. But in a video call, the "distance" the video causes is something that you put up with in exchange for a greater benefit. If I'm talking with someone that has a screen in front of their face showing me their face, that's distance that provides no benefit, so it's a loss without gain. It makes the person seem sketchy.
      - deanCommie 3y ago
        I don't know what kind of Facetime calls you're having but 99% of the time I'm looking at someone's face, but we're not making eye contact. The video is almost never exactly where the camera is, and if the person is using an external camera or a secondary monitor, the eyeline will never line up. It's fine! But you never have the illusion that you're talking to the person directly. Which may be is good enough for adults working on professional projects. But it's not good enough for a parent interacting with a young child.

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?
    - JohnFen 3y ago
      Yes, to me, personally. I should have made that more clear. Sorry.
      - haswell 3y ago
        Makes more sense and thanks for clarifying.
- fullspectrumdev 3y ago
  Pretty much everyone I have spoken to about the thing has been like “that’s fucking creepy”. A few have hoped you can display something else on it - like cat eyes or something to make it less fucking weird.
  - ricardobeat 3y ago
    Face filters in video were considered extremely creepy 3 years ago.
- acomjean 3y ago
  When google glass came out, there was the question of if you want to talk to someone who has a camera running at all times, (recording?). Its weird how perspective shifts. Of course in some places if its recording all the time it might be in some weird wire taping situation.
  - omegaworks 3y ago
    Google is also in the market of using every bit of data it can possibly record of you to show you ads.
    - smoldesu 3y ago
      It's a shame I don't trust Apple not to do the same anymore. If the advertisement creep into MacOS is any indication, the Vision Pro might have more pop-ups than the Quest.
  - JohnFen 3y ago
    > Its weird how perspective shifts. It's not clear that it has shifted yet. It wasn't clear that Google Glass would be rejected until people started wearing them publicly.
saurik 3y ago
Huh. To me it massively decreases the "creepy factor", as the idea that someone is watching me when I can't see their eyes looking at me is where the creepiness originates... the only thing we normally interact with where that happens with people are mirrored sunglasses, and those are themselves often associated with cops and (if you even consider this a separate category ;P) creeps.
- deanCommie 3y ago
  At least you KNOW they're not interacting with you. With the exterior glass projection you THINK you're making eye contact with them, while both of you are looking at screens through cameras. dystopian!
  - haswell 3y ago
    This scenario seems functionally similar to a FaceTime call or other form of video communication. Both parties know they’re not literally gazing into each other’s eyes, but the technical medium creates a pretty decent long distance approximation of doing just that. A video call will never replace the real thing, but I don’t think I’d say it’s dystopian. And I don’t find the tech in this headset all that different, the exception being that there isn’t a 2nd set of cameras and screens on the non-headset side of the conversation. On the other hand, maybe it is dystopian, but if so, I’d argue that dystopia is already here and has been for awhile.
    - JohnFen 3y ago
      > This scenario seems functionally similar to a FaceTime call or other form of video communication. But in a video call, the "distance" the video causes is something that you put up with in exchange for a greater benefit. If I'm talking with someone that has a screen in front of their face showing me their face, that's distance that provides no benefit, so it's a loss without gain. It makes the person seem sketchy.
    - deanCommie 3y ago
      I don't know what kind of Facetime calls you're having but 99% of the time I'm looking at someone's face, but we're not making eye contact. The video is almost never exactly where the camera is, and if the person is using an external camera or a secondary monitor, the eyeline will never line up. It's fine! But you never have the illusion that you're talking to the person directly. Which may be is good enough for adults working on professional projects. But it's not good enough for a parent interacting with a young child.