6 ms·

> The promise of VR is to unlock a world free of the constraints of physics. Where physical distance prevents certain styles of communication and interaction -

> The promise of VR is to unlock a world free of the constraints of physics. Where physical distance prevents certain styles of communication and interaction - where physical real estate is finite and therefore rivalrous, etc. There are many things that VR, in principle, could solve... See. You just did the exact same thing that Op is talking about. You didn't describe a single actual use case. You just talked about unlocking things or solving problems. You didn't describe any actual problems or any actual things. op's point is that enabling technologies are useless without problems that require the enablement to be solved. And no one is actually demonstrating that any of those exist.

kasey_junk 3y ago
If a set of vr hardware can make it so I can work as ergonomically from my patio as from my desk I will throw money at it.
- varelse 3y ago
  [dead]
- coffeebeqn 3y ago
  Doesn’t strapping on a VR helmet kind of counteract the fun of being outside? Might as well just load up a nice outdoor scene as your background environment
  - pohl 3y ago
    One wouldn’t even need to go outside to want it. This could be the ultimate standing desk — one that you can bring with you to the kitchen or to the basket of laundry.
    - ethbr0 3y ago
      Why would you want to bring your desk into the kitchen or to the basket of laundry? Not being flippant -- I really think that's the big question. Current AR/VR (Vision Pro included) lets us do desk things at not-desk places, but why would I want to do that?
      - pohl 3y ago
        Only you can say why you would, so I can't help you there. But, for me, for example: to GSD around the house while one needs to be in a Zoom, so that menial chores aren't waiting for me when I'm off work. Even Airpods let me do that somewhat now, but at the expense of missing slides or what's being shared on someone's desktop.
  - HDThoreaun 3y ago
    I enjoy the breeze and sun. Plus the smell of my garden
  - tptacek 3y ago
    No, a desktop background doesn't come within 100 miles of being physically on your patio when it's nice out (or when it's terrible out; either way, it's not the same experience).
curiousllama 3y ago
Watch movies, play tabletop games, exercise, play existing video games, visualize interior design, attend a virtual concert, etc etc All of those are use cases, and obvious ones. Your argument is “none of these seem compelling to me” (you’re not pulling) which is fine, but don’t ignore the comment’s point that they could soon be compelling to you (which is why they’re being pushed). This is especially true for network effect based use cases like Oculus is shooting for - even Facebook was useless until “everybody” was on it
- adverbly 3y ago
  > Watch movies, play tabletop games, exercise, play existing video games, visualize interior design, attend a virtual concert, etc etc Literally all of those are possible with your cell phone at slightly lower fidelity. We're not talking about zero to one applications here. Cell phone fundamentally unlocked new applications via mobile connected GPS, computer, camera, screen, accelerometer, internet. Fidelity is not worth as much as people think to as many people as they think. 3D TVs were a flop. People still play and watch low res cell shaded games and movies.
  - curiousllama 3y ago
    Yea I mean the point is that all of those already existed in other (worse) forms or were added later Fwiw, I’m a VR bear overall, but the idea that it’s somehow “not new” feels wild to me, like saying ChatGPT isn’t new because we’ve had chatbots for ages. Like, yea man but the preexisting stuff sucked lmao
    - pr0zac 3y ago
      The difference is ChatGPT is objectively better in every possible measure compared to what was available in the past with zero downsides to using it instead of old stuff. It’s also a lot better. VR so far only offers experiences that are moderately better in some ways (bigger screen, more immersive experience) while being objectively worse in others (heavy sweaty headset, lower resolution, nausea/headaches, high cost or be locked into a FB run ecosystem). It won’t explode the way LLMs and other AI has lately until it solves the negative factors it has. I say this as someone who uses VR regularly and figured most of this out from feedback from my normie friends and family.
EnragedParrot 3y ago
iPhones didn't solve any "problems", but they unquestionably ushered in a new era in smartphone user interfaces. The public wasn't clamoring for a touchscreen phone, Apple just made one up and told everyone it was the best thing ever. And it was. The touchscreen is, for nearly 99% of uses, just better. In the same vein, you'd have to be pretty bereft of imagination to not see how AR/VR promises an incredibly useful and exciting approach to interfaces. Instead of staring down at a tiny device or simply wracking your brain in desperation any time you need information about something in the world around you (driving/walking direction, business hours, the history of a sculpture in an art gallery, the name of an acquaintance approaching you down the sidewalk, etc.), imagine that the information is just... there. In the environment with you. That is incredibly useful, and is an incredible way to interact with information. Imagine cooking along to a recipe laid out on the countertop in front of you, with generative AI guiding you through different techniques (or even helping you change a tire on a busy roadside). Instead of needing bunches of different tiny screens for bunches of different use cases (I wake up and sit at my medium work screen, sometimes scroll my tiny screen, go home and sit on the couch and watch my large screen, maybe over the weekend I'll catch a movie on the extra large screen), you just need a single device that produces exactly the screen and environment you want. That's the promise of VR. I could be on a cramped flight watching a movie on an Imax screen or writing code with 3 separate monitors in front of me. We could go on and on and on just imagining excited scenarios where AR/VR would provide an incredible way to interact with tech. It all just hinges on how well it can be done. Apple has now laid out the requirements needed for a truly satisfying UX with these devices, so the next step will be to see if the industry can make devices small enough, powerful enough, with enough battery life, etc. to make these viable for the average consumer. If that happens, I predict that in 10 years flat-screen based (TVs, smartphones, desktop PCs, laptops) devices will all but disappear.
- lumb63 3y ago
  I see the vision you’ve laid out. The idea of “the information is just… there” sounds useful to me, too. Maybe it’s even the next step in computing. The hurdle to overcome in my opinion is the form factor. Everyone walking around wearing ski goggles is a deal breaker to me. Glasses, maybe; or even better, contacts. Right now that size technology is more sci-fi than reality, and I suspect it will be a very long time before we reach that (if we ever do). It’s also important to keep in mind that information availability isn’t the end goal. The purpose of having more information is to improve other aspects of our lives so we can reach our goals more effectively. We want big data so we can optimize for outcomes of our choosing. We want to understand the natural world so we can use it for our benefit. Connectedness to information does not benefit us if it comes at the cost of having face-to-face interactions with each other, IMO. A lot of people think in-person conversation has gotten worse since the advent of smartphones because they steal peoples’ attentions. Imagine the extent of that dynamic when everyone is always-connected and it is impossible to discern who is paying attention.
red-iron-pine 3y ago
Alright well then I'll bite. I'm in operational technology and deal with a lot of on-site tech, such as SCADA, factories, even stuff on trains or planes. We have 3D lidar mapped files of factories that are scaled in such a way that users can throw on VR and "walk" through the facility and figure things out. It's not completely mature but it's pretty good, and there have been talks about putting a camera on a scooter and letting engineers remotely drive though the place in real-time -- not just the static files. What do you do with it? erognomics engineering, looking at flows of goods, processes, etc.
- tuatoru 3y ago
  Telepresence devices have been a thing for years. No VR or AR needed. Still waiting for a Visicalc for AR.
  - RestlessMind 3y ago
    I am sure I read similar comments around 2008 - "We have phones with internet connectivity, phones with touchscreens and phones with apps. No iPhone needed". And yet, here we are. iPhone truly revolutionized phone market and was the first real smartphone.
    - ajdude 3y ago
      Enjoy a couple very similar HN discussions about the iPhone from 2007: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19185 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19185 Why I Don't Think The iPhone Will Sell Very Well (mattmaroon.com) 8 points by mattmaroon on May 4, 2007 | 11 comments https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16394 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16394 Why iPhone Will Win (kedrosky.com) 15 points by far33d on April 24, 2007 | 7 comments
- adverbly 3y ago
  Ding ding! You didn't mention it, but same thing is true for remote surgery applicatons. Telepresence for subject matter experts is a fundamentally new application that is unlocked by AR/VR tech. To nitpick, its more of an industry application rather than a consumer one(apple/meta releasing consumer-targeted products because the market is bigger) - but you're right that it's a good use case. Particularly in time-sensitive cases where industry would have to wait days to fly someone out when they need help immediately. To be fair though... a cell phone video call can already get you maybe half of the way there I'd say(where VR still might only get you to 80% given you cant smell/touch).
Jeff_Brown 3y ago
The use case I want is showing me someone's name and s few notes I wrote previously about them. I'd be so much more comfortable at parties. Creepier, too.
chaostheory 3y ago
Ok, working out is really boring for me. I also don’t have the time to participate in team sports. What AR VR brings me is a fun way to do cardio exercise. Instead of just using a boring cycle or treadmill, I get to box someone in a ring, fight monsters, or dodge bullets and arrows To date, I’ve lost 10-15 lbs Edit: here’s another use case I hate when schemas and architecture diagrams go way beyond the screen. Even 30 - 50” isn’t enough. Why can’t it fill a room or even go beyond a room instead? I’ve used a diagraming tool called noda.io that demonstrates whats possible where I can have a 3D viseo like diagram fill a stadium

kasey_junk 3y ago

If a set of vr hardware can make it so I can work as ergonomically from my patio as from my desk I will throw money at it.

varelse 3y ago
[dead]
coffeebeqn 3y ago
Doesn’t strapping on a VR helmet kind of counteract the fun of being outside? Might as well just load up a nice outdoor scene as your background environment
- pohl 3y ago
  One wouldn’t even need to go outside to want it. This could be the ultimate standing desk — one that you can bring with you to the kitchen or to the basket of laundry.
  - ethbr0 3y ago
    Why would you want to bring your desk into the kitchen or to the basket of laundry? Not being flippant -- I really think that's the big question. Current AR/VR (Vision Pro included) lets us do desk things at not-desk places, but why would I want to do that?
    - pohl 3y ago
      Only you can say why you would, so I can't help you there. But, for me, for example: to GSD around the house while one needs to be in a Zoom, so that menial chores aren't waiting for me when I'm off work. Even Airpods let me do that somewhat now, but at the expense of missing slides or what's being shared on someone's desktop.
- HDThoreaun 3y ago
  I enjoy the breeze and sun. Plus the smell of my garden
- tptacek 3y ago
  No, a desktop background doesn't come within 100 miles of being physically on your patio when it's nice out (or when it's terrible out; either way, it's not the same experience).

curiousllama 3y ago

Watch movies, play tabletop games, exercise, play existing video games, visualize interior design, attend a virtual concert, etc etc All of those are use cases, and obvious ones. Your argument is “none of these seem compelling to me” (you’re not pulling) which is fine, but don’t ignore the comment’s point that they could soon be compelling to you (which is why they’re being pushed). This is especially true for network effect based use cases like Oculus is shooting for - even Facebook was useless until “everybody” was on it

adverbly 3y ago
> Watch movies, play tabletop games, exercise, play existing video games, visualize interior design, attend a virtual concert, etc etc Literally all of those are possible with your cell phone at slightly lower fidelity. We're not talking about zero to one applications here. Cell phone fundamentally unlocked new applications via mobile connected GPS, computer, camera, screen, accelerometer, internet. Fidelity is not worth as much as people think to as many people as they think. 3D TVs were a flop. People still play and watch low res cell shaded games and movies.
- curiousllama 3y ago
  Yea I mean the point is that all of those already existed in other (worse) forms or were added later Fwiw, I’m a VR bear overall, but the idea that it’s somehow “not new” feels wild to me, like saying ChatGPT isn’t new because we’ve had chatbots for ages. Like, yea man but the preexisting stuff sucked lmao
  - pr0zac 3y ago
    The difference is ChatGPT is objectively better in every possible measure compared to what was available in the past with zero downsides to using it instead of old stuff. It’s also a lot better. VR so far only offers experiences that are moderately better in some ways (bigger screen, more immersive experience) while being objectively worse in others (heavy sweaty headset, lower resolution, nausea/headaches, high cost or be locked into a FB run ecosystem). It won’t explode the way LLMs and other AI has lately until it solves the negative factors it has. I say this as someone who uses VR regularly and figured most of this out from feedback from my normie friends and family.

EnragedParrot 3y ago

iPhones didn't solve any "problems", but they unquestionably ushered in a new era in smartphone user interfaces. The public wasn't clamoring for a touchscreen phone, Apple just made one up and told everyone it was the best thing ever. And it was. The touchscreen is, for nearly 99% of uses, just better. In the same vein, you'd have to be pretty bereft of imagination to not see how AR/VR promises an incredibly useful and exciting approach to interfaces. Instead of staring down at a tiny device or simply wracking your brain in desperation any time you need information about something in the world around you (driving/walking direction, business hours, the history of a sculpture in an art gallery, the name of an acquaintance approaching you down the sidewalk, etc.), imagine that the information is just... there. In the environment with you. That is incredibly useful, and is an incredible way to interact with information. Imagine cooking along to a recipe laid out on the countertop in front of you, with generative AI guiding you through different techniques (or even helping you change a tire on a busy roadside). Instead of needing bunches of different tiny screens for bunches of different use cases (I wake up and sit at my medium work screen, sometimes scroll my tiny screen, go home and sit on the couch and watch my large screen, maybe over the weekend I'll catch a movie on the extra large screen), you just need a single device that produces exactly the screen and environment you want. That's the promise of VR. I could be on a cramped flight watching a movie on an Imax screen or writing code with 3 separate monitors in front of me. We could go on and on and on just imagining excited scenarios where AR/VR would provide an incredible way to interact with tech. It all just hinges on how well it can be done. Apple has now laid out the requirements needed for a truly satisfying UX with these devices, so the next step will be to see if the industry can make devices small enough, powerful enough, with enough battery life, etc. to make these viable for the average consumer. If that happens, I predict that in 10 years flat-screen based (TVs, smartphones, desktop PCs, laptops) devices will all but disappear.

lumb63 3y ago
I see the vision you’ve laid out. The idea of “the information is just… there” sounds useful to me, too. Maybe it’s even the next step in computing. The hurdle to overcome in my opinion is the form factor. Everyone walking around wearing ski goggles is a deal breaker to me. Glasses, maybe; or even better, contacts. Right now that size technology is more sci-fi than reality, and I suspect it will be a very long time before we reach that (if we ever do). It’s also important to keep in mind that information availability isn’t the end goal. The purpose of having more information is to improve other aspects of our lives so we can reach our goals more effectively. We want big data so we can optimize for outcomes of our choosing. We want to understand the natural world so we can use it for our benefit. Connectedness to information does not benefit us if it comes at the cost of having face-to-face interactions with each other, IMO. A lot of people think in-person conversation has gotten worse since the advent of smartphones because they steal peoples’ attentions. Imagine the extent of that dynamic when everyone is always-connected and it is impossible to discern who is paying attention.

red-iron-pine 3y ago

Alright well then I'll bite. I'm in operational technology and deal with a lot of on-site tech, such as SCADA, factories, even stuff on trains or planes. We have 3D lidar mapped files of factories that are scaled in such a way that users can throw on VR and "walk" through the facility and figure things out. It's not completely mature but it's pretty good, and there have been talks about putting a camera on a scooter and letting engineers remotely drive though the place in real-time -- not just the static files. What do you do with it? erognomics engineering, looking at flows of goods, processes, etc.

tuatoru 3y ago
Telepresence devices have been a thing for years. No VR or AR needed. Still waiting for a Visicalc for AR.
- RestlessMind 3y ago
  I am sure I read similar comments around 2008 - "We have phones with internet connectivity, phones with touchscreens and phones with apps. No iPhone needed". And yet, here we are. iPhone truly revolutionized phone market and was the first real smartphone.
  - ajdude 3y ago
    Enjoy a couple very similar HN discussions about the iPhone from 2007: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19185 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19185 Why I Don't Think The iPhone Will Sell Very Well (mattmaroon.com) 8 points by mattmaroon on May 4, 2007 | 11 comments https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16394 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16394 Why iPhone Will Win (kedrosky.com) 15 points by far33d on April 24, 2007 | 7 comments
adverbly 3y ago
Ding ding! You didn't mention it, but same thing is true for remote surgery applicatons. Telepresence for subject matter experts is a fundamentally new application that is unlocked by AR/VR tech. To nitpick, its more of an industry application rather than a consumer one(apple/meta releasing consumer-targeted products because the market is bigger) - but you're right that it's a good use case. Particularly in time-sensitive cases where industry would have to wait days to fly someone out when they need help immediately. To be fair though... a cell phone video call can already get you maybe half of the way there I'd say(where VR still might only get you to 80% given you cant smell/touch).

Jeff_Brown 3y ago

The use case I want is showing me someone's name and s few notes I wrote previously about them. I'd be so much more comfortable at parties. Creepier, too.

chaostheory 3y ago

Ok, working out is really boring for me. I also don’t have the time to participate in team sports. What AR VR brings me is a fun way to do cardio exercise. Instead of just using a boring cycle or treadmill, I get to box someone in a ring, fight monsters, or dodge bullets and arrows To date, I’ve lost 10-15 lbs Edit: here’s another use case I hate when schemas and architecture diagrams go way beyond the screen. Even 30 - 50” isn’t enough. Why can’t it fill a room or even go beyond a room instead? I’ve used a diagraming tool called noda.io that demonstrates whats possible where I can have a 3D viseo like diagram fill a stadium