7 ms·

Karl Guttag on Apple Vision Pro (Part 1)

85 points by baggy_trough 3y ago

nojvek 3y ago
Analysis of Apple Vision Pro (AVP) and Meta Quest Pro (MQP) Introduction: Lack of technical analysis and understanding of VR/AR issues in AVP reviews. Neglecting issues of variable focusing and Vengeance Accommodation Conflict (VAC). Meta to present a paper on VR headset with retinal resolution varifocal display. Apple and Meta's inability to solve inherent human visual system limitations. Advantages of AVP over MQP: MQP considered poorly executed and a bridge to nowhere. MQP's passthrough mode criticized for low resolution and distortion. AVP has higher-resolution cameras, more depth-sensing cameras/sensors, and improved processing for passthrough. AVP's Micro-OLED provides better black levels/contrast than MQP's LCD with mini-LED local dimming. AVP's micro-lens array enhances light collection efficiency. Price Perspective: Comments on AVP's price being too high lack historical perspective. Apple and Meta need to prove the viability of a highly useful MR passthrough headset. AVP's price is subject to reduction with increased volume. Resolution for "Business Applications": MQP has lower pixel density, resulting in less readable text and slower reading speed. AVP's higher pixel count provides around 40 pixels per degree (ppd) for improved text readability. Long-term use of virtual desktops lacks evidence of being good for humans. Passthrough Capabilities: MQP's passthrough mode criticized for its poor execution. AVP's passthrough, although not perfect, is significantly better than MQP's. The accuracy of AVP's 3D views of the real world is unknown. AVP Micro-OLED vs. MQP's LCD with Mini-LED Local Dimming: AVP's Micro-OLED offers better black levels and contrast. MQP's local dimming feature has limitations and issues. Apple's Micro-OLED CMOS backplane is assembled by Sony, known for Micro-OLED expertise. Pancake (MQP) versus Aspherical Refractive Optics (AVP): AVP incorporates custom catadioptric lenses for sharpness and clarity. Apple's acquisition of Limbak, an optics design company, suggests the use of pancake or similar optics. MQP uses 3-element aspherical optics. Pancake optics are less efficient with Micro-OLED displays, requiring higher OLED power output. Conclusion: AVP reviews lack technical analysis and overlook critical issues. AVP offers advantages over MQP in passthrough, resolution, and display technology. The price of AVP needs to be viewed in the context of technological advancement. AVP's Micro-OLED and catadioptric lenses contribute to improved performance. Long-term suitability of AVP for business applications and human visual comfort remains uncertain.
cma 3y ago
> Pancake (MQP) versus Asperical Refractive Optics (AVP) Guttag's section about the lenses not being pancake and being refractive only I think is wrong, Apple says: "combined with custom catadioptric lenses," which implies reflection is is used like with pancake. (source: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2023/06/introducing-apple-vision-pro/ https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2023/06/introducing-apple-vis... ) > It should be noted that the AVP displays about 3.3 times the pixels, has more and higher resolution cameras, and supports much higher resolution passthrough. Thus the AVP is moving massively more data which also consumes power. An earlier Sony presentation on their 4K microdisplays from last year I believe showed they had some form of foveated scan out on the microdisplay itself, letting the display controller move less data. (source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVUSUdzsNgY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVUSUdzsNgY ) >Apple discussed (linked in WWDC 2023 video) how they implemented features in watchOS to encourage people to go outside and stop looking at screens, as it may be a cause of myopia. I’m not the only one to catch this seeming contradiction in messaging. Isn't this less of an issue with displays at a farther distance (whether physically or optically)? > I was doubtful based on what was rumored that Apple would address VAC. Like many others, Apple appears to have ignored the well-known and well-documented human mechanical and visual problem with VR/MR. There is less vergence accommodation conflict as you age. You slowly lose elasticity of your natural lens as you age and need reading glasses to see up close and the effect isn't as big: you're at a wrong farther focus when your eyes are converging anyway. It might actually be an improvement in vision for people over 45-50.
- buildbot 3y ago
  Catadioptric does mean exactly that - a combination of mirrors and lenses. In photography, catadioptric lenses are used to make very compact for the focal length telephoto lenses - for example, a 500 mm catadioptric lens with two mirrors and several elements weights nearly an order of magnitude less than a 500mm refractive only design. I thought it was very interesting and unique, I have no idea what the optical design could look like. Maybe something like the perkins-elmer solid cat design, shrunk down for a long focal length but compact pancake lens.
- kguttag 3y ago
  Good catch on the "combined with custom catadioptric lenses." Which by definition means a combination of mirrors and refractive optics. But I still don't think they are pancake lenses, but something more akin to what Limbak, which was recently bought by Apple was famous for designing catadioptric optics. Before being bought by Apple, Limbak was best known for their catadioptric design used by Lynx.
AndrewKemendo 3y ago
I appreciate Karl as the technical Bulldog for AR, doing really good technical analysis for the field. Even as someone steeped in this space, the fact of the 3-element AVP was news to me. That is a pretty big difference from other designs and tells me they are reaching for anything they can to squeeze optimizations out. AR is really really hard.
- MuffinFlavored 3y ago
  What are the current use cases for AR?
  - Daneel_ 3y ago
    One of the best I’ve seen is for manufacturing and inspection. Eg, it highlights the next set of holes to place bolts into, then gives tightening order, etc. It eliminates the need to think about each step.
    - Kon-Peki 3y ago
      If you're eliminating thinking, you might as well use a robot. I don't know about the ideal use cases, but it certainly appears that the SDK and dev environment are going to be the best and most accessible. So if a great use case does appear, it will probably be on the AVP.
      - jwagenet 3y ago
        You can use a robot for screws, but things like wiring can be difficult or impossible for a robot. Not to mention for low volume, setting up robotics isn’t worth it.
  - jwagenet 3y ago
    I think one of the better potential use cases for AR is for manufacturing work instructions. Typically, these are in binders or displayed on screens, but highlighting assembly steps, part orientations/locations, etc virtually would be especially nice for training or infrequent operations which don’t happen at a seated workstation. I believe Glass and some other products were exploring this space, but it could be that it’s a lot of work to set up.
mellosouls 3y ago
Excellent article, I look forward to the updates. As a Meta Quest 2 owner, and Android user, I'm a bit of an Apple-skeptic when it comes to their pricing on some products; but I have to acknowledge that while the Vision Pro seems mad-expensive on first reveal, it doesn't seem to be poor value going by the previews and specs, which seems to match the article's conclusions. That is where the Quest Pro seems to have failed - at least at its initial pricing it was very difficult to see the added value matching the price premium. Apple - at several times the price of the Quest Pro here - has me rooting for it as a considerably more serious product at a relatively-justified serious price in what is an uncertain undertaking.
- ChuckNorris89 3y ago
  Yes, the Apple headset is miles more advanced, but to me, the massive selling point of the Quest 2 was also how easy to sideload stuff was. The Side Quest store is full of amazing apps and ports, like Doom 3 for example, that for reasons don't meet the Quest Store approval criteria or because the devs don't want to pay the 30% fee to Meta. I doubt we'll see such freedom on the Apple headset as it looks more of a "VR iPad" than a "VR iMac". If I know Apple well, sideloading apps will be a huge no-no and you'll only be able to run what Apple approves on it, so those hoping for immersive VR porn or other wild fantasies, might be left hanging.
  - oh_sigh 3y ago
    Apple is being forced by the EU DMA law to allow support for alternate app stores by 2024 - I imagine the same would hold true for the vision pro. I guess it depends if VR goggles are viewed as an entirely separate category of product, or if they are essentially just "smart phones with a fancy display".
    - ChuckNorris89 3y ago
      >Apple is being forced by the EU DMA law to allow support for alternate app stores by 2024 As always, I'm waiting to see the final implementation before rejoicing prematurely. Appel can always intentionally maliciously screw with the implementation of this law in so many ways, in order to make sideloading an unattractive proposition for the majority, but that is still compliant with the law, like they did with the self repair program, or like the implementation of many GDPR cookie banners use dark pattern to annoy you into just giving up and accepting tracking. A law is one thing. It's the implementation that makes or breaks it. Meta left sideloading relatively open without a law having to drag them kicking and screaming into it, which is much better IMHO from a hacker perspective, as it means our vision & goals for the product usage are slightly more aligned.
satvikpendem 3y ago
Anyone else worried that Vision Pro will simply be a large iPad and not macOS like, ie closed app store and not geared towards productivity? The fact that to run VSCode you need to mirror your own Mac simply boggles the mind, it's like Apple wants to cut off the potential of the device at the knees simply to continue selling services.
- drcode 3y ago
  When Apple says "Pro", they mean you get to hang around with a couple of marketing people pointing at PowerPoint slides You thought they meant actual apps that professional people use, like VSCode?
- ohgodplsno 3y ago
  Why worry ? It's already guaranteed to be the case. Apps will not have direct access to the cameras, meaning that the Vision Pro is destined to keep being a toy fully steered by Apple. You also cannot access any depth information, or anything that would make it useful as a general 3D computing device. You can't access eye tracking, so say good bye to foveated rendering. And since you can't have foveated rendering, well you're now rendering 2x 4k images on a relatively underpowered device.
  - ladberg 3y ago
    Foveated rendering is supported by default. Most apps will rely on the OS's renderer and not their own so they don't have to do anything with eye tracking to have it enabled. EDIT: See cma's comment below which adds more info: apps that use their own render still support foveated rendering too.
    - ohgodplsno 3y ago
      Exactly. If you want to do anything without going through Apple's benediction, you're shit out of luck. It's one more episode in the war on general computing, except somehow it's okay when Apple restricts what you can do with your three thousand five hundred dollar ski goggles.
MuffinFlavored 3y ago
> In many ways, the AVP can be seen as the “Meta Quest Pro done much better.” If you are doing more of a “flagship/Pro product,” it better be a flagship. Ok. I'm fine with being told "you aren't the target audience" but... name 5 things I would do with it if I bought one. Why would I put it on my face/what would I gain from it? Gaming? Productivity? What can it do that a screen + monitor + mouse + keyboard / iPad / iPhone can not?
- ohgodplsno 3y ago
  The propaganda for the Vision Pro is somewhat similar to various crypto bullshit in the past years: "you're not seeing the vision", while it stays a mostly useless tool.
  - rched 3y ago
    I’m not sure this is a fair statement given that the thing isn’t even out yet and most haven’t used it.
- hackeraccount 3y ago
  3,500 is withing striking distance of - very nice computer + very nice monitor + very nice camera. The question in my mind is if I want the thing strapped to my face for an 8 hour work day. If so then (while still too expensive for my blood) it's not crazy; it just needs a couple of years in the oven, if not then it's not a couple of years it's a decade or more.
- liquidise 3y ago
  I only need to name 1 for myself: i travel a lot and work from a laptop often. AVP feels like an obvious choice for development if it delivers on the vision (heh). Working without a dedicated desk space, laptop stand, separate monitor, etc, laptop work just pales in productivity and comfort to my multi-monitor desk setup at home. A wearable that acts as if i have floating monitors anywhere sounds like a massive win, in a device that appears to be far more portable than actually bringing the aforementioned accoutrements with me everywhere i go.
Aerbil313 3y ago
I’ve just learned the Vergence-accommodation conflict [1]. VR/AR, from now on is a no-go for me. It never came to my mind that those headsets had such a problem. We’re talking about an accommodation distance of what, three centimeters? I’m already on my way to reverse my myopia, sorry, I can’t take an even more unhealthy visual environment [3]. Half of the world is already on its way to be myopic by 2050 according to research [2], and keep in mind this is only the effect of smartphones. You don’t exactly hold them centimeters away from your eyes. I’ll stick with my plans of buying a projector if I ever want giant screens. 1: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vergence-accommodation_conflict https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vergence-accommodation_confl... 2: https://www.aaojournal.org/article/s0161-6420(16)00025-7/fulltext https://www.aaojournal.org/article/s0161-6420(16)00025-7/ful... 3: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XPIGDSY_xBs https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XPIGDSY_xBs
- chis 3y ago
  The accomodation distance can be set to any value by the headset lens design. The problem he's discussing is that you can't change the distance depending on the content shown. Probably apple is setting the distance to 1 meter since that's where they show all their content at. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vergence-accommodation_conflict#Measure_of_VAC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vergence-accommodation_conflic...
  - Aerbil313 3y ago
    Oh thanks! I understood, but why is there written "VR headset screen" in the image in the wikipedia page? Probably a mistake, right? It confused me.
- losvedir 3y ago
  No, you misunderstand. The lenses between your eyes and the screens will give it a focal distance of something like ~2 meters. So from an eye health / focus point of view it will be like staring at a wall 2 meters away all day (which is possibly better than staring at a computer screen .5m away!). This is why nearsighted people still need some sort of accommodation in VR. The thing to realize is there's two different kinds of focusing: the first is the one everyone thinks of which is how your two eyes work together. They point together when focusing close, and spread apart when focusing far. But separately each eye also can focus individually. Try covering one eye and holding up a finger at arms' length for your other eye to focus on. Then switch to focusing on the wall with that eye, and back. You'll feel your eye muscle making the adjustment. In the real world these two kinds of focuses normally operate in sync. If you want to look far, you'll normally both point your eyes further apart and adjust the individual eye focus for distance, and when you want to look close, you'll point your eyes kind of together and adjust each eye for near focus. But in VR, your "focal distance" is fixed at the generally comfortable ~2m I mentioned. However, because it's a 3D world you can look near and far, and in that case you'll change how your eyes point but not the other kind of focus. So I'm not sure to what extent that causes problems, if any, but it's different from staring at something a few centimeters away.
WhiteNoiz3 3y ago
I agree that the price doesn't matter as much as the experience; the Hololens 2 is just as expensive but generally people wouldn't commit to the limited field of view and lack of compelling use cases. Aside from media consumption and general computing prowess, I'm not sure if Apple made a complete case for it, but we'll see what software is ready to ship with it when it launches. Possibly people will be excited enough to develop for it that Apple can reach a critical mass of interesting "things to do" on the platform.
robotburrito 3y ago
What does it mean that guys like this and SadlyItsBradley were not invited to try the Vision Pro? Interesting to note that the experts in the state of the field were not given a chance to try it.
- dagmx 3y ago
  Not much given neither are press or developers, which are basically the only two groups that are usually invited. Neither really do product reviews as their main gig either.
  - robotburrito 3y ago
    Fair enough, I did not consider this angle.
- thebigman433 3y ago
  I dont think it really means anything. Neither are major press outlets or developers, inviting them only really has a downside for Apple
- wkat4242 3y ago
  I'm sure they were not because they know too much. Apple loves keeping the "magic" on their products as long as they can. Once they are in consumers hands they can't stop teardowns and detailed comparisons but right now they won't want some wise guy ascertaining the FoV, PPD, distortion figures etc. They want their marketing to be viewed as a class of their own, without direct specs to compare to their competitors. Once you bring it down to technical fact territory, that "magic" they're going for is lost. Right now they're only showing it to their most loyal followers that are bound to go "wow" but don't pick up too many technical details.
alpark3 3y ago
Speaking in terms of eye health, does it matter if the screen is right in front of my eye if the focal length is farther? Or is it still unhealthy?
- cassianoleal 3y ago
  I won't pretend to actually know the answer but I've seen many people saying that VR can improve myopia due to the distant focal point. Assuming that's true, I imagine this would have similar effects.
- charcircuit 3y ago
  The physical distance does not matter except for the heat it produces
- wkat4242 3y ago
  No it does not matter at all. The optics focus it much further away. As far as your eyes are concerned the display isn't right in front of them. In fact if those optics weren't there you wouldn't see anything except a few coloured blobs. The amount of brightness your eyes are ingesting is also much lower than walking around on a sunny day without sunglasses. Remember our eyes work logarithmically so the outside could be tens, hundreds of times as bright.
  - The5thElephant 3y ago
    But if I understand correctly the optics can't recreate how our eyes focus on near and far things in reality. So if something is supposed to be 100 meters away it will still be physically like focusing on something 1-2 meters away due to how the optics work. That's the whole VAC issue mentioned in the article.
    - wkat4242 3y ago
      That's true. They still can't without eye tracking and physically moving lenses. I've seen a prototype in the news that could do that. But of course it's mechanically highly complex. Perhaps liquid/gel lenses could do the same job (similar to how our eyes work). I've never heard of this actually causing harm though, except some questions were raised about kids whose eyes are still developing. It would be similar to looking through a microscope or binoculars for hours, which is not unheard of in human history (e.g. researchers, lookouts on ships)

85 points by baggy_trough 3y ago

Analysis of Apple Vision Pro (AVP) and Meta Quest Pro (MQP) Introduction: Lack of technical analysis and understanding of VR/AR issues in AVP reviews. Neglecting issues of variable focusing and Vengeance Accommodation Conflict (VAC). Meta to present a paper on VR headset with retinal resolution varifocal display. Apple and Meta's inability to solve inherent human visual system limitations. Advantages of AVP over MQP: MQP considered poorly executed and a bridge to nowhere. MQP's passthrough mode criticized for low resolution and distortion. AVP has higher-resolution cameras, more depth-sensing cameras/sensors, and improved processing for passthrough. AVP's Micro-OLED provides better black levels/contrast than MQP's LCD with mini-LED local dimming. AVP's micro-lens array enhances light collection efficiency. Price Perspective: Comments on AVP's price being too high lack historical perspective. Apple and Meta need to prove the viability of a highly useful MR passthrough headset. AVP's price is subject to reduction with increased volume. Resolution for "Business Applications": MQP has lower pixel density, resulting in less readable text and slower reading speed. AVP's higher pixel count provides around 40 pixels per degree (ppd) for improved text readability. Long-term use of virtual desktops lacks evidence of being good for humans. Passthrough Capabilities: MQP's passthrough mode criticized for its poor execution. AVP's passthrough, although not perfect, is significantly better than MQP's. The accuracy of AVP's 3D views of the real world is unknown. AVP Micro-OLED vs. MQP's LCD with Mini-LED Local Dimming: AVP's Micro-OLED offers better black levels and contrast. MQP's local dimming feature has limitations and issues. Apple's Micro-OLED CMOS backplane is assembled by Sony, known for Micro-OLED expertise. Pancake (MQP) versus Aspherical Refractive Optics (AVP): AVP incorporates custom catadioptric lenses for sharpness and clarity. Apple's acquisition of Limbak, an optics design company, suggests the use of pancake or similar optics. MQP uses 3-element aspherical optics. Pancake optics are less efficient with Micro-OLED displays, requiring higher OLED power output. Conclusion: AVP reviews lack technical analysis and overlook critical issues. AVP offers advantages over MQP in passthrough, resolution, and display technology. The price of AVP needs to be viewed in the context of technological advancement. AVP's Micro-OLED and catadioptric lenses contribute to improved performance. Long-term suitability of AVP for business applications and human visual comfort remains uncertain.

cma 3y ago

> Pancake (MQP) versus Asperical Refractive Optics (AVP) Guttag's section about the lenses not being pancake and being refractive only I think is wrong, Apple says: "combined with custom catadioptric lenses," which implies reflection is is used like with pancake. (source: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2023/06/introducing-apple-vision-pro/ https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2023/06/introducing-apple-vis... ) > It should be noted that the AVP displays about 3.3 times the pixels, has more and higher resolution cameras, and supports much higher resolution passthrough. Thus the AVP is moving massively more data which also consumes power. An earlier Sony presentation on their 4K microdisplays from last year I believe showed they had some form of foveated scan out on the microdisplay itself, letting the display controller move less data. (source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVUSUdzsNgY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVUSUdzsNgY ) >Apple discussed (linked in WWDC 2023 video) how they implemented features in watchOS to encourage people to go outside and stop looking at screens, as it may be a cause of myopia. I’m not the only one to catch this seeming contradiction in messaging. Isn't this less of an issue with displays at a farther distance (whether physically or optically)? > I was doubtful based on what was rumored that Apple would address VAC. Like many others, Apple appears to have ignored the well-known and well-documented human mechanical and visual problem with VR/MR. There is less vergence accommodation conflict as you age. You slowly lose elasticity of your natural lens as you age and need reading glasses to see up close and the effect isn't as big: you're at a wrong farther focus when your eyes are converging anyway. It might actually be an improvement in vision for people over 45-50.

buildbot 3y ago
Catadioptric does mean exactly that - a combination of mirrors and lenses. In photography, catadioptric lenses are used to make very compact for the focal length telephoto lenses - for example, a 500 mm catadioptric lens with two mirrors and several elements weights nearly an order of magnitude less than a 500mm refractive only design. I thought it was very interesting and unique, I have no idea what the optical design could look like. Maybe something like the perkins-elmer solid cat design, shrunk down for a long focal length but compact pancake lens.
kguttag 3y ago
Good catch on the "combined with custom catadioptric lenses." Which by definition means a combination of mirrors and refractive optics. But I still don't think they are pancake lenses, but something more akin to what Limbak, which was recently bought by Apple was famous for designing catadioptric optics. Before being bought by Apple, Limbak was best known for their catadioptric design used by Lynx.

AndrewKemendo 3y ago

I appreciate Karl as the technical Bulldog for AR, doing really good technical analysis for the field. Even as someone steeped in this space, the fact of the 3-element AVP was news to me. That is a pretty big difference from other designs and tells me they are reaching for anything they can to squeeze optimizations out. AR is really really hard.

MuffinFlavored 3y ago
What are the current use cases for AR?
- Daneel_ 3y ago
  One of the best I’ve seen is for manufacturing and inspection. Eg, it highlights the next set of holes to place bolts into, then gives tightening order, etc. It eliminates the need to think about each step.
  - Kon-Peki 3y ago
    If you're eliminating thinking, you might as well use a robot. I don't know about the ideal use cases, but it certainly appears that the SDK and dev environment are going to be the best and most accessible. So if a great use case does appear, it will probably be on the AVP.
    - jwagenet 3y ago
      You can use a robot for screws, but things like wiring can be difficult or impossible for a robot. Not to mention for low volume, setting up robotics isn’t worth it.
- jwagenet 3y ago
  I think one of the better potential use cases for AR is for manufacturing work instructions. Typically, these are in binders or displayed on screens, but highlighting assembly steps, part orientations/locations, etc virtually would be especially nice for training or infrequent operations which don’t happen at a seated workstation. I believe Glass and some other products were exploring this space, but it could be that it’s a lot of work to set up.

mellosouls 3y ago

Excellent article, I look forward to the updates. As a Meta Quest 2 owner, and Android user, I'm a bit of an Apple-skeptic when it comes to their pricing on some products; but I have to acknowledge that while the Vision Pro seems mad-expensive on first reveal, it doesn't seem to be poor value going by the previews and specs, which seems to match the article's conclusions. That is where the Quest Pro seems to have failed - at least at its initial pricing it was very difficult to see the added value matching the price premium. Apple - at several times the price of the Quest Pro here - has me rooting for it as a considerably more serious product at a relatively-justified serious price in what is an uncertain undertaking.

ChuckNorris89 3y ago
Yes, the Apple headset is miles more advanced, but to me, the massive selling point of the Quest 2 was also how easy to sideload stuff was. The Side Quest store is full of amazing apps and ports, like Doom 3 for example, that for reasons don't meet the Quest Store approval criteria or because the devs don't want to pay the 30% fee to Meta. I doubt we'll see such freedom on the Apple headset as it looks more of a "VR iPad" than a "VR iMac". If I know Apple well, sideloading apps will be a huge no-no and you'll only be able to run what Apple approves on it, so those hoping for immersive VR porn or other wild fantasies, might be left hanging.
- oh_sigh 3y ago
  Apple is being forced by the EU DMA law to allow support for alternate app stores by 2024 - I imagine the same would hold true for the vision pro. I guess it depends if VR goggles are viewed as an entirely separate category of product, or if they are essentially just "smart phones with a fancy display".
  - ChuckNorris89 3y ago
    >Apple is being forced by the EU DMA law to allow support for alternate app stores by 2024 As always, I'm waiting to see the final implementation before rejoicing prematurely. Appel can always intentionally maliciously screw with the implementation of this law in so many ways, in order to make sideloading an unattractive proposition for the majority, but that is still compliant with the law, like they did with the self repair program, or like the implementation of many GDPR cookie banners use dark pattern to annoy you into just giving up and accepting tracking. A law is one thing. It's the implementation that makes or breaks it. Meta left sideloading relatively open without a law having to drag them kicking and screaming into it, which is much better IMHO from a hacker perspective, as it means our vision & goals for the product usage are slightly more aligned.

satvikpendem 3y ago

Anyone else worried that Vision Pro will simply be a large iPad and not macOS like, ie closed app store and not geared towards productivity? The fact that to run VSCode you need to mirror your own Mac simply boggles the mind, it's like Apple wants to cut off the potential of the device at the knees simply to continue selling services.

drcode 3y ago
When Apple says "Pro", they mean you get to hang around with a couple of marketing people pointing at PowerPoint slides You thought they meant actual apps that professional people use, like VSCode?
ohgodplsno 3y ago
Why worry ? It's already guaranteed to be the case. Apps will not have direct access to the cameras, meaning that the Vision Pro is destined to keep being a toy fully steered by Apple. You also cannot access any depth information, or anything that would make it useful as a general 3D computing device. You can't access eye tracking, so say good bye to foveated rendering. And since you can't have foveated rendering, well you're now rendering 2x 4k images on a relatively underpowered device.
- ladberg 3y ago
  Foveated rendering is supported by default. Most apps will rely on the OS's renderer and not their own so they don't have to do anything with eye tracking to have it enabled. EDIT: See cma's comment below which adds more info: apps that use their own render still support foveated rendering too.
  - ohgodplsno 3y ago
    Exactly. If you want to do anything without going through Apple's benediction, you're shit out of luck. It's one more episode in the war on general computing, except somehow it's okay when Apple restricts what you can do with your three thousand five hundred dollar ski goggles.

MuffinFlavored 3y ago

> In many ways, the AVP can be seen as the “Meta Quest Pro done much better.” If you are doing more of a “flagship/Pro product,” it better be a flagship. Ok. I'm fine with being told "you aren't the target audience" but... name 5 things I would do with it if I bought one. Why would I put it on my face/what would I gain from it? Gaming? Productivity? What can it do that a screen + monitor + mouse + keyboard / iPad / iPhone can not?

ohgodplsno 3y ago
The propaganda for the Vision Pro is somewhat similar to various crypto bullshit in the past years: "you're not seeing the vision", while it stays a mostly useless tool.
- rched 3y ago
  I’m not sure this is a fair statement given that the thing isn’t even out yet and most haven’t used it.
hackeraccount 3y ago
3,500 is withing striking distance of - very nice computer + very nice monitor + very nice camera. The question in my mind is if I want the thing strapped to my face for an 8 hour work day. If so then (while still too expensive for my blood) it's not crazy; it just needs a couple of years in the oven, if not then it's not a couple of years it's a decade or more.
liquidise 3y ago
I only need to name 1 for myself: i travel a lot and work from a laptop often. AVP feels like an obvious choice for development if it delivers on the vision (heh). Working without a dedicated desk space, laptop stand, separate monitor, etc, laptop work just pales in productivity and comfort to my multi-monitor desk setup at home. A wearable that acts as if i have floating monitors anywhere sounds like a massive win, in a device that appears to be far more portable than actually bringing the aforementioned accoutrements with me everywhere i go.

Aerbil313 3y ago

I’ve just learned the Vergence-accommodation conflict [1]. VR/AR, from now on is a no-go for me. It never came to my mind that those headsets had such a problem. We’re talking about an accommodation distance of what, three centimeters? I’m already on my way to reverse my myopia, sorry, I can’t take an even more unhealthy visual environment [3]. Half of the world is already on its way to be myopic by 2050 according to research [2], and keep in mind this is only the effect of smartphones. You don’t exactly hold them centimeters away from your eyes. I’ll stick with my plans of buying a projector if I ever want giant screens. 1: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vergence-accommodation_conflict https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vergence-accommodation_confl... 2: https://www.aaojournal.org/article/s0161-6420(16)00025-7/fulltext https://www.aaojournal.org/article/s0161-6420(16)00025-7/ful... 3: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XPIGDSY_xBs https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XPIGDSY_xBs

chis 3y ago
The accomodation distance can be set to any value by the headset lens design. The problem he's discussing is that you can't change the distance depending on the content shown. Probably apple is setting the distance to 1 meter since that's where they show all their content at. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vergence-accommodation_conflict#Measure_of_VAC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vergence-accommodation_conflic...
- Aerbil313 3y ago
  Oh thanks! I understood, but why is there written "VR headset screen" in the image in the wikipedia page? Probably a mistake, right? It confused me.
losvedir 3y ago
No, you misunderstand. The lenses between your eyes and the screens will give it a focal distance of something like ~2 meters. So from an eye health / focus point of view it will be like staring at a wall 2 meters away all day (which is possibly better than staring at a computer screen .5m away!). This is why nearsighted people still need some sort of accommodation in VR. The thing to realize is there's two different kinds of focusing: the first is the one everyone thinks of which is how your two eyes work together. They point together when focusing close, and spread apart when focusing far. But separately each eye also can focus individually. Try covering one eye and holding up a finger at arms' length for your other eye to focus on. Then switch to focusing on the wall with that eye, and back. You'll feel your eye muscle making the adjustment. In the real world these two kinds of focuses normally operate in sync. If you want to look far, you'll normally both point your eyes further apart and adjust the individual eye focus for distance, and when you want to look close, you'll point your eyes kind of together and adjust each eye for near focus. But in VR, your "focal distance" is fixed at the generally comfortable ~2m I mentioned. However, because it's a 3D world you can look near and far, and in that case you'll change how your eyes point but not the other kind of focus. So I'm not sure to what extent that causes problems, if any, but it's different from staring at something a few centimeters away.

WhiteNoiz3 3y ago

I agree that the price doesn't matter as much as the experience; the Hololens 2 is just as expensive but generally people wouldn't commit to the limited field of view and lack of compelling use cases. Aside from media consumption and general computing prowess, I'm not sure if Apple made a complete case for it, but we'll see what software is ready to ship with it when it launches. Possibly people will be excited enough to develop for it that Apple can reach a critical mass of interesting "things to do" on the platform.

robotburrito 3y ago

What does it mean that guys like this and SadlyItsBradley were not invited to try the Vision Pro? Interesting to note that the experts in the state of the field were not given a chance to try it.

dagmx 3y ago
Not much given neither are press or developers, which are basically the only two groups that are usually invited. Neither really do product reviews as their main gig either.
- robotburrito 3y ago
  Fair enough, I did not consider this angle.
thebigman433 3y ago
I dont think it really means anything. Neither are major press outlets or developers, inviting them only really has a downside for Apple
wkat4242 3y ago
I'm sure they were not because they know too much. Apple loves keeping the "magic" on their products as long as they can. Once they are in consumers hands they can't stop teardowns and detailed comparisons but right now they won't want some wise guy ascertaining the FoV, PPD, distortion figures etc. They want their marketing to be viewed as a class of their own, without direct specs to compare to their competitors. Once you bring it down to technical fact territory, that "magic" they're going for is lost. Right now they're only showing it to their most loyal followers that are bound to go "wow" but don't pick up too many technical details.

alpark3 3y ago

Speaking in terms of eye health, does it matter if the screen is right in front of my eye if the focal length is farther? Or is it still unhealthy?

cassianoleal 3y ago
I won't pretend to actually know the answer but I've seen many people saying that VR can improve myopia due to the distant focal point. Assuming that's true, I imagine this would have similar effects.
charcircuit 3y ago
The physical distance does not matter except for the heat it produces
wkat4242 3y ago
No it does not matter at all. The optics focus it much further away. As far as your eyes are concerned the display isn't right in front of them. In fact if those optics weren't there you wouldn't see anything except a few coloured blobs. The amount of brightness your eyes are ingesting is also much lower than walking around on a sunny day without sunglasses. Remember our eyes work logarithmically so the outside could be tens, hundreds of times as bright.
- The5thElephant 3y ago
  But if I understand correctly the optics can't recreate how our eyes focus on near and far things in reality. So if something is supposed to be 100 meters away it will still be physically like focusing on something 1-2 meters away due to how the optics work. That's the whole VAC issue mentioned in the article.
  - wkat4242 3y ago
    That's true. They still can't without eye tracking and physically moving lenses. I've seen a prototype in the news that could do that. But of course it's mechanically highly complex. Perhaps liquid/gel lenses could do the same job (similar to how our eyes work). I've never heard of this actually causing harm though, except some questions were raised about kids whose eyes are still developing. It would be similar to looking through a microscope or binoculars for hours, which is not unheard of in human history (e.g. researchers, lookouts on ships)