7 ms·

> One of the realities of the iPad is that, for most customers, it is a personal video player; for that particular use case the Apple Vision is superior in near

> One of the realities of the iPad is that, for most customers, it is a personal video player; for that particular use case the Apple Vision is superior in nearly every way. Pretty hard for me to imagine parents handing their young kids AVP instead of an ipad to watch videos, or an adult putting on AVP as they go to sleep instead of the pad on the side of the bed. Some people will prefer AVP on a plane over an ipad perhaps, but not all. Maybe teens will prefer it for casual watching, but many people will prefer something where it is less awkward to get up and pee or get a snack or interact with someone else in your house.

cramjabsyn 3y ago
The quest 3 does essentially the same at roughly 10x lower price. I say that because I think the price tag makes AVP a non starter for vast majority of families with kids. I think its out of reach price-wise even for a lot of professionals without kids tbh. But also this is the first version. The original iPhone didn't have copy/paste or the ability to shoot video. The software will continue to get refined and the hardware will get smaller. It'll eventually fit into roughly standard sized glasses and I think that's going to change everything
- bemusedthrow75 3y ago
  > The original iPhone didn't have copy/paste I eventually did get iPhones, but vividly remember being laughed at -- as a Mac user -- for choosing the little white HTC Magic with a trackball because I prioritised the idea of actually being able to edit text (which we now do on iPhones with a force-touch gesture not much more elegant than that trackball and lacking some of its nuance.)
- kshacker 3y ago
  There have to be limits to miniaturization. I have seen the industry evolve from 8088 chips to now; and what we have now was likely unimaginable then; but aren't we going to run into limits eventually? When I look at my Apple Watch, even that feels too big (thick) to me, so thinning AVP is quite far off IMO. On the other hand, all the research to make things thin will finally pay off when it happens. If Vision Pro can go half its weight and double the battery (even if detached like now), that will probably be the point when it becomes a serious platform.
- mrcwinn 3y ago
  I own a Quest 3 and on day three of AVP. I can assure you, the difference in quality - and therefore movie-watching experience - is night and day between these devices. Watching a movie in AVP is outstanding. This device doesn't shine in all cases, but it shines there. It's like saying, "Sure, Ferarris are cool, but my VW can also drive to the track." (No shade thrown to VWs. Love the boxy, 90s-era Jetta.) Usual disclaimers: Is it for everyone? Probably not. Is it expensive? Very. Is it perfect? No. "Essentially the same?" Not at all.
  - crazygringo 3y ago
    There's no difference in detail for 1080p content. There absolutely is for 4K content though. If you're happy with 1080p the Quest is perfectly fine. Not for the AR experience of a screen in your living room, but for a VR experience watching a floating screen in space.
  - cramjabsyn 3y ago
    Yeah the VW/Ferrari analogy is good, because as two cars they do essentially the same thing. Also I think the group of people who are shelling out $4k for the AVR are going to be heavily biased to justify the expense. I don't think there's a $3000 difference between the two devices. Maybe $500.
    - FumblingBear 3y ago
      Fundamentally though, that's just the nature of diminishing returns. Of course the value proposition for the Quest 3 is far better than the value prop of the Vision Pro. It's no different than consumer GPU's. There will be enthusiasts who purchase the GTX 4090 for $2000 but the average consumer is far better off buying something like a 3060Ti for $340. My favorite example of this is a site called Logical Increments [0] that clearly shows just how expensive pushing to the next tier of quality is as you scale up. [0] - https://www.logicalincrements.com/ https://www.logicalincrements.com/
      - hackeraccount 3y ago
- deepGem 3y ago
  There is a counter argument to this - the iPhone shape did not change, the shape evolved. Apple is never known to change shapes or geometry, they evolve from the same geometric construct. The AVP fitting into standard sized glasses like swim goggles is a possibility but it'll be more like Cyclops visors. I am not sure if it will ever achieve a Rayban form factor.
  - smileson2 3y ago
    [dead]
- m3kw9 3y ago
  A card board home also can be argued to do essentially what house does. Please do not write such arguments
- jsbisviewtiful 3y ago
  > I think the price tag makes AVP a non starter for vast majority of families with kids. I don't have kids and the price is still outlandish for my household of well-earners. I would never pay more than $2k for this.
  - bemusedthrow75 3y ago
    I think it’s that and also more than that. For example I would like, and could reasonably afford, a decent technical camera rig and a 45mp+ digital mirrorless camera to go on the back of it. I know how to use it properly to get value from it. The outlay for this is more than the Vision Pro by a small margin. But there are many things I probably should spend that money on before that. The Vision Pro, as amusing as it surely is, is way, way down the road beyond even that purchase. Having the money to spend on something — whether a personal or business expense - means engaging with the opportunity cost of spending the money. And even if you comfortably have the money, you still question the value. What is going on right now is a lot of people have a Vision Pro on fifteen day approval and they are all feverishly writing blog posts and tweets to explore every possible way that they could get other people to validate their impulse purchase. Because that’s what it is. Unless you’re going to build an app for it —- go all-in on that ecosystem —- it’s a weird thing to prioritise spending $3500 on.
- GeekyBear 3y ago
  > The quest 3 does essentially the same at roughly 10x lower price. Only if you claim that having "a screen" is the only metric that counts. > Apple is very proud of the displays inside the Vision Pro, and for good reason — they represent a huge leap forward in display technology... They also look generally incredible — sharp enough to read text on without even thinking about it... The displays are the main reason the Vision Pro is so expensive — they’re at the heart of the Vision Pro experience and what makes the whole thing work. You are always looking at them, after all. https://www.theverge.com/24054862/apple-vision-pro-review-vr-ar-headset-features-price https://www.theverge.com/24054862/apple-vision-pro-review-vr...
brk 3y ago
I agree, for whatever it's worth. There is already a social stigma around people being focused on their phones/screens, and the disconnect it creates with people around you. But that disconnect is somewhat virtual in that the phone is absorbing your attention, but it's not a physical barrier. These AR glasses all, by design, create a very real physical barrier between the wearer and their surroundings. It also doesn't help that they look goofy, and sometimes slightly creepy. I think this creates a much bigger barrier to widespread adoption, it is a much larger conscious decision by a user to wear an AR kit. You can't just glance at it and get sucked into the content stream, it is a very distinct process to put it on/take it off. I've been intrigued by the Apple Vision, and other AR devices, but it still feels like there isn't a breakthrough moment for them.
- ghaff 3y ago
  I'm already not a huge fan of wearing something like noise canceling earpods out in public. I couldn't imagine wearing goggles isolating me from what's going on. But I realize a lot of people don't care.
  - Lio 3y ago
    I love noise cancelling headphones in public. Many shops, cafes and restaurants insist on playing music I really hate. Certain types of popular music make my skin crawl. My favourite tech product of recent years has been effective noise cancelling headphones I can keep in my pocket to block that out.
- j4yav 3y ago
  Slightly creepy? It looks like someone wired their whole face directly to the internet dopamine tap and turned it to eleven.
  - bemusedthrow75 3y ago
    Oh hush. You can still see their "eyes" [0]. What are you complaining about? ;-) [0] not much better than the creepy face-screens in Jamin Winans' amazing low-budget movie, Ink
cmiller1 3y ago
> less awkward to get up and pee Arguable, imagine getting up to pee and not interrupting your movie at all.
- furyofantares 3y ago
  More succinctly, here's my point: Maybe AVP is a better personal video player for people who are very into optimizing the experience of the content they're consuming. But almost every use of an ipad as a personal video player that I can think of isn't that.
- wcrossbow 3y ago
  Maybe for the ladies or the men that pee sitting down, if they manage to make their way to the toilet without rolling down a flight of stairs. However, if I try to pee with one of this on my wife will not appreciate it.
  - __egb__ 3y ago
    What if there were an app that could overlay a calculated stream trajectory over the view of the toilet, showing you exactly where and how to stand to minimize urination errors. The name of the app could be Piss Optimal Flow Flight, or Piss OFF.
    - cozzyd 3y ago
      Gamifying stand-up urination is probably the best use case for AR I've heard
    - dvngnt_ 3y ago
      not if there's a split steam
  - shwaj 3y ago
    Let's hear it for the sitzpinklers!
  - Yizahi 3y ago
shusaku 3y ago
To be fair, it was pretty hard for me to imagine parents handing their young kids an iPad.
saagarjha 3y ago
Apple Vision Pro is heavy and inconvenient to use. It has glare and poor FoV. It gets hot and has a short battery life. There are plenty of reasons why you might not want to use it, even if it is actually pretty nice for watching movies.
- mvkel 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - saagarjha 3y ago
    I'm replying to you from one :)
    - mvkel 3y ago
      Pwned. Rereading your comment, I apologize. You were citing the most common "cons" of it, which are totally valid reasons not to buy one. AND it's still the best VR experience we've got :)
      - saagarjha 3y ago
        I agree!
- ramesh31 3y ago
  >It has glare and poor FoV. It gets hot and has a short battery life. FOV is the most unforgivable. I can't for the life of me imagine who is deciding that 110 is sufficient. I would give up just about every single other specification in a headset for 180°+, and I have owned just about every consumer headset released since DK2.
  - crazygringo 3y ago
    > I would give up just about every single other specification in a headset for 180+. I'm having a very difficult time imagining how that would be physically possible. I'm actually curious what the highest theoretically possible FOV is for a conveniently sized device strapped to your face, and how close we are to it already.
justapassenger 3y ago
[dead]
mithr 3y ago
The biggest drawback for me is that AVP only works if you're watching things alone. You can easily watch an iPad with your SO, with your kid, with your friends — and AVP may be a better experience, but only for you alone. It may be amazing on a plane, but even then only when you're traveling by yourself.
- saagarjha 3y ago
  Nit: you can group watch things with people who are remote. My friends have done this thing since the pandemic where we pick a show and all watch it from our own homes but while on a Discord voice call, and it just got a whole lot nicer to do this since last week ;)
duxup 3y ago
Yup, my ability to quickly monitor what my kids are up to is a big deal to me. Putting on a headset, software options for monitoring, they're just not as quick, detailed, or convenient.
tim333 3y ago
I watch a fair bit of video and have no great desire for some heavy mask thing on my face. The laptop works fine for casual viewing.
wilg 3y ago
Also, iPads are worse personal video players than laptops. You wouldn't buy a personal video player with a 4:3 screen. Plus it doesn't stand up on its own so you can't set it on a surface to watch. You could reassemble it into a laptop if you want, but you'd be better off just with the laptop.

cramjabsyn 3y ago

The quest 3 does essentially the same at roughly 10x lower price. I say that because I think the price tag makes AVP a non starter for vast majority of families with kids. I think its out of reach price-wise even for a lot of professionals without kids tbh. But also this is the first version. The original iPhone didn't have copy/paste or the ability to shoot video. The software will continue to get refined and the hardware will get smaller. It'll eventually fit into roughly standard sized glasses and I think that's going to change everything

bemusedthrow75 3y ago
> The original iPhone didn't have copy/paste I eventually did get iPhones, but vividly remember being laughed at -- as a Mac user -- for choosing the little white HTC Magic with a trackball because I prioritised the idea of actually being able to edit text (which we now do on iPhones with a force-touch gesture not much more elegant than that trackball and lacking some of its nuance.)
kshacker 3y ago
There have to be limits to miniaturization. I have seen the industry evolve from 8088 chips to now; and what we have now was likely unimaginable then; but aren't we going to run into limits eventually? When I look at my Apple Watch, even that feels too big (thick) to me, so thinning AVP is quite far off IMO. On the other hand, all the research to make things thin will finally pay off when it happens. If Vision Pro can go half its weight and double the battery (even if detached like now), that will probably be the point when it becomes a serious platform.
mrcwinn 3y ago
I own a Quest 3 and on day three of AVP. I can assure you, the difference in quality - and therefore movie-watching experience - is night and day between these devices. Watching a movie in AVP is outstanding. This device doesn't shine in all cases, but it shines there. It's like saying, "Sure, Ferarris are cool, but my VW can also drive to the track." (No shade thrown to VWs. Love the boxy, 90s-era Jetta.) Usual disclaimers: Is it for everyone? Probably not. Is it expensive? Very. Is it perfect? No. "Essentially the same?" Not at all.
- crazygringo 3y ago
  There's no difference in detail for 1080p content. There absolutely is for 4K content though. If you're happy with 1080p the Quest is perfectly fine. Not for the AR experience of a screen in your living room, but for a VR experience watching a floating screen in space.
- cramjabsyn 3y ago
  Yeah the VW/Ferrari analogy is good, because as two cars they do essentially the same thing. Also I think the group of people who are shelling out $4k for the AVR are going to be heavily biased to justify the expense. I don't think there's a $3000 difference between the two devices. Maybe $500.
  - FumblingBear 3y ago
    Fundamentally though, that's just the nature of diminishing returns. Of course the value proposition for the Quest 3 is far better than the value prop of the Vision Pro. It's no different than consumer GPU's. There will be enthusiasts who purchase the GTX 4090 for $2000 but the average consumer is far better off buying something like a 3060Ti for $340. My favorite example of this is a site called Logical Increments [0] that clearly shows just how expensive pushing to the next tier of quality is as you scale up. [0] - https://www.logicalincrements.com/ https://www.logicalincrements.com/
    - hackeraccount 3y ago
deepGem 3y ago
There is a counter argument to this - the iPhone shape did not change, the shape evolved. Apple is never known to change shapes or geometry, they evolve from the same geometric construct. The AVP fitting into standard sized glasses like swim goggles is a possibility but it'll be more like Cyclops visors. I am not sure if it will ever achieve a Rayban form factor.
- smileson2 3y ago
  [dead]
m3kw9 3y ago
A card board home also can be argued to do essentially what house does. Please do not write such arguments
jsbisviewtiful 3y ago
> I think the price tag makes AVP a non starter for vast majority of families with kids. I don't have kids and the price is still outlandish for my household of well-earners. I would never pay more than $2k for this.
- bemusedthrow75 3y ago
  I think it’s that and also more than that. For example I would like, and could reasonably afford, a decent technical camera rig and a 45mp+ digital mirrorless camera to go on the back of it. I know how to use it properly to get value from it. The outlay for this is more than the Vision Pro by a small margin. But there are many things I probably should spend that money on before that. The Vision Pro, as amusing as it surely is, is way, way down the road beyond even that purchase. Having the money to spend on something — whether a personal or business expense - means engaging with the opportunity cost of spending the money. And even if you comfortably have the money, you still question the value. What is going on right now is a lot of people have a Vision Pro on fifteen day approval and they are all feverishly writing blog posts and tweets to explore every possible way that they could get other people to validate their impulse purchase. Because that’s what it is. Unless you’re going to build an app for it —- go all-in on that ecosystem —- it’s a weird thing to prioritise spending $3500 on.
GeekyBear 3y ago
> The quest 3 does essentially the same at roughly 10x lower price. Only if you claim that having "a screen" is the only metric that counts. > Apple is very proud of the displays inside the Vision Pro, and for good reason — they represent a huge leap forward in display technology... They also look generally incredible — sharp enough to read text on without even thinking about it... The displays are the main reason the Vision Pro is so expensive — they’re at the heart of the Vision Pro experience and what makes the whole thing work. You are always looking at them, after all. https://www.theverge.com/24054862/apple-vision-pro-review-vr-ar-headset-features-price https://www.theverge.com/24054862/apple-vision-pro-review-vr...

brk 3y ago

I agree, for whatever it's worth. There is already a social stigma around people being focused on their phones/screens, and the disconnect it creates with people around you. But that disconnect is somewhat virtual in that the phone is absorbing your attention, but it's not a physical barrier. These AR glasses all, by design, create a very real physical barrier between the wearer and their surroundings. It also doesn't help that they look goofy, and sometimes slightly creepy. I think this creates a much bigger barrier to widespread adoption, it is a much larger conscious decision by a user to wear an AR kit. You can't just glance at it and get sucked into the content stream, it is a very distinct process to put it on/take it off. I've been intrigued by the Apple Vision, and other AR devices, but it still feels like there isn't a breakthrough moment for them.

ghaff 3y ago
I'm already not a huge fan of wearing something like noise canceling earpods out in public. I couldn't imagine wearing goggles isolating me from what's going on. But I realize a lot of people don't care.
- Lio 3y ago
  I love noise cancelling headphones in public. Many shops, cafes and restaurants insist on playing music I really hate. Certain types of popular music make my skin crawl. My favourite tech product of recent years has been effective noise cancelling headphones I can keep in my pocket to block that out.
j4yav 3y ago
Slightly creepy? It looks like someone wired their whole face directly to the internet dopamine tap and turned it to eleven.
- bemusedthrow75 3y ago
  Oh hush. You can still see their "eyes" [0]. What are you complaining about? ;-) [0] not much better than the creepy face-screens in Jamin Winans' amazing low-budget movie, Ink

cmiller1 3y ago

> less awkward to get up and pee Arguable, imagine getting up to pee and not interrupting your movie at all.

furyofantares 3y ago
More succinctly, here's my point: Maybe AVP is a better personal video player for people who are very into optimizing the experience of the content they're consuming. But almost every use of an ipad as a personal video player that I can think of isn't that.
wcrossbow 3y ago
Maybe for the ladies or the men that pee sitting down, if they manage to make their way to the toilet without rolling down a flight of stairs. However, if I try to pee with one of this on my wife will not appreciate it.
- __egb__ 3y ago
  What if there were an app that could overlay a calculated stream trajectory over the view of the toilet, showing you exactly where and how to stand to minimize urination errors. The name of the app could be Piss Optimal Flow Flight, or Piss OFF.
  - cozzyd 3y ago
    Gamifying stand-up urination is probably the best use case for AR I've heard
  - dvngnt_ 3y ago
    not if there's a split steam
- shwaj 3y ago
  Let's hear it for the sitzpinklers!
- Yizahi 3y ago

shusaku 3y ago

To be fair, it was pretty hard for me to imagine parents handing their young kids an iPad.

saagarjha 3y ago

Apple Vision Pro is heavy and inconvenient to use. It has glare and poor FoV. It gets hot and has a short battery life. There are plenty of reasons why you might not want to use it, even if it is actually pretty nice for watching movies.

mvkel 3y ago
[flagged]
- saagarjha 3y ago
  I'm replying to you from one :)
  - mvkel 3y ago
    Pwned. Rereading your comment, I apologize. You were citing the most common "cons" of it, which are totally valid reasons not to buy one. AND it's still the best VR experience we've got :)
    - saagarjha 3y ago
      I agree!
ramesh31 3y ago
>It has glare and poor FoV. It gets hot and has a short battery life. FOV is the most unforgivable. I can't for the life of me imagine who is deciding that 110 is sufficient. I would give up just about every single other specification in a headset for 180°+, and I have owned just about every consumer headset released since DK2.
- crazygringo 3y ago
  > I would give up just about every single other specification in a headset for 180+. I'm having a very difficult time imagining how that would be physically possible. I'm actually curious what the highest theoretically possible FOV is for a conveniently sized device strapped to your face, and how close we are to it already.

justapassenger 3y ago

[dead]

mithr 3y ago

The biggest drawback for me is that AVP only works if you're watching things alone. You can easily watch an iPad with your SO, with your kid, with your friends — and AVP may be a better experience, but only for you alone. It may be amazing on a plane, but even then only when you're traveling by yourself.

saagarjha 3y ago
Nit: you can group watch things with people who are remote. My friends have done this thing since the pandemic where we pick a show and all watch it from our own homes but while on a Discord voice call, and it just got a whole lot nicer to do this since last week ;)

duxup 3y ago

Yup, my ability to quickly monitor what my kids are up to is a big deal to me. Putting on a headset, software options for monitoring, they're just not as quick, detailed, or convenient.

tim333 3y ago

I watch a fair bit of video and have no great desire for some heavy mask thing on my face. The laptop works fine for casual viewing.

wilg 3y ago

Also, iPads are worse personal video players than laptops. You wouldn't buy a personal video player with a 4:3 screen. Plus it doesn't stand up on its own so you can't set it on a surface to watch. You could reassemble it into a laptop if you want, but you'd be better off just with the laptop.