4 ms·

Well sure. It's 10x the price of a Quest 2 and has a good spec bump for it, but is that a conceptual leap? It feels like it's just focusing on the high end of

by jayd16 3y ago

Well sure. It's 10x the price of a Quest 2 and has a good spec bump for it, but is that a conceptual leap? It feels like it's just focusing on the high end of the market. Is it even a moat? Won't Meta have a similar device in a few years?

mjamesaustin 3y ago
What Apple gets right are all the tiny details that make it feel like an AR pass-through device. Aside from the impressive spec differences that are required for usability, these are the things they focused on that really matter to me from a user perspective: 1. No noticeable lag due to very high refresh rate 2. The viewpoint and perspective of the cameras mimics your actual view almost exactly 3. AR-first, and user-friendly VR shows other people when they approach you 4. Quick, accurate eye tracking and comfortable gesture controls
- bliteben 3y ago
  Also hiding the cord for like 99% of the marketing
- dnissley 3y ago
  1, 2, and 4 are basically speculation at this point, no?
  - crooked-v 3y ago
    We don't have hard numbers for them, but we do have everyone who tried the demo units being basically unanimous on those points, including people already familiar with existing VR devices.
- poisonarena 3y ago
  >What Apple gets right they haven't released anything yet
MBCook 3y ago
But in a few years Apple will have new devices too. They’ll be cheaper for the “low end” due to better economies of scale and not using brand new cutting edge tech like the screens are today. The high end will be even better. And they’ll have a few years more experience and refinement. By then Meta’s similar device may not be enough, or even if the hardware is up there the lack of experience on high-end AR may end up showing.
- eastbound 3y ago
  This is speculation, Apple doesn’t generally produce cheaper-for-the-low-end, they wait for inflation and expectations to climb and make their high-end products “normal”.

by jayd16 3y ago

mjamesaustin 3y ago

What Apple gets right are all the tiny details that make it feel like an AR pass-through device. Aside from the impressive spec differences that are required for usability, these are the things they focused on that really matter to me from a user perspective: 1. No noticeable lag due to very high refresh rate 2. The viewpoint and perspective of the cameras mimics your actual view almost exactly 3. AR-first, and user-friendly VR shows other people when they approach you 4. Quick, accurate eye tracking and comfortable gesture controls

bliteben 3y ago
Also hiding the cord for like 99% of the marketing
dnissley 3y ago
1, 2, and 4 are basically speculation at this point, no?
- crooked-v 3y ago
  We don't have hard numbers for them, but we do have everyone who tried the demo units being basically unanimous on those points, including people already familiar with existing VR devices.
poisonarena 3y ago
>What Apple gets right they haven't released anything yet

MBCook 3y ago

But in a few years Apple will have new devices too. They’ll be cheaper for the “low end” due to better economies of scale and not using brand new cutting edge tech like the screens are today. The high end will be even better. And they’ll have a few years more experience and refinement. By then Meta’s similar device may not be enough, or even if the hardware is up there the lack of experience on high-end AR may end up showing.

eastbound 3y ago
This is speculation, Apple doesn’t generally produce cheaper-for-the-low-end, they wait for inflation and expectations to climb and make their high-end products “normal”.