30 ms·

Apple Vision Pro review

• gift09 3y ago
  [dead]
• kplex 3y ago
  Have been waiting on Norman Chans review over at Tested, he's been a consistent and reliable reviewer of VR/AR for years now. That plus Adam Savage++
• genman 3y ago
  The question is - can you run Linux on it?
• mariuz 3y ago
  Related video : Vision Pro Review: 24 Hours With Apple’s Mixed-Reality Headset | WSJ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xI10SFgzQ8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xI10SFgzQ8
• georgewilbert 3y ago
  [flagged]
• janeyhughes9 3y ago
  [flagged]
• satvikpendem 3y ago
  As long as it's still gimped by not having a true productive OS like macOS, ie making everything go through the app store so as to not cannibalize Mac sales, it will be relegated as simply another form factor for the iPad. The iPad could've been a true Surface competitor, where I could run VSCode on it and compile applications natively, but instead it's just become a media consumption device for most people.
  • NoPedantsThanks 3y ago
    [dead]
  • Eisenstein 3y ago
    > but instead it's just become a media consumption device for most people. I don't think that is true. I think 'most people' don't need a computer for more than what an iPad can do, and that your use case is more exceptional than common. Computers as we think of them, with a somewhat permissive operating system that let's you execute whatever you want are probably going to decrease in relevance to somewhere akin to how they were in the 90s -- incredibly powerful devices useful to some people who need them for particular reasons or just like using them. Everyone else will be fine with whatever the equivalent of the smartphone/tablet OS is.
    • satvikpendem 3y ago
      Sure, but I still see most people using iPads for media while having a MacBook for "real work," which is exactly what Apple wants, to not cannibalize their own products.
      • urda 3y ago
        I'm actually not seeing that and the market numbers don't agree with ya on that. Many less "pro" consumers (not coders or the heavy engineering skew you find here on HN) in my circles have moved away from their traditional Macs as their iPads coupled with their keyboard case of choice or apple pencil (or both) do a lot of their on-the-go.
        • satvikpendem 3y ago
          In my circles of even non-tech people, everyone has a new Apple Silicon MacBook now, I rarely see people using their iPad for work.
        • ghaff 3y ago
          I've had people at work tell me their kid doesn't want a MacBook because their phone works fine for writing papers. My brain still can't process. I've never made my iPad work for me on a business trip except for something very short where I won't really be writing. I also don't draw and, while I could probably do photo editing on it well enough, I wait until I get home and use old-school Lightroom.
• spking 3y ago
  https://archive.ph/OiKhr https://archive.ph/OiKhr
• atbpaca 3y ago
  I read somewhere that the FOV is only 100-110, as opposed to full immersion as seen on their marketing material.
  • wombat-man 3y ago
    That's what I'm reading too. But reviewers still say it's good for movie viewing.
    • Someone 3y ago
      You don’t need a large FOV for movie viewing. Even if it were only 60°, you’d be able see a 2 meter wide screen at a distance of 2 meters (and that’s measuring that distance to the edges of that screen; its center would be about 15% closer)
      • wombat-man 3y ago
        Yeah that makes sense.
  • Kirby64 3y ago
    I've got an HTC Vive which is also ~110degrees. Although you do initially get the 'looking through ski goggles' feeling when you first put it on, that feeling VERY quickly goes away when you start doing anything inside. It's plenty immersive. Sure, more FoV would be nicer, but it's not like looking through a telescope or something.
    • mrguyorama 3y ago
      Right, your brain really does not give a crap about the very edge of your vision. Instead of spending thousands on way more screen and optics real estate that you will barely notice because you barely notice ANYTHING outside of your focal point, we'd probably be just fine with a couple RGB LEDs shining just colors at your periphery.
      • 3y ago
• isoprophlex 3y ago
  That... doesn't sound all that bad, to be honest. But will it run Pycharm?
  • cpdean 3y ago
    Imagining all the people getting first-degree burns on their face trying to open jetbrains applications.
    • lapetitejort 3y ago
      I don't see the problem as long as they're using dark mode
      • SushiHippie 3y ago
        They probably meant the heat the CPU generates when opening heavy programs
  • CharlesW 3y ago
    No, but remote desktop solutions will be a popular app category for AVP. The developer of Virtual Desktop has announced that he intends to support visionOS, for example.
• tunesmith 3y ago
  One of the aspects of the device that has been under-realized is that when mirroring your desktop/laptop display to the AVP, you can't break out its applications into different areas. You can't pull them away from the desktop window. This is one of those things that Apple never claimed was supported, and yet there's something about that behavior that feels like such a natural intuitive implication to the technology that a lot of people feel alarmed or even cheated when they realize it's not possible (yet). It's been funny to watch the various discussion threads as people pop up talking about their shocked realization and disappointed feelings. Update: I did realize when watching the WSJ video that the "mirrored" display actually appeared to have greater "resolution" (more pixels in height and width) than what she had on her laptop. So that's something.
  • orenlindsey 3y ago
    You can put VisionOS apps next to the Mac desktop, so it isn't as much of a problem as it seems.
  • jwells89 3y ago
    I wouldn’t be surprised if this came in a visionOS update. On a shorter timescale it could also come in the form of third party apps, because there’s no technical limitations preventing a server app from cutting out windows on a desktop OS and sending them over a wire to a visionOS client.
    • spogbiper 3y ago
      There are third party apps that do this already on the Quest. I believe they can replicate Mac screens, they definitely can replicate Windows PC screens into the VR space. If Apple doesn't provide a 1st party solution I suspect someone else will soon.
    • orangecat 3y ago
      On a shorter timescale it could also come in the form of third party apps If Apple approves it, of course. This is one of my major concerns; there's a lot of potentially useful functionality that could be implemented, but you have to jump through the app store hoops and hope that Apple doesn't decide that it conflicts with their idea of what you should be allowed to do.
• NoPedantsThanks 3y ago
  No video input, no dice. This thing could have been useful on day one for lots of people, from drone operators to cinematographers to programmers. But Apple's sad fear of I/O has crippled yet another product. People should expect that a $3500 video-display device has a way to get video into it.
  • jhatemyjob 3y ago
    It's actually insane, it's been over a decade, and nobody put 2+2 together on this. It's right in the name... Head Mounted Display. I bet Luckey had something like this working in the early days but abandoned it because it wouldn't work for games. What a shame
    • NoPedantsThanks 3y ago
      [dead]
• spogbiper 3y ago
  What's the killer app? Quest headsets have been out for years and haven't seemed to find one. Well.. besides 3d porn
  • jasonsb 3y ago
    It looks like there's no killer app this time. They just bet on the fact that people will buy it because it's expensive and it's designed by Apple.
    • joezydeco 3y ago
      Macintosh '84 didn't have a killer app until 1985-1986. And it was a laser printer.
      • microtherion 3y ago
        Not sure about the social acceptance of people walking around with a laser printer strapped to their face…
  • JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > What's the killer app? Movies on airplanes. I’m guessing these will become virtually ubiquitous in the front cabin within a few years.
    • ghaff 3y ago
      You mean the front cabin where they have big screens for every seat? I couldn't see carrying one of these instead of just an iPad for movies. (But then I'm a very light packer.)
      • hwbehrens 3y ago
        I think it will be more like the proliferation of noise-cancelling headphones; it's not about what it brings (music, dialog, etc) but about what it blocks out (the ambient sounds). Yes, you can watch a movie on a plane now, but with a headset you remove the depressing, crowded, and claustrophobic visual environment.
• patapong 3y ago
  I think we are now at a stage where VR hardware has surpassed software. Between this and the Quest 3, we have powerful, polished and consumer friendly devices, but beyond a few niches (fitness, simulation, gaming to some extent), there is nothing to convince users to put the headsets on. I am hoping we will see a lot of experimentation in the coming years, and I am excited for what the Apple ecosystem will bring to the table. That said, from what I have seen so far this does not seem to be a revolution compared to the current offerings, but an evolution on various fronts, without addressing the killer app question.
  • pavlov 3y ago
    It wouldn't be the first time that hardware gets ahead of software. In 1988-94, the CPUs available in desktop computers were substantially more advanced than the widely used operating systems. Windows 3 and Mac System 6/7 didn't support pre-emptive multitasking, memory protection, or many other features that define a modern OS. Maybe we'll look back at today's Quest and Vision Pro as similar transitional devices with one foot stuck in the old paradigm, running old-style software.
    • pvg 3y ago
      The Apple headset is maybe more akin to the expensive workstations of the time which did make fuller use of their CPU facilities but were neither priced nor aimed at consumers. The headset is not nearly as expensive (especially inflation adjusted) and is ostensibly a consumer device but it's current incarnation seems unlikely to have the kind of mass adoption for the analogy to work out.
      • pavlov 3y ago
        The fact that the Vision Pro today mostly runs legacy iPad and web software in 2D rectangles kind of makes it feel like Windows/386 which most people just used to run text mode MS-DOS programs inside GUI windows.
      • cgk 3y ago
        Visiting a certain urban area on the east coast, dm me on X if possible to meet up
• ahmedfromtunis 3y ago
  I can't wait what the Vision Pro 4S-equivalent would look like and what capabilities it would have. I already imagine how people from 5 years in the future will be sharing photos of the current Vision Pro asking "Remember when this was the best VR headset hhh??" Sure, VR headsets existed before Apple's foray into that segment, but also did laptops, smartphones, tables computers, smart watches and bluetooth headsets. And if one to learn from history, all these products categories were significantly improved after Apple entered their respective markets.
  • monkeynotes 3y ago
    It's not VR though. The AR angle of this device is why it's compelling. VR is completely blind to your surroundings, Apple Pro could in principle make your public park look like Jurassic Park with full size dinosaurs etc. Blending our reality with an overlayed real time rendering is a massive benefit over straight VR.
    • pests 3y ago
      Its not true AR though. Its "record reality then display in VR". You're never looking at the world. Always through screens.
      • losvedir 3y ago
        That could just be an initial limitation of technology, though. The Apple Vision "spatial computing" line could move to glasses eventually. That said, I think the "you're looking at a digital reconstruction of the world" aspect pretty interesting since it means, in principle, everything can be changed as you'd like. Why not turn day to night, night to day, redecorate, block out ads on billboards, re-paint your house, hang paintings, add an extra window to your wall, etc?
        • cyberax 3y ago
          To completely reproduce the reality you need to be able to manipulate the phase of light of individual pixels. Basically, make a dynamic hologram. Without that, you'll be looking at an artificially "crisp" version of the world.
• OrvalWintermute 3y ago
  I'm going to be much more buy these AFTER they announce the virtual slim & fit function on personas
• steelframe 3y ago
  [flagged]
  • methodical 3y ago
    What types of data exactly are you implying that this device may capture that would be any more extreme than the data which would be captured by any other existing Apple device? I would think the Apple Watch alone has the ability to capture more data about habits and personal information than the Apple Vision Pro possibly could, considering its countless additional sensors on top of its existing ecosystem integration with the iPhone.
    • steelframe 3y ago
      Did you read the article for the post I linked? I don't care about the data it captures on the wearer. If you're inclined to hand over all that telemetry on yourself to other people, I don't know what to tell you. I care very much about the high-resolution cameras it has pointed at me. I don't think that's okay.
      • methodical 3y ago
        Unfortunately no I didn't read the article you linked, I still don't see how this device collects any additional data over what is already available for other devices in the Apple ecosystem. Anybody who has used a Mac, iPhone, or iPad has had HD cameras pointed at them. To clarify, my point with this comment and my first one was never that data collection (and as far as I can tell mass surveillance as well to you?) was okay, rather that I don't see how this device captures any more data on a wearer than the other devices they likely own.
        • schmorptron 3y ago
          I think GP's point was that it normalizes having cameras pointed at other people at all times while you're wearing it or similar devices. I see a much bigger issue in this regard with the meta ray ban sunglasses, since those will actually be worn by people outside. We already have cameras pointed all around public spaces, but this device category will increase that coverage to near ubiquity long-term. When you are in the presence of someone wearing this, you're being captures by 4 or more high-res cameras, in 3d, whether you want it or not.
• matsemann 3y ago
  > Still, there’s something great about capturing photos and videos without using your hands, and that means connected eyewear. Does it? What about gopros or similar action cams, being used for over a decade, and for less than a tenth of the price?
  • gfodor 3y ago
    People don't wear those all day. A scenario where people have cameras on their face all day yields a totally different kind of ability to capture serendipitious moments, etc. That's not to say this value proposition is high enough to warrant it, or that we should expect this technology to actually succeed mass adoption, but it is not the same value proposition as what you're talking about.
    • matsemann 3y ago
      True, but the quote I'm discussing was in context of filming while being in the slopes.
  • baby 3y ago
    I think the rayban meta glasses are a better example
• dottjt 3y ago
  The thing I don't get about spacial computing is: why? I feel like being able to see everything open at once would be incredibly distracting. I like how I can swipe between app screens on my desktop so that I'm only focusing on one app at a time. Of course I imagine there are some applications where it's useful, but to me it just feels like the Apple Vision Pro is just a very large screen and they haven't quite figured out what to do with it.
  • joshstrange 3y ago
    It's the same reason (some) people love multiple monitors and don't find it distracting. In fact, I feel extremely limited on just 1 or even 2 monitors. I'm hoping that the 4k virtual monitor in AVP will suffice and with windowing tools I think it will since it can be so much larger.
  • jccalhoun 3y ago
    I've been a skeptic of VR/AR since Occulus launched. I'm still skeptical after reading the reviews.
  • tomjakubowski 3y ago
    > I like how I can swipe between app screens on my desktop so that I'm only focusing on one app at a time. You can shove the app into a corner of your room, out of your view, and it will be there when you walk over to that corner later. That's part of the idea of "spatial computing" - if we can associate computer objects with real locations in space, maybe we can better harness spatial memory and stuff like that when we interact with them.
  • zmmmmm 3y ago
    It is interesting, I do regularly use Immersed in which I have total freedom to place windows any size anywhere I want in 3d space. Do you know what I end up doing mostly? Snapping them into the fixed 3 monitor layout in front of me just like they are physical monitors. It turns out, the way we set up physical monitors is actually how we want the virtual ones too .... what a surprise!
• zemo 3y ago
  am I hearing things or at 6:28 does she call her dog "Browser"
  • jkubicek 3y ago
    Yeah, that's her dog's name. In addition to being a dog, he's also a published author: https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-dumb-delightful-world-of-pet-tech-1481655316 https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-dumb-delightful-world-of-pe...
• devit 3y ago
  It seems that a lot of basic information is missing in the review: 1. How does it compare to an high-end monitor for text editing/programming, web browsing, watching non-VR video, playing non-VR games? Is it better or not? 2. Is the resolution, latency, FoV and lack of color fringing good enough for it to be indistinguishable from reality in both passthrough and VR modes? If not, how exactly far is it? 3. Can you run VR games on a PC with multiple desktop GPUs and stream to it? How does it compare to current high-end and ultra-high-end VR headsets?
  • robin_reala 3y ago
    On number 3, definitely not.
    • zeusk 3y ago
      You can always make an app to stream H265 content from any device :) Windows even has support for IndirectDisplayDevices - I'm not sure how openXR or SteamVR handles those, however.
      • robin_reala 3y ago
        That gives you a flat video presumably, not a VR game.
        • zeusk 3y ago
          Huh, you think VR is some special non-flat surface? All render target surfaces are a 2D texture
  • jhatax 3y ago
    This review from TheVerge answers some of your questions: https://www.theverge.com/24054862/apple-vision-pro-review-vr-ar-headset-features-price https://www.theverge.com/24054862/apple-vision-pro-review-vr... I recommend the video review as well. Seeing the video call between Nilay, Joanna, and MKB shows how much the tech has advanced but also how much it still needs to evolve to be at the level of FaceTime Video.
• joshstrange 3y ago
  I know it's v1, I know it's expensive, I know it's limited but I cannot wait to get my hands on it this Friday. Even with just 1 4k floating screen I think it would be a winner for me but I'm also really excited to see what people come up with in VisionOS itself. I think for a while the sweet spot (for me) with be using a virtual monitor and a handful of VisionOS apps as well. Eventually I hope to be able to pull macOS windows out of a fixed box and arrange them wherever I want but I'm fully aware that might not be this year or even next year.
  • dmix 3y ago
    Its coming out on Friday?
    • joshstrange 3y ago
      Yes, February 2nd, this Friday.
  • wombat-man 3y ago
    Well it's QHD not 4k. I don't think you'll be able to pull windows out of the mac screen, but apps you might need are in vision OS anyway like safari or messages. I think my dream would be dual 4k monitors, or maybe a double wide?
    • joshstrange 3y ago
      Yeah, I think long-term I'd want a "confluence mode" (a la Parallels) or a large curved screen. Dual/Tri-screens would be fine too but I feel like we can do better with an infinite canvas (though "monitors" might make macOS apps play nicer).
    • jojobas 3y ago
      It's a far cry. This thing is a little more that 4k for the entire field of view. Resolution required to render two 4k monitors at comfy distance is more than an order of magnitude away.
• beanjuiceII 3y ago
  what i am wondering about these devices is, my eyes get tired and strained from VR. I can only game on VR for limited amounts of time, I am a pretty fit person but i sweat a TON, de-fogging these devices has been a gigantic pain point.. does apple vision pro innovate in these areas ? I just felt the occulus devices as oppressive 30+ minutes of use.
• joshstrange 3y ago
  > Q: What if I wear glasses? > A: The Vision Pro wasn’t designed to be worn with glasses. Instead you have to order prescription Zeiss optical inserts for $99. The two monocle-looking pieces snap right into place. It's $99 for readers (non-prescription) and $149 for a prescription. Very odd that she would have gotten that detail wrong since it's so easy to check and it's been repeated so often in coverage of the AVP.
  • jsheard 3y ago
    Not to excuse that mistake but FWIW there are third party manufacturers which sell prescription lenses for various headsets for as little as $50, so there will probably be cheaper options once they start making them for the Vision Pro. The cost to actually manufacture the lenses depends on the strength of the prescription, and most VR lens manufacturers reflect that in their pricing, but Apple appears to be charging everyone the worst-case price and pocketing the difference when you order a weaker prescription.
    • sgt 3y ago
      Also, you might be able to take your previous pair of glasses, remove the lenses and grind until they fit. I did something similar to make my own prescription sunglasses (glued in the lenses).
    • delfinom 3y ago
      I await the day that Apple adds authentication chips to lenses and locks out 3rd parties. Basically it wouldn't be them to pass up a accessory sell opportunity.
      • wharvle 3y ago
        Looks around desk at non-Apple monitor, keyboard, mouse, USB hub, and cables Yeah, uh, they definitely always do that. It "wouldn't be them" to ever not. (Hell, the monitor even supports True Tone—and it didn't at first, that arrived in an OS update, from Apple)
• dang 3y ago
  Also: Apple Vision Pro review: magic, until it's not - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39190506 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39190506 - Jan 2024 (226 comments)
• aloer 3y ago
  It is interesting how many here are excited about this for productive computer work. It’s also what Apple advertises with. But what is the account situation like? For years I’ve been complaining that I can’t easily use my private iPad with my company Mac because they have separate Apple IDs. Things like sidecar for a quick virtual whiteboard are basically impossible. AirPods have gotten better over the years where today I can freely switch between devices belonging to different Apple IDs with the same AirPods. But is the Vision Pro like that as well? It would seem weird to exclude the not-so-small group of people working from home but with company MacBooks
  • ildjarn 3y ago
    I think Apple want to discourage sharing to increase device sales. It’s a great question though.
    • wharvle 3y ago
      Its wireless operation seems to depend on Hand Off in some capacity. Most companies probably wouldn’t want to grant a personal device access to that on a work laptop, and I bet there are some thorny questions about what to do with incoming Hand Off data from multiple accounts.
  • Fauntleroy 3y ago
    The entire screen sharing setup they demo'd in the original Vision Pro demo reels always made me laugh. They've had years to get Sidecar right, and have failed miserably every time. How am I going to believe that they'll get wireless display transmission to work perfectly for this thing?
    • mthoms 3y ago
      I haven't used it in quite a while so I'm wondering what the current issues with Sidecar are?
    • kemayo 3y ago
      I haven't used the Vision Pro, so I can't say how well it works in practice... but with macOS 14 this year they redid their screen sharing app to, presumably, use whatever technology is underlying the Vision Pro display-sharing. It's really good. Vast improvement over the previous tech (presumably VNC?). Assuming the Vision Pro screen sharing works using the same stuff, I have high hopes.
• oflannabhra 3y ago
  I really like Joanna Stern, and how she approaches reviews like this. I’ve watched her review, The Verge’s, and MKBHD’s unboxing video. However, the best review I’ve found that actually transmits what is possible and what it is like to use is Brian Tong’s 55 minute review video: https://youtu.be/GkPw6ScHyb4 https://youtu.be/GkPw6ScHyb4 I’m not familiar with him, but unlike other reviews I’ve seen, he spends less time evaluating or summarizing, and more time trying to actually use the device. I didn’t even realize that you can seamlessly use your Mac to control your visionOS apps, for example.
  • npunt 3y ago
    Good review. Most interesting part was at 43:00 discussing the ergonomics and weight, which is the real question for everyone hoping to make this a daily driver. He said he could wear it 45 mins before needing to take it off, that it was overstimulating so you need to slow down how quickly you use apps and move things on screen, and that gestures also were fatiguing. You could tell he was trying to be fair but positive. Headsets just haven’t cracked this nut yet, and tho tech may advance somewhat, they may be limitations inherent to the form factor. Even if it gets really light weight, the issues of overstimulation, headaches, and the amount of neck movement implied may keep these products in a niche. (I say this as someone super excited about AVP) For everyone used to using their computers all day long wanting to do it in a headset, don’t throw your macbooks away just yet.
    • crooked-v 3y ago
      I've regularly done 2+ hours of light activity (e.g. mini golf, social hangouts) with my Quest 3 without issues, though I will note this is with a third-party head strap specifically designed to be way more ergonomic and comfortable than anything first-party from Meta or Apple [1]. [1]: https://www.bobovr.com/products/bobovr-m3-pro https://www.bobovr.com/products/bobovr-m3-pro A lot of the physical downsides here are basically self-inflicted by companies trying really hard to hide the "nerd factor" necessary for comfort, to the detriment of the actual user experience.
      • 3y ago
• ijhuygft776 3y ago
  Why is it so expensive? is it that much better than Meta's devices?
• KolmogorovComp 3y ago
  For me the two takeways from the various reviews are that: - The Vision Pro is the best VR set that can be done today, with massive investment (rumoured 5e9 USD) and competent staff, and hefty price. It is miles ahead of the competition. - It’s still not enough for most if any practical use, apart from films maybe. The technical requirements for a really useful VR are still largely out-of-reach, and will be for at least the next 5-10 years.
  • GeorgeTirebiter 3y ago
    what does "5md USD" mean? I assume USD = US Dollars but "5md" ? Thank you.
    • ghc 3y ago
      I was confused as well, so I checked various European languages for what their word for billion is. I suspect they are french, using an abbreviation for milliard, the French word for billion.
      • H8crilA 3y ago
        Not just French, also for example German and Polish. Milion, Miliard, Bilion, Biliard = Million, Billion, Trillion, Quadrillion (neither are justified because neither start at the beginning, that is at a thousand :) )
        • schmorptron 3y ago
          This is one of the places where the US has a better naming standard than us in the EU imo. Just feels much more intuitive to count up with Bi, Tri without doubling them up every time.
          • suction 3y ago
            [dead]
    • 3y ago
• testmasterflex 3y ago
  Just give me MacOS in goggles so I can work on a plane with a wireless keyboard and intermittently watch something. I could pay 3k for that.
• pedalpete 3y ago
  I'd like to understand how this compares to something like XReal with better UX (I'm assuming the software for XReal isn't great, I've never tried it).
• llm_nerd 3y ago
  The most disappointing aspect to the reviews I've seen is that the cameras -- the things that facilitate the AR -- are not great. They're good, but far from great. In this the example video of a low light situation is terribly noisy, and she complains that she can't read small print because of pixelation. Given that the display itself is very high resolution, this has to fall on subpar cameras. And the battery life is brutal. Extremely first generation.
• andy_ppp 3y ago
  I haven’t heard much about motion sickness yet, how long can we expect to be in AR before this happens?
  • jsheard 3y ago
    The main driver of motion sickness in VR is "moving without moving", where your virtual viewpoint moves independently of your actual head position and confuses your brain. That's a common issue in VR games where practical space limitations mean that some kind of artificial locomotion is usually required, but Apple seems to be purposely avoiding that kind of experience by keeping the viewpoint locked to your head at all times. Third party immersive apps might break that rule, of course.
• throwaway71271 3y ago
  The complexity of our systems has increased a lot, and I dont think the tooling has caught up yet. Its sad that the fastest thing we have now is log.Printf("asdasdf") and grep the logs on the pod :) Debugging multithreaded application is as difficult as it was 50 years ago, maybe VR debuggers will allow us to debug complex interconnected systems or models in a more intuitive environment. Also I think having hundreds of chats with some llms to investigate specific part of the code/docs fits very nicely with infinite screen space, and using your eyes to focus instead of alt+tabbing I have my fingers crossed for some insane tooling advancements in the next years. Does anyone know of any re-inventing the IDE in VR projects that are worth following?
  • ninkendo 3y ago
    Apple can’t even get lldb to not crash trying to show me the values of variables in the current stack frame… the intuitiveness of the UI is far from the top of my priority list.
    • throwaway71271 3y ago
      :) apple doesnt even let you gdb -p unless you disable the system integrity protection
• jackschultz 3y ago
  How much talk is there about how these headsets are going to be used to talk to AI models? I don't see comments about that, but that's what I imagine they'll be used for. Models will be quicker, more efficient, and be able to capture audio, and able to be run on self owned GPUs. Take a google thing, throw a fake looking person and some type of voice on top and presto, you're talking to models. I feel like that _has_ to be why all major companies are pushing hard on vision products like this. They know AI is coming and need to be there first so their glasses are efficient and adopted where models will be easy additions.
  • astrange 3y ago
    That's not how development cycles work. Conversational AI being any good is a 1-2 year old thing, and VR development of this quality is 5+ years.
• perryizgr8 3y ago
  Is the vision pro like iphone or like mac when it comes to device ownership? Can you be root on the system? Can you compile and run programs on it? Or do all apps have to be installed via an app store?
  • wraptile 3y ago
    Unsurprisingly, it's completely locked down.
• arctac 3y ago
  7x the price of Quest 3 which does exactly the same, no thank you.
  • Sohcahtoa82 3y ago
    Yeah but the Quest 3 doesn't have an Apple logo on it.
  • hu3 3y ago
    Quest 3 has better FOV and a battery. So some might argue it is better even.
  • crooked-v 3y ago
    > exactly the same Nah. I've tried using the Quest 3 for various things, and at the OS level it just fundamentally sucks for anything but fully immersive games. Multitasking support is close to nonexistent, the hand tracking is crap, the UX is mediocre for even basic things like "sit on the couch and watch a movie", the system is end-to-end filled with small annoyances every time you use it, and there are no signs that Meta has even recognized these problems, let alone have any plans to improve on them. The difference in functionality is night and day, even including the downsides noted by reviewers.
• stephc_int13 3y ago
  I quite often have buyer impulse when seeing the newest high-end Apple products. Even if I don't like the brand monopoly, even if I find their design language mostly boring and bland, there is often something weirdly appealing in their marketing. But in this case, I would probably try this device during half a day if someone gave it to me, but I feel zero desire to own or use one. It does not enable anything that I can't do better with a real computer, a TV or a smartphone.
  • Sohcahtoa82 3y ago
    > I quite often have buyer impulse when seeing the newest high-end Apple products. Even if I don't like the brand monopoly, even if I find their design language mostly boring and bland, there is often something weirdly appealing in their marketing. This is an utterly bizarre stance. I can't possibly imagine buying a product, any product, let alone a $1,000+ product, purely based on their marketing, when you admit that you don't even like the product. Most people, when marketing convinces them to buy something, aren't really consciously aware of it. Not only are you consciously aware of it, but you acknowledge that you don't like it, and buy it anyways.
    • stephc_int13 3y ago
      Buyer impulse, a feeling, not an action, I don’t own Apple products except for an old iPhone ES.
• hoistbypetard 3y ago
  I find it interesting that they include the archive.ph link on the front page. Also, it's hard not to enjoy any review that includes the word "bejeezus." The thing I most want to know about this device that went totally unmentioned is: how sharp is the text? Or, how many windows of code can I comfortably see at once and is it more or less than my 30-something-inch monitor? TBH, that's what will sway me one way or the other on this... my current monitor might have been $3500 nearly 20 years ago. It was $1000+ when I bought it in 2012. If this (or one of its near term successors) could replace it in a way that is better, I'm kind of interested.
• rubyn00bie 3y ago
  It's definitely a bit niche, given the price of the Vision Pro, but I really think Apple needs to invest in first-party "gaming" simulators along with allowing the corresponding hardware support to easily connect to it (likely via a Mac or dock). From my experience with VR, the only thing I've been absolutely and definitively blown away by was sim racing. Before getting a PSVR2 I had played roughly 70 hours of Gran Turismo 7, now I'm at over 500 hours in the five months I've had a PSVR2. I want to buy a PC-compatible headset to get access to better pedals, wheels, and simulators (games) than I can get on the PS5. It's quite easy to sink many thousands of dollars into the experience. I believe the margin requirements are there for Apple (eventually) when considering the potential for professional training solutions. But! Without taking ownership of something, creating some IP (intellectual property) to provide a killer app, and inspire other segments, they're going to be hard pressed to make inroads and get this to scale.
• zmmmmm 3y ago
  Lots of surprises on the downside from all the reviews. Pass through much more limited in quality with motion blur, pixelation, distortions, limited color and dynamic range. The eye tracking driven input method which was seen as holy grail turns out to be annoying after a while because people don't naturally always look at what they want to click on. Personas straight up aren't ready. The lack of AR features is the biggest surprise. They tried hard to avoid it being a VR device but all the actual high quality experiences, especially the ones people are impressed by are the VR ones. For me the biggest issue though is that it can't fulfil it's primary use cases: Want it for productivity? it can't run MacOS applications and if you want to use your actual Mac it can't do multiple monitors. Want it for entertainment? people want to enjoy photos, videos, movies with other people and it can't include them. Even if they have a Vision Pro, I haven't yet seen any sign of ability for multiple people to do these things together. All up, it all seems far more immature and dev-kit stage than I was expecting.
  • crooked-v 3y ago
    > I haven't yet seen any sign of ability for multiple people to do these things together. The reviews haven't mentioned it, but SharePlay [1] is OS-level functionality and the press releases mention using it with movies, music, and games. [1]: https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2023/10087/ https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2023/10087/
  • MuffinFlavored 3y ago
    I wonder given all this... what the expectations are at Apple from a higher up/board/executive standpoint are Most of Apple offerings are good: Watch iPad Mac iPhone services Are they really expecting this to just be a hard problem initially that they get better at over time? When is the last time they launched a "so so" product?
    • wahnfrieden 3y ago
      Tim Apple reportedly overrode the design team on launching it prematurely relative to their typical standards in order to enter the market and begin iterating before waiting too long. It’s the first new product category made under his leadership and he’s eyeing retirement, as context. Btw, don’t forget visionOS 2.0 is just 18 weeks away. (Source: WWDC is every June and every platform gets a version bump, as we saw with watchOS launching in April then getting a 2.0 immediately after at WWDC.)
• throwanem 3y ago
  > Living room a stress-inducing mess? Go full virtual reality Or, I dunno. Clean the living room? You can even watch a movie while you do that!
• hendersoon 3y ago
  Apple failed to make a compelling argument for purchasing their device. Where's the "killer app"? The original iPhone was a better phone, and a general computing device with a web browser to boot. Is it to watch movies on a 100" screen on an airplane? The xReal weighs 75 grams and does that for four hundred dollars. It has a HDMI port too, so I can play my steam deck or switch. Where are the cool AR apps? Where is the contextual data popping up as I drive my car? None of that exists!
  • hackstack 3y ago
    Do people really watch movies on xreals? I tried the Air Pro 2 and found them borderline unusable. Also, AR glasses being used by someone operating a motor vehicle sounds like a recipe for an entirely different kind of “killer” app.
  • saurik 3y ago
    > The original iPhone was a better phone... ?!? The audio quality wasn't somehow different, but the feature set surrounding the phone sucked: it didn't have ring tone profiles / called groups and so was pretty infuriating versus a basic Nokia phone in addition to having a fraction of the battery life, a worse form factor to hold up to your ear, and a fundamentally more fragile construction. It also was pretty pathetic at text messages, as it didn't have any support for MMS (which was already shipping on competing devices). Notably and critically, even a cheap Nokia candy bar phone could do the most basic texting feature of sending a single message to multiple people at once... somehow the iPhone shipped without that? Even the most basic things like "at least you will be able to store a ton of text messages finally as the device had a LOT of storage" somehow were thwarted: Apple implemented some stupid arbitrary limit of I think it was only 1000 messages before it started deleting old ones!! I just can't believe you think the original iPhone was a better phone than it's contemporary competitors.
• subsubzero 3y ago
  I could see this taking the place of a TV screen in some households, (smaller ones of course unless you want to spend $15k for the whole family to all watch TV in a living room!). I think a killer feature for this is to pair it with a treadmill and project trails and famous city scapes while you run. That last bit for me might be a reason to buy it as if its winter and icy where you live running on the thread mill is a forced indoor exercise.
  • Erratic6576 3y ago
    I’m looking forward to learning about geography from a huge atlas
  • graypegg 3y ago
    The weight would be a major problem there, and needs to be improved before they can honestly pitch cardio with it on.
    • GlickWick 3y ago
      With a good head strap i have no issues pushing 165 bpm for 45 minutes or so on the Quest 3. It works well for cardio already. Honestly headset weight is more of an issue for 4+ hour working sessions than exercise.
• layer8 3y ago
  I found the details interesting, like how she couldn’t really see if pepper was coming out of the pepper mill. Or the cooking app recommending not to actually wear the AVP during cooking due to (presumably) safety reasons. The spatially placed timers are one of the most compelling use cases I’ve seen so far, but I wouldn’t want to wear 1.3+ pound goggles plus battery for that.
• karim79 3y ago
  I'm a bit puzzled as to why they did not include at least one HDMI output. Given that it has a fairly impressive hardware spec, it's not hard to imagine someone buying this as a device which could be an face computer when desired, and also for it to double as something like a Mac Mini. I'm sure it supports Airplay, but being able to plug it in to a real monitor with a wire, wouldn't that make the purchase a bit more appealing?
• phelm 3y ago
  Seems fun that most of the huge engineering effort seems to have gone into making the device feel as if its not there, Passthrough, Persona, EyeSight, and most of the downsides in the review comes from the fact that the device is still there. The device is a simulation of the dream device that can overlay UI on top of your vision without you looking any different to those around you, I wonder how far away that is.
  • mattigames 3y ago
    I don't think it needs to be 100% not-there to reach full popularity, in the shape of glasses or a hat would be good enough, or perhaps something you can put on top of your regular glasses.
• cortexa4 3y ago
  One of the most mind-blowing use cases of spatial computing was using the Vision Pro while cooking. You could create timers for different activities and place them in the locality of the object that you are tracking. This way you can track the recipe throughout its different stages with these virtual timers over different pots, pans, ovens etc.
• wkirby 3y ago
  This seems like a prank. I simply cannot fathom wanting this even if it were free --- and I own and have used multiple VR headsets. The idea that I'd want to live any significant portion of my day in one seems like absolutely madness.
  • abletonlive 3y ago
    I don't think apple is expecting for normal consumers to buy this product. It seems like a dev kit for a future where AR glasses are possible
    • wkirby 3y ago
      Even that future seems massively unappealing as a consumer. Plus a $3500 dev kit that lets me set a kitchen timer, while simultaneously recommending I not wear the device while cooking, seems crazy to me.
• golemiprague 3y ago
  [dead]
• oglop 3y ago
  I thought my watch was overpriced and sold under a lie, which then cost me serious money to basically buy the same product again. It works fine, but I will always hate it since I had to buy it twice. The Macbook went from an amazing piece of tech to a useless piece of RSI inducing crap. You have to buy from system 76 to get anything like the old macbooks. The phone, well, I was forced into an upgrade this year (as part of the watch fiasco above) and was amazed how underwhelmed I was. I went from an X to a 15 and as far as I can tell, the camera is better and it's a little lighter. That's not enough for the money I had to shell out. All in all, the company has seemed to be going downhill to me for at least 5-8 years. But, I'm just one consumer of many. Other people seem very amazed by these things which just do nothing for me.
• aenis 3y ago
  It'll be a flop. Noone with a pretty face would be caught dead wearing this, and fashion trends are set by pretty people. Its creepy.
• ilrwbwrkhv 3y ago
  This device isn't it. The iPhone had issues when it launched, but it was magical. The Vision Pro isn't magical. It has the same issues as the Oculus. The weight in front of the face is felt after using it for a while so definitely not something that can be used for long hours. And the dinosaurs and stuff are nice gimmicks, and really cool but wear off after a while. What is required is a device as thin as sunglasses, which basically does AR things. That will be the gamechanger and I think that will be done by another company because it feels Apple forced this one and that's sad.
  • peebeebee 3y ago
    It wasn't magical. Technically, it couldn't do a lot of things that other smartphones could. I had a Windows smartphone that could run Excel, with a slide-out keyboard for fast input. 1st gen iPhone was a bare-bones consumer device with the best touchscreen technology and a good (but very basic) UI. That is all it took to redefine the market. It could not even copy-paste. It had horrible internet. Vision Pro may be the first OS that does things "the right way" in AR/VR too. Big difference is that iPhone was a real consumer device, this seems more like a development device. Which may be a smart move, because after all: (Phone) Apps made Apple win, and not enough apps made Windows lose.
• Flatcircle 3y ago
  Apple seems to do well with products that are essential. Phones, computers, iPads, airpods, even iPods were essential to walk around the city and listen to music. The Vision Pro is like Google Glass, a none essential luxury item that seems cumbersome. I don't think this will make it TBH. But perhaps it does. And if so, seems a bit dystopian.
  • ggrelet 3y ago
    I think your comment is pure hindsight. I don’t get how you’d tag the iPad as essential when we already had the iPhone? You also seem to forget the huge success of not-so-essential AirPods and to a lesser extent, Apple Watches.
• nomilk 3y ago
  Nevermind cooking, TV, and timers, I'd consider this solely to serve as a portable monitor. With remote work, that could be very handy. When I travel I never take an external monitor, so all work gets done on a 16 or 14 inch screen. This could be a game changer, like adding a large display. Could also be very handy when working on planes, and for working from outdoor locations like parks (which I love to do). I find I'm most productive working from planes, but if there's a seat in front (non exit row), looking down at a laptop for several hours at a sharp angle can cause some neck pain. This would allow me to look straight ahead.
  • pzo 3y ago
    the problem with using this in plane is you cannot have your macbook in your carry on bag. You have to remove it from your bag and open the screen lid and see it with your vision pro headset to connect to it. This is not maybe an issue if you are flying business class and with economy class I don't find it comfortable - plane tables are too small and macbook pro 16'' too big and heavy for such environment.
    • nomilk 3y ago
      I agree using a macbook is not comfortable in economy, but it’s what I do as my default, the only difference in using the headset is I won’t have to look down at a sharp angle (which is usually fine for a while but can hurt if done for too long).
• rfwhyte 3y ago
  I find it somewhat feckless how basically every review I've read so far of the Vision Pro seems focused more on the "Potential" of the device than on the current reality of the device itself. Every fault is seemingly boot-licked away with promises of how it'll all be "Better" in the future. A fancy VR headset that costs more money than the majority of humans on earth earn in an entire year of their lives should honestly be arriving a lot more fully baked than it seems the Vision Pro is. But hey, just keep giving Apple your money, cause if you give them enough of it they'll have to eventually make a version of this thing that actually delivers on their BS promises right?
• racl101 3y ago
  Cool.
• nmstoker 3y ago
  I don't wish to imply any insult to the reviewer but the Persona image seemed fairly well aligned with how she looked when she did the scan. The poor lighting may have contributed to her slightly pallid colouring in the Persona. Presumably the main concern is the uncanny not-very-lifelike nature that's putting people off and the rest is self-consciousness. Maybe they need longer scanning to build a more accurate facial movement model? I still find it very odd when the eyes the device displays to others have such a raised position compared to the true eye position. If I had one, I would rather something static went there or nothing, and maybe overlay that with a gaze direction indicator "spot" instead of faux eyes.
  • crooked-v 3y ago
    I'd rather just have a VRChat avatar, for simple animated eye/face tracking and no uncanny valley effect.
• orenlindsey 3y ago
  Anyone remember when Memoji came out? It was pretty mid. Lots of problems with it. Now it's really good. It works really well now. Personas are like that. Same thing with eye tracking. This whole product is 90% of the way there. But the next 9% is just as hard as that original 90%. Apple is releasing it now to push it to 99%. It'll get better.
  • FPGAhacker 3y ago
    wait, Memoji is still a thing?
    • presentation 3y ago
      I have literally never had anybody I know ever send me a Memoji. Maybe there's a different community that uses it, but I don't know who that is.
      • ekms 3y ago
        I think parent comment was maybe trolling a bit with a memoji comparison lol. Hard to say though
  • pquki4 3y ago
    [flagged]
  • siva7 3y ago
    I've never seen people (particularly young people) use memojis and i wish there was an option to disable it entirely from my phone.
    • timothyduong 3y ago
      Only see older folk use it, I respect that, gives people different ways to express themselves
• diebeforei485 3y ago
  Apple will invest in making future hardware generations of this product better (and to some extent deliver improvements to current hardware via software updates) but it seems they cheaped out on the chip. Why does it have an M2, when the 5nm M3 is already available? As with most Apple products, just like the Apple Watch and the iPhone, I don't think this first gen product is a good buy. Wait for the 2nd gen unless you just want to play with the tech.
• Nifty3929 3y ago
  My main objection to these type of technologies (I feel similarly about voice control) - is that I don't WANT to use large hand gestures (or verbal expression) to control my device. It's exhausting, and too much interference with the ambient experience. I can control my whole desktop experience with very little wrist motion using my speedy mouse. I have a bunch of extra buttons under my thumb for a variety of tasks as well. Reaching out with my whole arm to click, or pinch to zoom, is a HORRIBLE user experience. (For most things - clearly VR games and such will be fine). It seems I can connect an ordinary keyboard and mouse to it though, so I could see using it as essentially a really large monitor. As long as I can point and click with my mouse independent of my eyes or head position, and my text-entry focus doesn't move without permission.
  • oomun 3y ago
    fwiw, I agree with you (same reason i stopped using a Leap Motion controller) and users do not need to reach their arm out just look with their eyes and then gesture with the hand lots of reviewers discuss how the hands can be in low, resting positions theoretically, as i dont have primary experience to draw from, this UX could potentially be even a smaller amount of wrist motion
  • wraptile 3y ago
    That has been my biggest pet peeve with scifi depiction of futuristic inputs. Why would anyone want to move _more_ not less? Better tech should be more sensitive and accurate allowing us to do more with less not the other way around. That's also the main reason nobody uses Quest 3's hand tracking despite it being really good. Why would I wave my hands around when I can achieve this with micro movements of my thumb.
• iteratethis 3y ago
  My hot take: VR enthusiasts, which I guess now includes Apple, assume there's some natural, obvious mass market demand for such a solution if only the tech is good enough. I'm telling you that this mass appeal doesn't exist. Nobody cares about AR/VR. We've had AR on iOS for a decade and other than navigation and Pokemon, there's no killer apps, no ecosystem. I took my colleagues to a VR center, where they could experiment with lots of setups, try out games and experiences. They had a great time but nobody spoke about it ever again and nobody bought any device. And these people work in tech. The tech isn't the problem. The entire interaction simply isn't a fit.
• guptaneil 3y ago
  > Does it live up to the stratospheric hype? Not so much. Oh sorry, that's from CNET's review of the first iPhone in 2007: https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/original-iphone-review/ https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/original-iphone-review/ It's way too early to tell if this product line will succeed in the long term. Will the first gen Vision Pro be a runaway success? Of course not! Will later generations look as obvious as the iPhone does now? I sure hope so! For comparison, Apple sold 1.4 million iPhones in 2007. Supposedly Apple is expecting to sell around 500k Vision Pro units this year. Given the 3x price difference (in 2024 dollars), that effectively means the first gen Vision Pro is expected to bring the same revenue as the first gen iPhone. We all have rosy retrospection about how great and obvious the first iPhone or first iPod was, but honestly nobody had any idea if Apple's crazy bet would pay off. We all agreed it was magical tech, but it was expensive, had tons of limitations, and nobody really needed it. Sound familiar? All I know is betting against Apple has rarely paid off. They do have failures too though and this is clearly technologically more ambitious than any other launch, so who knows! And honestly that's what makes this launch most exciting. It's been so long since I've had child-like wonder about some new technology that I'm just glad Apple took a chance on launching such a crazy device, even if I don't know what to do with it... yet.
  • zmmmmm 3y ago
    > I'm just glad Apple took a chance on launching such a crazy device Probably a dozen other companies launched similar devices already. Apple is hardly going out on a crazy limb here. This is their classic iterative refinement of what other people already did. But I do agree with the first point - the flaws in this gen 1 has very little bearing on the long term success of it as a product category. But I would argue it works both ways, in that to the extent it is successful in the niche that buys it, you can't tell yet if it will break out to mass appeal. We just don't know.
  • _gabe_ 3y ago
    The difference is that in that review there were plenty of remarks like: > Fortunately, we can report that on the whole, the touchscreen and software interface are easier to use than expected. What's more, we didn't miss a stylus in the least. Despite a lack of tactile feedback on the keypad, we had no trouble tapping our fingers to activate functions and interact with the main menu. What I’m seeing in the reviews of AVP say the opposite about many aspects: > There is a built-in virtual keyboard so you can type in thin air. But it will drive you mad for anything longer than a short message. And selecting smaller buttons with a pinch should be a carnival game. I started getting real work done once I paired the Vision Pro with a Bluetooth keyboard and mouse. I agree it’s still too early to tell, but the best thing that I see being mentioned is movie watching which is something all the other headsets already do as well. The AR aspect seems to be a unique aspect, but I wonder if there will be safety issues that prevent things like cooking and doing other tasks assisted with AR from truly taking off.
• password54321 3y ago
  If they can get near the form factor of Google Glass with good battery that will almost certainly be revolutionary. Just being able to have maps in AR, and not having to keep looking at your phone and look at buildings and immediately see rating/menu, train arrival times and so on. Probably many use cases with current AI as well.
• elzbardico 3y ago
  If you are already tethered to an external battery, why not move the bulk of circuitry to an external box to make this contraption lighter?
• propmaster 3y ago
  I think Apple's war to replaceable / serviceable batteries reached pathological levels: ok, for some technological limitations you have to use that unpractical umbellical-corded battery, for god sake, transform it in a feature, permitting the use of pluggable power banks, people can reuse those they have around without having to be "plugged into the wall with the 5-foot cord". Maybe they could add a little buffer battery with, let's say 5 minute autonomy, permitting "hot swap" features, hopefully user replaceable. About the weight : is that (IMHO disturbing) external-eye-reproduction feature necessary ? I find it useless and I think a screen reproducing my eyes externally consumes an important amount of energy , that for a 2 hour autonomy device could be important. About the applications, reading this article I'm sure: the object lacks of any "killer app" and friends, cooking with the visor on make me laugh : it's like you are about to solder the food pretending it's carbon steel ! In my day-to-day tech needs, I have instead space for some good AR glasses, like the old Google glasses: for example, live translation, being in a foreign country could be valuable something able to translate at command what I have in front of me, being a biker, could be valuable be able to read data from motorbike without having to move the eye from the street, same for navigator directions, etc. Other ideas? An app that suggest me places around worth to visit. I use oscilloscopes and other lab equipment, could be priceless to have the data accessible without moving the sight from the PCB, etc, etc, etc.
• jfoster 3y ago
  Apple should've called this a dev kit to save face, hedge bets, explain the price tag, and most accurately represent what this is. It clearly does not belong in prime position on apple.com yet.
• mring33621 3y ago
  Apple's new thing is gonna sell a lot of Meta Quest 3s.
• Animats 3y ago
  It's a good review. Basically, the thing gives you some screens fixed in world space. You have to be mostly stationary for the effect to work. So it won't replace walking around staring at your cell phone. A lot of thought has gone into the interface for this sort of thing. That's the real achievement here, and that matters. Workplace of the near future - a room full of people, crammed together as on an airplane or in a theater, each wearing a headset. No more desks! It's still too heavy, though. If it's tethered to a belt-mounted unit, why isn't the electronics down there, instead of in a brick on the back of your head? The headgear part needs to drop to no worse than swim goggles.
  • mvkel 3y ago
    I think your description is the absolute best case scenario. In reality, it will collect dust. It needs to "do work" faster, or at least more conveniently, than a computer can. Just needing to put the thing on is a massive hurdle for regular adoption.
    • Animats 3y ago
      > I think your description is the absolute best case scenario. I tend to agree, but Apple has a big fan base. If anybody else shipped this thing, it would be a very niche product. We know, because others have shipped such things and gone nowhere.
• mvkel 3y ago
  Wild that the Quest 3 sounds like a better device. Call me crazy, but if Apple can't figure this out, maybe the concept itself is flawed.
  • makeitdouble 3y ago
    That's giving way too much credit to a corporation. As an anchoring point, Apple couldn't figure out a better solution for movie watching than Google's or Amazon's offering (cheaper yet better than the Apple TV), and I don't think the concept is flawed in any way. If anything, it's probably healthy to see Apple stretch and hit some walls, try new ideas that might or might not succeed, and overall experiment in the open instead of always assuming they've got the perfect solution.
    • mvkel 3y ago
      disagree. Apple TV is fine albeit solving boring problems. This is a solution that creates 20 new problems. > too much credit to a corporation What does this mean? Are indie developers supposed to do a better job than a corp (see: a group of people) with billions in R&D?
      • makeitdouble 3y ago
        Apple TV is fine, but for instance it took them such a long time to get a remote with buttons that can be recognized in the dark. And that weird push for games when there's no first party controller. The storage tiers that made no sense. All in all it has been such a weird product. > too much credit Sorry for the weird turn of phrase. I just think Apple is a company like any other, with sometimes good ideas, sometimes bad idea, sometimes they'll hit the jackpot and sometimes they battle the EU. Apple not figuring a good approach to a problem doesn't feel like any further indication of how hard the problem is. I mean, we could say they haven't figured out how to charge a wireless mouse either.
  • pquki4 3y ago
    agreed. Reading these reviews, I just keep thinking -- yes Apple does this better, and that is interesting, but... the Quest 3 can almost do all of these at a fraction of the price. And the biggest investments -- screen and cameras -- need to see real use cases yet. I am not convinced that people are actually going to replace their monitors or TVs with Vision Pro and wearing this for many hours straight at this point.
• mvkel 3y ago
  Just saw that the hand tracker continues to interpret input if you're typing on a Bluetooth keyboard. That's... embarrassing. This should have been a dev kit.
• stevage 3y ago
  I love the tone this writer strikes. It's just perfect. One thing I really notice about this stuff is that unlike mobile phones and TVs, this will not be for everyone. There's a big chunk of society that does not want home automation, VR/AR, fitbits, smartwatches, etc etc. Me included. Seems like kind of fun if you're into that sort of thing, though.
• righthand 3y ago
  I was able to try Apple’s VR headset and I just didn’t see any advantage. Overly simple to use to the point where it was annoying in the day-to-day. Heavy on the head. I went back to my Arch laptop instead.
• antoniuschan99 3y ago
  Was thinking they should have made it an accessory to the iphone instead. Have the iphone do all the compute and glasses just have sensors. It’s already wired because of the battery: it would weigh much less, iphone has magsafe portable battery for that extra juice, and would cost less (more adoption too) Won’t be surprised if some android manufacturer like xiaomi release something like this. Also, makes sense why Meta kept the form factor because they never had their own mobile device!
  • zaptrem 3y ago
    Given that this has an M2 and a dedicated sensor processing chip the size of an M2 I have a feeling the power draw and heat generated would be unusable with a phone in a pocket. I bet they'll go in this direction with a non-Pro version in four years or so when chips catch up.
    • antoniuschan99 3y ago
      true i read the m2 on ipad 2 gets hot when playing games. And iPhones don’t have fans. Maybe it’s apple trying to push the limits of this tech, a16 bionic compared to m2 is like 40% slower in the various computational performances so won’t be surprised to see the form factor show up in android devices soon for sure.
• alchemist1e9 3y ago
  It’s not realistic to strap a computer to your head and walk around and pass through is a bad idea generally. In my mind EDITH glasses are what should be real today and that’s where my focus has turned. I recently bought a Viture Glasses and their Neckband, they are actually pretty neat but still not viable for walking around in an AR sense. However their Neckband is onto something imho, it’s a good location for wearing computing power. I’m now personally going towards the BLE HUD style glasses for investigating ideas, bought several developer and enterprise kits to tinker with.
  • daemonologist 3y ago
    > Viture Glasses Holy moly that website (https://www.viture.com/ https://www.viture.com/). It looks like a huge amount of development effort went into it but it's almost completely useless. I went looking for detailed information about the product and was relieved to find the "learn more" button (which I'd initially mentally dismissed as a GDPR cookie compliance button), but it just opens an autoplaying marketing video with all the controls disabled. (If you do want to read about the product their Kickstarter page was a bit more digestible/normal for me: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/viture/viture-game-and-stream-anywhere-anytime https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/viture/viture-game-and-... .)
• matt3210 3y ago
  They’re headphones for you’re eyes
• SteveHammans 3y ago
  [dead]
• VikingCoder 3y ago
  I remember people laughing that the iPod had less storage, less features, didn't sound as good, and was more expensive than other mp3 players already on the market. People forget that the brand Apple carries so much freaking weight. People buy the Apple lifestyle. Which now includes AR goggles.
• gigatexal 3y ago
  It’s a first gen product. It’ll get better with software updates and better hardware. The original iPhone was a barely useful soap shaped thing that didn’t even have copy and paste. Of course this thing is supposed to be the future of computing but it is still very much a first iteration. It’ll get better.
• andrewljohnson 3y ago
  It seems like such a device _could_ be amazing for skiing. Pilots use AR and skiing is a lot like flying. I hope this sort of technology gets so common in my lifetime that companies can bother to build it into legit ski goggles.
• tyiz 3y ago
  The Wokeness disease destroyed Apple‘s engineering culture. It’s dead.
• w10-1 3y ago
  Joanna Stern: Maestro! I cannot imagine having to do this review. It's: - Likely to be read and seen by a substantial number of people - On the highest of high-tech devices - From a company that splits the world into Fans and Haters - Where the real question is how does it feel, and how do I look? - And for heaven's sake should I spend $3,500+? So much potential for embarassment! She did a great job, and identified its killer app: home 3D movies. Selfies are so passe, when you can actually re-experience something, and perhaps notice what you missed before, and reinforce memories. It's ideal oldsters to experience trips that their grandchildren take. Gating factors: My concern is mainly that this will need another generation of chip miniaturization to get the headset lighter AND more performant AND using less power -- and may require a faster bus between the chips. Win/lose factors: Probably enough people will buy it to make it not a financial mistake. But the big win is that developers will have to start solving the problems with this device, and only those using this device will have solutions under their belt. To get to VR + 3D media, go through Apple?
• TealMyEal 3y ago
  Does anyone know if this can connect to an External HDD via USB C?
  • saagarjha 3y ago
    There's no USB-C port on the device.
• danielscrubs 3y ago
  Steve Jobs is gone. I’ve prophesied that the Apple stock will go up like crazy (the OS is in a near duopoly after all), but the magic spark (it just works/delight/polish factor) will be worse and worse as more and more employees and processes change. Journalists are the easiest to delight so if they can’t even do that… All that said, I do think they will succeed eventually with this product, with years of using us as beta testers and shrinking the size of it.
• enson110 3y ago
  After watching the video, I have two conclusions: 1. Vision Pro will definitely replace all kind of monitors, such as TV, projectors, etc., because it provides a completely immersive watching experience 2. Besides that, due to the limitations of latency and noise issues in the low light situations, it will still be an entertainment toy instead of a productive tool
• pjmlp 3y ago
  Lovely it feels like seeing a demo for Holo Lens, how things change the more they stay the same.
• mch82 3y ago
  Unexpected that it’s possible to ski while wearing a Vision Pro (demonstrated close to the end of the WSJ video review). That’s the first time I’ve seen that Vision Pro works outside. Skiing is pretty complicated, so that implies a pretty solid display.
• wolframhempel 3y ago
  I work from home with my family and pets jumping around. Having a device that isolates you to some extend while giving you effectively unlimited screen space (and hopefully individual floaty windows in a future update) is quite attractive to me.
• Razengan 3y ago
  @dang: Why was the "The Best Headset Yet" removed from the title of this post, but the other review post still has the "Magic, until it's not" in the title? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39195419 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39195419
• masfoobar 3y ago
  The technology of what we see with Meta/Vive/etc VR headsets, as well as what with see with Apple Vision, will be nothing more than a pair of glasses so light you will hardly notice it This is what it will be like in 10 years. The current generation (teens and adulets) wondering around the streets with their head sinked to their phones, will be replaced wearing "specs" 24/7. In the next 20-25, I would not be surprised if it becomes no more than contact lenses. Monitors will likely be a thing of the past.. even giant TVs in the living room. Same for (physical) keyboard and mouse, being replaced by IR equiverlants being as good/responsive. The technology is not there, yet. This is a glimpse of what our everyday will be, and in the working office. Interesting to see where it goes.
  • Gazoche 3y ago
    > In the next 20-25, I would not be surprised if it becomes no more than contact lenses. I can see the current XR headsets shrinking down to the size of a pair of glasses within a couple decades, but contact lenses would require a giant leap forward in technology. You'd need displays, electronics, sensors and batteries that can all fit together inside a paper-thin plane, and also, somehow, be invisible. Not saying it will never happen but we are really talking sci-fi tech at this point.
    • masfoobar 3y ago
      If I went back in time (say... 1991) and told people my predictions of the future, I will likely be laughed at for being sci-fi tech. For example, let suggest I predict that by 2011 most people in developed Countries will have a PDA allowing you to make calls or connect with people all over the world. Sure many will laugh at me. I continue to say that these PDA's will be a 5" touchscreen, allowing you to play games. Games far more powerful than the Mega Drive and can play with your friends from anywhere in the world. The PDA has a far superior, higher resolution screen beyond 640x480 and can render much faster 3D images than the supercomputers of today (ie SGI workstations) All of these claims.. alongside explaining what a PDA is, which you can fit in your pocket that wont need charging for 5+ hours, etc... Even people who do see the possibility will likely spend most of their efforts explaining that their RC Cars don't last 30 mins without recharding the batteries, so this wont work, either! Of course by PDA (Personal Data Assistant) - I refer to what we call Smartphones today. Point is - I try to be realistic about future tech even in the next 20-25 years.. but I leave some areas open to being more "advanced" than we anticipate. Yes.. contact lenses is a stretch for "next 20-25 years" but lets not ignore the suggestion. Young kids in 2040 will laugh at how we managed to wear these "heavy" VR headsets. Who knows how this type of tech will evolve and mix with other tech.
• calini 3y ago
  I'm incredibly excited for the software that will inevitably get cloned onto the Quest!
• trzeci 3y ago
  What's the device model (in Apple signature, like iPhone14,4) when Vision Pro is used?
• lklkjl 3y ago
  [flagged]
• lklkjl 3y ago
  [flagged]
• camgunz 3y ago
  My feeling is that Apple went entirely the wrong way here. They made an expensive device that doesn't meaningfully move the needle on AR/VR or AR/VR UX. As a result, they've narrowed the market so much that they can't convince app developers (who they've spent the last few years alienating) to develop for it, and are cannibalizing future sales (to Nilay Patel's point) by convincing people that a lot of these technologies (vision tracking, passthrough) are cul-de-sacs. If they'd made something like "Vision Air" that was essentially Meta's Ray-Ban Smart Glasses plus AR for $999 they'd sell millions, they'd have a market for app developers, they'd convince people there was a point to having them. That's an actual interesting product and it's closer to where they want to be anyway. This feels broadly like a staff retention project, or some kind of market positioning strategy or supply chain capture strategy or something. I just can't believe this product was the point of all the time, effort, and money Apple spent on it.
  • sudhirj 3y ago
    This is generally true of most of the product line... the iPod Nano / Shuffle were very popular but not the first iPod, the Watch is popular now, but the first one wasn't a all that, same with AirPods, and of course the iPhone itself. Apple has visibility into the Vision Air, and the Pro 2 & 3 and maybe 4 as well, so I'm curious to see where in are in 3 years or iterations.
    • camgunz 3y ago
      TL;DR: I'll be super surprised if this thing makes any dent in tech/culture whatsoever. It's way too expensive (we're not too far out from used car territory here [0]) and breaks no meaningful new ground. Eh I think there are a couple of important differences. The first difference is that the iPhone wasn't 300% the price of the contemporary Nokia N95. It was actually around 30% cheaper ($500 vs. $730). The Vision Pro is $3,500 and its closest competition is the Quest Pro at $1,200. I don't think anyone would argue that the experience justifies the price difference. The second difference is that the iPhone foretold how people were going to use phones in the future. The technology was good and convincing enough that it--to my sorrow--killed other ideas instantly. The Vision Pro obviously hasn't done this. People are buying the state of the art when they buy the Vision Pro, but people were buying the future when they bought the iPhone, and everyone knows it. And I mean, inventing the future is a bonkers high bar. I admit we shouldn't be holding any company--including Apple--to that standard. It was a confluence of a talented, experienced team, world events, and technological progress. I'm saying I find it hard to square the fact that buying the future (the iPhone) cost less than the then state of the art, whereas Apple's clearly not created the future here, and priced it way out of bounds. It would be like if the iPhone ran the best version of Symbian and had the best resisitive touch screen or physical keyboard that could possibly be made, and then they sold it for $2k. We wouldn't even be talking about this product as a real product if it weren't Apple selling it. We'd assume only rich people would buy it and it would impact the culture not at all. Also, that's what's happening! Well, that's the best case. The probable actual outcome is people not only get used to the idea that AR/VR has hit a ceiling and is really expensive, but a few really obnoxious people wear the Vision Pro to cafes and everyone gets the idea that it's extremely uncool. This thing is at best a dev kit and at worst a bauble. [0]: https://indianapolis.craigslist.org/search/cta?hasPic=1&max_price=5000&sort=pricedsc#search=1~gallery~0~0 https://indianapolis.craigslist.org/search/cta?hasPic=1&max_...
• meindnoch 3y ago
  Is there a prediction market for "the Vision Pro is going to flop"?
• Geee 3y ago
  I see a minor complaint about eye tracking, but people conveniently forget about the status quo. The status quo is holding large objects which are strapped on your hands and using point-and-shoot to click on items. You literally have to shoot items like on a shooting range, and hope that you hit. It's ridiculous. You can't use standard UIs with that kind of interaction, because everything is way too small. And while you're strapped to those items you can't use keyboard or anything else with your hands. You can't scratch an itch or put something in your mouth. Your hands are occupied and you feel like you're in jail. Surprisingly you actually want to have hands. This is the single most important innovation in Apple Vision. It gives you hands.
  • bdemirkir 3y ago
    Only if it already wasn't available in other VR/AR platforms. Hand tracking is available on Meta Quest platform (albeit not very reliable, I admit) since December 2019.
    • Geee 3y ago
      It's a combination of eye tracking and hand gestures. You use eyes as the primary pointing device on Vision Pro. Hands are used for clicking, scrolling etc.
• irusensei 3y ago
  I'd buy it if it have advantages over a monitor. Assuming of course the Airplay capability is spotless and very low latency. AV1 encoding on the Mac side would be a must.
• justanotherjoe 3y ago
  i never done it, but i imagine making ui for a vr app is going to be a nightmare. So much real estate to fill, and how in your face everything is.
• robg 3y ago
  Why put so much emphasis on FaceTime and other video calls? Seems like that’s a great opportunity to take the thing off and have a conversation. EyeSight too could be marketed more like glances than a full on experience.
• jack_riminton 3y ago
  I really hope this product fails. Our lives are already being ruined by screens, having one strapped to your eyes is a retrograde step
• OOPMan 3y ago
  Another solution in search of a problem... Unless the problem is Apple fans having too much disposable income, in which case I guess this is an excellent solution XD
• nojvek 3y ago
  I’ve heard Meta is going full throttle to make their Ray Ban form factor glasses have an AR display. Very much like the XReal glasses but with resolution of Quest line. I loved my XReals. The biggest issue with them was it had no head/position tracking to keep the screens in one place. The technology I’d throw my money is glasses that: - look like fashionable glasses. Not that glasshole crap from Google. Or VisionPro goggles weighing a kilo. XReal are fashionable enough that most people didn’t notice it when I was using it in public. - Add an unobtrusive display only visible to you, not to bystanders. Text display ought to be crisp and readable. - Built in speakers audible only to you, not to bystanders. - track head position so windows can stay floated in space instead of moving with head. The immersion of virtual object. - some form of finger tracking to select and tap on things. Again private, shouldn’t need to put them infront of my face. - pretty darn good contextual AI that has understanding of world around me. Show me gps directions. When I meet someone, recall their notes so I can have a meaningful conversations. Fact check my conversations on the fly. Be the bicyle of my mind.
• SebFender 3y ago
  Her persona isn't that bad - it's pretty much what she looks like...
• feliciegerald 3y ago
  [dead]
• feliciegerald 3y ago
  [dead]
• jessica310 3y ago
  [dead]