3 ms·

With the direction they're taking all of the "Continuity" stuff, I suspect the line won't really matter in the future. You'll work near to your laptop. Program

With the direction they're taking all of the "Continuity" stuff, I suspect the line won't really matter in the future. You'll work near to your laptop. Programs will run directly on the laptop, but the windows (not the entire desktop) will stream to the headset. Vision Pro will manage "the space" and your laptop/desktop will run the heavy lifting.

eddieroger 3y ago
Yeah, that's the answer I expected, too, particularly based on Apple's video of the MacBook going black and the desktop moving to the headset. They already have the ability to broadcast a display (not even the primary) to an iPad or AppleTV, so surely the Vision Pro can receive that broadcast as well, and now you've got 1-or-many desktop windows in addition to whatever native apps exist.
phire 3y ago
But why not just do it on device? The CPU in Vision Pro is more than powerful enough for most tasks; It's the exact same CPU that Apple are shipping in many of their laptops. With the continuity workflow, I'll always need bring both my headset and my laptop with me if I might want to do anything beyond what the headset can do by itself. I'm also concerned about the additional latency that continuity will probably introduce. Yes, continuity is a useful feature for when I'm doing stuff that does actually need the extra processing power of a proper workstation, but it shouldn't be the only solution. (The cynical part of me is pretty sure it know the answer. Apple wants a locked down ecosystem just like they have on the ipad and iphone)
- SkyPuncher 3y ago
  Vision Pro is powerful enough for "phone" or "tablet" type tasks, but I don't think it's powerful enough for actual work. Development, Design, Video Editing, etc, etc still require additional capacity than what the Vision Pro is offering.
  - RandallBrown 3y ago
    The Vision Pro has the same processor as my MacBook Pro. It will be able to handle most of that stuff just fine as long as the apps are built for the interface.
    - SkyPuncher 3y ago
      The M2 is a lineup of chips with a range of specs (much like i3, i5, i7, i9 lineups). The M2 that powers the iPad is 1/3 the performance of the M2 in my MBP. I suspect the Vision Pro's M2 will be somewhere in the middle to manage heat and battery life. While the Vision Pro M2 can technically "run it", it will still run faster on a dedicated external machine that can handle the heat and power better. Add in the need to render a very large virtual space and you end up with a lot of capacity being used by default. That's likely fine for "iPad like tasks" (web-browsing, email, messaging), but it seems insufficient for anything requiring processing or memory.
      - phire 3y ago
        I'm not sure where you are getting your 1/3 numbers from as the M2 in the iPad scores pretty close in benchmarks to the M2 in the 13" macbook pro. [1] vs [2]. It's not a family. It's the exact same physical chip. You can also check Apple's technical specs too. They are both listed as "8-core CPU with four performance cores and four efficiency cores". The only real difference between the ipad, macbook air and 13" macbook pro is the cooling solution. The ipad is fanless and the macbook pro has a fan. If you had a longer-running benchmark, or a sustained workload you would see a larger difference, but not that large. [1] https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/1591299 https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/1591299 [2] https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/1594101 https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/1594101
  - spacedcowboy 3y ago
    It has an M2, dude. It's plenty powerful for "actual work".
    - 3y ago

eddieroger 3y ago

Yeah, that's the answer I expected, too, particularly based on Apple's video of the MacBook going black and the desktop moving to the headset. They already have the ability to broadcast a display (not even the primary) to an iPad or AppleTV, so surely the Vision Pro can receive that broadcast as well, and now you've got 1-or-many desktop windows in addition to whatever native apps exist.

phire 3y ago

But why not just do it on device? The CPU in Vision Pro is more than powerful enough for most tasks; It's the exact same CPU that Apple are shipping in many of their laptops. With the continuity workflow, I'll always need bring both my headset and my laptop with me if I might want to do anything beyond what the headset can do by itself. I'm also concerned about the additional latency that continuity will probably introduce. Yes, continuity is a useful feature for when I'm doing stuff that does actually need the extra processing power of a proper workstation, but it shouldn't be the only solution. (The cynical part of me is pretty sure it know the answer. Apple wants a locked down ecosystem just like they have on the ipad and iphone)

SkyPuncher 3y ago
Vision Pro is powerful enough for "phone" or "tablet" type tasks, but I don't think it's powerful enough for actual work. Development, Design, Video Editing, etc, etc still require additional capacity than what the Vision Pro is offering.
- RandallBrown 3y ago
  The Vision Pro has the same processor as my MacBook Pro. It will be able to handle most of that stuff just fine as long as the apps are built for the interface.
  - SkyPuncher 3y ago
    The M2 is a lineup of chips with a range of specs (much like i3, i5, i7, i9 lineups). The M2 that powers the iPad is 1/3 the performance of the M2 in my MBP. I suspect the Vision Pro's M2 will be somewhere in the middle to manage heat and battery life. While the Vision Pro M2 can technically "run it", it will still run faster on a dedicated external machine that can handle the heat and power better. Add in the need to render a very large virtual space and you end up with a lot of capacity being used by default. That's likely fine for "iPad like tasks" (web-browsing, email, messaging), but it seems insufficient for anything requiring processing or memory.
    - phire 3y ago
      I'm not sure where you are getting your 1/3 numbers from as the M2 in the iPad scores pretty close in benchmarks to the M2 in the 13" macbook pro. [1] vs [2]. It's not a family. It's the exact same physical chip. You can also check Apple's technical specs too. They are both listed as "8-core CPU with four performance cores and four efficiency cores". The only real difference between the ipad, macbook air and 13" macbook pro is the cooling solution. The ipad is fanless and the macbook pro has a fan. If you had a longer-running benchmark, or a sustained workload you would see a larger difference, but not that large. [1] https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/1591299 https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/1591299 [2] https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/1594101 https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/1594101
- spacedcowboy 3y ago
  It has an M2, dude. It's plenty powerful for "actual work".
  - 3y ago