4 ms·

> they also offer bifocals, and progressives Wow, really? I don't see how that makes any sense. Bifocals are for things that vary in distance, but the displays

> they also offer bifocals, and progressives Wow, really? I don't see how that makes any sense. Bifocals are for things that vary in distance, but the displays are at a constant distance from your eyes. Are people really so used to looking through bifocals that they need them in a headset just to feel comfortable even though they aren't necessary to focus? I'm disappointed there is zero detail about the eye tracking cameras. Where they're located, what kind they are, how they see around/through the lenses, where the infrared illumination is. Has anyone else been investigating this?

pram 3y ago
I’ve found a lot of recent teardowns from them are light on interesting details. They seem to be making short YouTube videos now that don’t really cover everything. The screen analysis was interesting but they rushed through the rest, and didn’t even look at any of the cameras???
daemonologist 3y ago
I'm not aware of any information on camera details, but you can see the locations of the cameras and illuminators in this image from Apple: https://web.archive.org/web/20240206041049/https://www.apple.com/v/apple-vision-pro/c/images/overview/technology/features/eye_tracking_on__ln11reqs6mi6_large.jpg https://web.archive.org/web/20240206041049/https://www.apple... The tracking system is inboard of the lenses, so it doesn't need to look through them. There are two cameras per eye, below and on the inside (near the nose), and infrared illuminators (not sure if they're just LEDs or something more complex) surrounding the lenses on all sides.
- modeless 3y ago
  Thanks for that image, I can see the locations in the teardown now as well. But it couldn't be more clear that the cameras do need to look through the lenses. And furthermore, the IR LEDs also go through the lenses. They are all on the display side of the lens. It must have been tricky to avoid reflections from the illuminators going through those very fancy lenses.
  - daemonologist 3y ago
    You're right, thanks for correcting my mistake - I was looking at a teardown image where the lenses had already been removed.
outworlder 3y ago
> but the displays are at a constant distance from your eyes Nitpick, but the focal point is about 6 feet away, which is the important thing for this discussion.
jrockway 3y ago
I don't see how bifocals could possibly work in this; the display is always a constant distance away. What I bet they do is interpolate between your distance and close-up prescription to guess what prescription you need to view the constant-distance displays. You can ask your optometrist for "computer glasses" if you want to see this in action.
- heisenzombie 3y ago
  That brings up a question for me: Are there people with wildly different near and far prescriptions whose vision would be improved by looking at the world through this device which reprojects it at a fixed optical distance such that a single prescription can be used?
  - modeless 3y ago
    Certainly wearing this device would remove the need to refocus your eyes, so people with presbyopia (everyone, yes everyone, gets it eventually) would see a benefit. But there are so many other downsides (FOV, latency, resolution, motion blur, color gamut, brightness, reprojection errors, not to mention battery life and comfort) that it would be hard to imagine that anyone's vision would be improved on the whole.
  - jrockway 3y ago
    Yeah. It would be nice to stare off into infinity as you're working. I don't think a computer needs to be involved, though, you need glasses that have an autofocus system. That's what progressive bifocals try to be; when you look at something at the bottom of your vision, it's expected that it's close, so you're looking through a lens that compensates for your eye's inability to focus on something that close. It's imperfect, though; computers are close but they often fill your whole field of vision. That's the idea behind "computer glasses", though I personally could never get used to them because I'm not always looking at computer screens from the exact same distance. That's why you'd want something to measure the distance and adjust the focus, like your camera does. I think it's too complicated and what people do to work around it is just make the font gigantic or whatever. I have bifocals but honestly have enough control over focus to not really get tired looking at my computer screen through my distance prescription. But if I'm tired it does get harder, and I just lean back a little bit and look through my close-up prescription. (I have progressives so infinite adjustment between the two. It is nice when you get it perfect but only a tiny area of your vision is in perfect focus.) Also something that annoys me is that glasses lenses are super primitive compared to camera lenses. I have a pretty heavy prescription and always notice the chromatic aberration. Camera lenses use multiple elements to minimize this problem. I'd spend $3600 on a pair of glasses that could focus the entire field of view on one plane automatically. Prescription changes would just be firmware updates, so you wouldn't even be buying them every year. But, I don't think the tech is anywhere close to that yet. The vision pro isn't suitable, it's low resolution and has low battery life. You need 16+ hour battery life for glasses. But if someone invented my thing I'd buy it.
banana_giraffe 3y ago
Not mentioned, but Apple also has help pages for what to order if you only wear/need reader eyeglasses. I'm equally confused why this would be necessary.
thomastjeffery 3y ago
It's a contextual communication choice: the intended reader is someone who is concerned about their bifocal prescription. I would assume that whoever makes the lenses will simply choose the correct focal measurement corresponding to the Vision Pro's fixed 6ft focal distance, and manufacture a lens for that specific focus. What needs to be communicated to the intended reader is that a bifocal prescription will be properly accommodated.
- modeless 3y ago
  I'm pretty sure you're right. I'm not the intended reader. I'm wishing for a much more technical teardown while iFixit is going for a general pop sci audience.

pram 3y ago

I’ve found a lot of recent teardowns from them are light on interesting details. They seem to be making short YouTube videos now that don’t really cover everything. The screen analysis was interesting but they rushed through the rest, and didn’t even look at any of the cameras???

daemonologist 3y ago

I'm not aware of any information on camera details, but you can see the locations of the cameras and illuminators in this image from Apple: https://web.archive.org/web/20240206041049/https://www.apple.com/v/apple-vision-pro/c/images/overview/technology/features/eye_tracking_on__ln11reqs6mi6_large.jpg https://web.archive.org/web/20240206041049/https://www.apple... The tracking system is inboard of the lenses, so it doesn't need to look through them. There are two cameras per eye, below and on the inside (near the nose), and infrared illuminators (not sure if they're just LEDs or something more complex) surrounding the lenses on all sides.

modeless 3y ago
Thanks for that image, I can see the locations in the teardown now as well. But it couldn't be more clear that the cameras do need to look through the lenses. And furthermore, the IR LEDs also go through the lenses. They are all on the display side of the lens. It must have been tricky to avoid reflections from the illuminators going through those very fancy lenses.
- daemonologist 3y ago
  You're right, thanks for correcting my mistake - I was looking at a teardown image where the lenses had already been removed.

outworlder 3y ago

> but the displays are at a constant distance from your eyes Nitpick, but the focal point is about 6 feet away, which is the important thing for this discussion.

jrockway 3y ago

I don't see how bifocals could possibly work in this; the display is always a constant distance away. What I bet they do is interpolate between your distance and close-up prescription to guess what prescription you need to view the constant-distance displays. You can ask your optometrist for "computer glasses" if you want to see this in action.

heisenzombie 3y ago
That brings up a question for me: Are there people with wildly different near and far prescriptions whose vision would be improved by looking at the world through this device which reprojects it at a fixed optical distance such that a single prescription can be used?
- modeless 3y ago
  Certainly wearing this device would remove the need to refocus your eyes, so people with presbyopia (everyone, yes everyone, gets it eventually) would see a benefit. But there are so many other downsides (FOV, latency, resolution, motion blur, color gamut, brightness, reprojection errors, not to mention battery life and comfort) that it would be hard to imagine that anyone's vision would be improved on the whole.
- jrockway 3y ago
  Yeah. It would be nice to stare off into infinity as you're working. I don't think a computer needs to be involved, though, you need glasses that have an autofocus system. That's what progressive bifocals try to be; when you look at something at the bottom of your vision, it's expected that it's close, so you're looking through a lens that compensates for your eye's inability to focus on something that close. It's imperfect, though; computers are close but they often fill your whole field of vision. That's the idea behind "computer glasses", though I personally could never get used to them because I'm not always looking at computer screens from the exact same distance. That's why you'd want something to measure the distance and adjust the focus, like your camera does. I think it's too complicated and what people do to work around it is just make the font gigantic or whatever. I have bifocals but honestly have enough control over focus to not really get tired looking at my computer screen through my distance prescription. But if I'm tired it does get harder, and I just lean back a little bit and look through my close-up prescription. (I have progressives so infinite adjustment between the two. It is nice when you get it perfect but only a tiny area of your vision is in perfect focus.) Also something that annoys me is that glasses lenses are super primitive compared to camera lenses. I have a pretty heavy prescription and always notice the chromatic aberration. Camera lenses use multiple elements to minimize this problem. I'd spend $3600 on a pair of glasses that could focus the entire field of view on one plane automatically. Prescription changes would just be firmware updates, so you wouldn't even be buying them every year. But, I don't think the tech is anywhere close to that yet. The vision pro isn't suitable, it's low resolution and has low battery life. You need 16+ hour battery life for glasses. But if someone invented my thing I'd buy it.

banana_giraffe 3y ago

Not mentioned, but Apple also has help pages for what to order if you only wear/need reader eyeglasses. I'm equally confused why this would be necessary.

thomastjeffery 3y ago

It's a contextual communication choice: the intended reader is someone who is concerned about their bifocal prescription. I would assume that whoever makes the lenses will simply choose the correct focal measurement corresponding to the Vision Pro's fixed 6ft focal distance, and manufacture a lens for that specific focus. What needs to be communicated to the intended reader is that a bifocal prescription will be properly accommodated.

modeless 3y ago
I'm pretty sure you're right. I'm not the intended reader. I'm wishing for a much more technical teardown while iFixit is going for a general pop sci audience.