5 ms·

I owned one and this article is perfectly accurate. This guy hit the nail on the head on everything. Passthrough is massively oversold, even if it's technicall

I owned one and this article is perfectly accurate. This guy hit the nail on the head on everything. Passthrough is massively oversold, even if it's technically impressive. They set expectations way too high. The comfort is the #1 reason I don't own a Vision Pro anymore. I feel exactly as the author put it, "relieved," when I take it off. I feel significantly more disconnected from my family when I have it on because I have no easy way to share my content with them. A massively improved guest mode, better casting, or something else would go a long way here. The eye tracking + tap is incredible, but Apple tried to shoehorn this into everything. It should have been the primary mode of interaction with a detailed/precision interaction when needed. Eye tracking + tap is simply not good enough for power user use cases. It was such a relief to go back to my Quest after Vision Pro because the controllers were so precise and easy to use. And finally, I'll mention that the OS + standardization of UX is HUGE. The Quest feels like a crappy Chinese clone in comparison. Every single window has a completely different way of moving, adjusting, etc. Sometimes you click in the center, sometimes you click under, sometimes you can't move it at all. On the Vision Pro, everything is standardized. I'd love to see Meta fix this.

archagon 3y ago
I also feel like the lack of precise/physical controls is going to make gaming a non-starter. Which is really the main reason I’m excited about VR in the first place.
- causi 3y ago
  Owning a Rift and a Quest 2 has pretty much convinced me I'll never be into VR. VR makes for incredible immersion but, for me, terrible gaming. Instead of putting the cool stuff from games into reality, it puts the worst parts of reality into my games. Instead of walking and crouching with a touch of a finger, now I have to walk and crouch. To look behind me I have to actually turn around. Instead of everything being in focus all the time, I have to look at things one by one. Not for me.
  - imzadi 3y ago
    I'm a bit of a VR enthusiast. I have 8 headsets (DK1, Quest 1, Quest 2, Oculus Go, Vive Pro 2, HP Reverb G2, Pico 4, Pimax Crystal). I will easily spend 2 - 6 hours a day in VR. That said, I just refuse to play any game with a stupid movement system. If I can't use my control to move around, I am not going to play the game. It's great to have those options for people who want them, but when a game tries to force me to walk in my personal space or physically turn, they are going to lose me. I don't have the balance to do that stuff.
    - shrubble 3y ago
      Is there anything good enough to substitute for a 1080p monitor for a lengthy period of time?
      - imzadi 3y ago
        The Pico 4 is actually a really good headset. It's not officially released in the US market, but can be imported from EU sellers, which is how I got mine. The resolution is pretty good and good enough to replace a monitor, imo. I've used it with the Immersed app and liked it. It's also really small and light compared to other headsets. The Pimax Crystal has great resolution and virtually no glare, but it is too heavy and bulky to wear for extended periods of time. At work, I have setup and support the Meta Quest 3. It's also a good headset, but I don't feel compelled to get one at all. The visuals comfort are on par with the Pico 4, but the Pico 4 is cheaper and not dragged down by the Meta software. Though, it should be noted that I use it for PCVR almost exclusively with Virtual Desktop.
- tcmart14 3y ago
  I would assume someone could easily integrate a controller for their app using the Game Controller framework [1]. So its not impossible. The only complaint I could see is there not being a standardize visionOS physical controller. But I assume that you could assume the PlayStation DualSense or SteelSeries Nimbus+[2] is probably what you should target controls for. [1] https://developer.apple.com/documentation/gamecontroller/ https://developer.apple.com/documentation/gamecontroller/ [2] https://www.apple.com/shop/smart-home/accessories/gaming https://www.apple.com/shop/smart-home/accessories/gaming
  - archagon 3y ago
    Unfortunately, a gamepad is just not sufficient for immersive VR gaming: you need something like the Meta Quest controller. And the lack of a first-party controller means that games will be forced to build sub-par gesture based controls as the default, with physical controls as an afterthought. (We already saw this play out with the Apple TV.) As a result, I highly doubt we'll get anything as advanced as Half-Life: Alyx on the platform.
    - Terretta 3y ago
      > a gamepad is just not sufficient for immersive VR gaming This seems strange, since so many folks love giant ultrawide screens for immersion whether playing console or PC and whether with controller or mouse+keyboard. They carry on how much immersion there is, and it's not nearly as visually immersed. So it seems less likely it's about the controller. If they find the ultrawide immersive, and the controller is fine, why not AVP, since the "look around" control is just turn your head? Do you not feel immersed when driving a car? You have fewer controls, and can't run around, you just sit there in your car seat, turn the wheel, turn your head, and gas and brake.
      - throwanem 3y ago
        It's funny you mention that metaphor in particular: driving a car does feel less immersive to me than walking. When I drive, I'm in the car; when I walk, I'm in the world.
spr-alex 3y ago
agree very much here. apple - we're missing many intuitive gestures. lets ditch the cursor paradigm eye tracking is set to work on. in the real world we have proprioception that lets us accurately interact with the environment without looking at what we're doing.
LordDragonfang 3y ago
>Passthrough is massively oversold, even if it's technically impressive. They set expectations way too high. As a Vision Pro owner, kinda, but kinda not? I have a really low-power glasses prescription (-1/-1.5) and I've come to the conclusion that everyone saying this has the priviledge of being born with perfect (irl) vision. It's intentionally a little bit out of focus to obscure the screen door effect, which I understand might be disorienting to people who've never had to wear glasses. But taking that into account, it's incredibly clear. If you've used any other pass through, it's night and day. I will frequently put on my headset having forgotten that the cover is on, and when I take it off my brain genuinely reads that as uncovering a transparent lens. The slightly reduced HDR, slight desaturation, and almost imperceptible visual snow all added up still don't detract enough from that to say it is not close to "lifelike". It's not perfect, but it's incredibly close - and probably better than a good chunk of the population's uncorrected vision. I mean, the comparison images in the article almost make the point for me. The left image, when adjusted for brightness/contrast (which the human vision system does automatically absent other stimulus, e.g. when all you can see is the headset) has a greater resemblance to what a cloudy day looks like IRL compared to the completely oversaturated, amateurly HDR'd image on the right.
- gamblor956 3y ago
  The passthrough camera has fairly low resolution compared to the inner displays, so if it looks "lifelike" to you, it's probably time to consider getting your glass prescription updated. Comparing the VP to the Quest 3, it's a significant upgrade (and should be, for the 7x price), but neither of them is anywhere close to "lifelike."
  - LordDragonfang 3y ago
    So, to gather anecdata, a question to you: do you wear corrective lenses or contacts in your day-to-day life? I never said I couldn't tell the difference between my corrected vision and the vision pro. But it's probably close to as clear as my uncorrected vision, which is how I experience life the majority of time. In a very real way, it is lifelike. My reaction to the cover coming off is "oh, I don't have my glasses on" not "oh, I'm looking at a screen". In no world would I have the same reaction to the passthrough on any other VR headset I own. The latency, lack of screen door, minimization of warping artifacts, and yes, even the resolution, are at a place where someone who doesn't have the privilege of 24/7 perfect vision could easily mistake it at first glance. There's lots of places to improve (mostly the blur when moving your head), but we're at the point where "not literally indistinguishable" is the point of contention. Also, keep in mind "lifelike" has never even meant "literally undisguisable" in the first place. People have been using it to describe graphics since the PS1, so I think it's fair to use to describe something that looks more like life than the majority of even present-day "realistic" 3D games.
petesergeant 3y ago
> I owned one and this article is perfectly accurate. This guy hit the nail on the head on everything. Strangely enough, I don't own one, but just assumed this guy had hit the nail on the head with everything. Everything else I've read felt like it was pushing an agenda, this guy's writing just seemed like it was accurately weighing the pros and cons as he saw them.
throwup238 3y ago
> I feel significantly more disconnected from my family when I have it on because I have no easy way to share my content with them. A massively improved guest mode, better casting, or something else would go a long way here. This whole paragraph sounds downright dystopian. “A family that shares content together, stays together”
- samplatt 3y ago
  You're right that we need to be aware of this because we can and WILL be exploited via these avenues, but for now at least, it's kinda the other way around - a family that stays together naturally wants to share content with each other. "Hey, let's play a game!" What sort of game? "One we can play together" Welp looks like this multi-thousand-$$ toy is out then, lets go back to traditional games.
  - throwup238 3y ago
    > a family that stays together naturally wants to share content with each other. “Content” is the worst euphemism I’ve ever heard. You have been fully exploited. Real families want to share quality family time in the real world, not “content”
    - samplatt 3y ago
      Okay: "naturally wants to share experiences with each other." Or is that too web 1.0? VR/AR has the capacity to bridge technology platforms that have hitherto been kept separate, sometimes by cultural forces, and sometimes for good reason. Words like 'content' are ripe for misinterpretation - I'd be more careful about assuming too much about strangers on the internet, mate. To be fair, I should have been less vague, especially on a thread about an apple product where people tend to get a bit evangelical.
    - mckn1ght 3y ago
      > You have been fully exploited. That's a bit harsh. "Content" can mean a wide variety of things, and smartphones/tablets are capable of displaying such a wide variety of things. We strive to curtail our own usage of devices around our young daughter at home. The extent of her screen time is maybe 1-2 movie nights per month. But she and I do around 5-10 minutes of Duolingo/Pimsleur every day. She asks every morning if we're going to "do French" today (even though we switched to Hungarian for most of this year). Are we fully exploited?
nox101 3y ago
What is the UX experience for basic web HTML input elements? (text/date/range/slider/select/...) Have they been changed for visionOS? How about flutter apps like https://flutter.github.io/samples/web/material_3_demo/ https://flutter.github.io/samples/web/material_3_demo/ I've been complaining that flutter is the next flash, meaning that by rendering their own UX instead of using the platform's they're basically making dead end apps. They'll claim devs just need to reship their apps with the latest version but that's means all old flutter apps are abandonware. It also ignores that the next platform they'll run into the same problem again.

archagon 3y ago

I also feel like the lack of precise/physical controls is going to make gaming a non-starter. Which is really the main reason I’m excited about VR in the first place.

causi 3y ago
Owning a Rift and a Quest 2 has pretty much convinced me I'll never be into VR. VR makes for incredible immersion but, for me, terrible gaming. Instead of putting the cool stuff from games into reality, it puts the worst parts of reality into my games. Instead of walking and crouching with a touch of a finger, now I have to walk and crouch. To look behind me I have to actually turn around. Instead of everything being in focus all the time, I have to look at things one by one. Not for me.
- imzadi 3y ago
  I'm a bit of a VR enthusiast. I have 8 headsets (DK1, Quest 1, Quest 2, Oculus Go, Vive Pro 2, HP Reverb G2, Pico 4, Pimax Crystal). I will easily spend 2 - 6 hours a day in VR. That said, I just refuse to play any game with a stupid movement system. If I can't use my control to move around, I am not going to play the game. It's great to have those options for people who want them, but when a game tries to force me to walk in my personal space or physically turn, they are going to lose me. I don't have the balance to do that stuff.
  - shrubble 3y ago
    Is there anything good enough to substitute for a 1080p monitor for a lengthy period of time?
    - imzadi 3y ago
      The Pico 4 is actually a really good headset. It's not officially released in the US market, but can be imported from EU sellers, which is how I got mine. The resolution is pretty good and good enough to replace a monitor, imo. I've used it with the Immersed app and liked it. It's also really small and light compared to other headsets. The Pimax Crystal has great resolution and virtually no glare, but it is too heavy and bulky to wear for extended periods of time. At work, I have setup and support the Meta Quest 3. It's also a good headset, but I don't feel compelled to get one at all. The visuals comfort are on par with the Pico 4, but the Pico 4 is cheaper and not dragged down by the Meta software. Though, it should be noted that I use it for PCVR almost exclusively with Virtual Desktop.
tcmart14 3y ago
I would assume someone could easily integrate a controller for their app using the Game Controller framework [1]. So its not impossible. The only complaint I could see is there not being a standardize visionOS physical controller. But I assume that you could assume the PlayStation DualSense or SteelSeries Nimbus+[2] is probably what you should target controls for. [1] https://developer.apple.com/documentation/gamecontroller/ https://developer.apple.com/documentation/gamecontroller/ [2] https://www.apple.com/shop/smart-home/accessories/gaming https://www.apple.com/shop/smart-home/accessories/gaming
- archagon 3y ago
  Unfortunately, a gamepad is just not sufficient for immersive VR gaming: you need something like the Meta Quest controller. And the lack of a first-party controller means that games will be forced to build sub-par gesture based controls as the default, with physical controls as an afterthought. (We already saw this play out with the Apple TV.) As a result, I highly doubt we'll get anything as advanced as Half-Life: Alyx on the platform.
  - Terretta 3y ago
    > a gamepad is just not sufficient for immersive VR gaming This seems strange, since so many folks love giant ultrawide screens for immersion whether playing console or PC and whether with controller or mouse+keyboard. They carry on how much immersion there is, and it's not nearly as visually immersed. So it seems less likely it's about the controller. If they find the ultrawide immersive, and the controller is fine, why not AVP, since the "look around" control is just turn your head? Do you not feel immersed when driving a car? You have fewer controls, and can't run around, you just sit there in your car seat, turn the wheel, turn your head, and gas and brake.
    - throwanem 3y ago
      It's funny you mention that metaphor in particular: driving a car does feel less immersive to me than walking. When I drive, I'm in the car; when I walk, I'm in the world.

spr-alex 3y ago

agree very much here. apple - we're missing many intuitive gestures. lets ditch the cursor paradigm eye tracking is set to work on. in the real world we have proprioception that lets us accurately interact with the environment without looking at what we're doing.

LordDragonfang 3y ago

>Passthrough is massively oversold, even if it's technically impressive. They set expectations way too high. As a Vision Pro owner, kinda, but kinda not? I have a really low-power glasses prescription (-1/-1.5) and I've come to the conclusion that everyone saying this has the priviledge of being born with perfect (irl) vision. It's intentionally a little bit out of focus to obscure the screen door effect, which I understand might be disorienting to people who've never had to wear glasses. But taking that into account, it's incredibly clear. If you've used any other pass through, it's night and day. I will frequently put on my headset having forgotten that the cover is on, and when I take it off my brain genuinely reads that as uncovering a transparent lens. The slightly reduced HDR, slight desaturation, and almost imperceptible visual snow all added up still don't detract enough from that to say it is not close to "lifelike". It's not perfect, but it's incredibly close - and probably better than a good chunk of the population's uncorrected vision. I mean, the comparison images in the article almost make the point for me. The left image, when adjusted for brightness/contrast (which the human vision system does automatically absent other stimulus, e.g. when all you can see is the headset) has a greater resemblance to what a cloudy day looks like IRL compared to the completely oversaturated, amateurly HDR'd image on the right.

gamblor956 3y ago
The passthrough camera has fairly low resolution compared to the inner displays, so if it looks "lifelike" to you, it's probably time to consider getting your glass prescription updated. Comparing the VP to the Quest 3, it's a significant upgrade (and should be, for the 7x price), but neither of them is anywhere close to "lifelike."
- LordDragonfang 3y ago
  So, to gather anecdata, a question to you: do you wear corrective lenses or contacts in your day-to-day life? I never said I couldn't tell the difference between my corrected vision and the vision pro. But it's probably close to as clear as my uncorrected vision, which is how I experience life the majority of time. In a very real way, it is lifelike. My reaction to the cover coming off is "oh, I don't have my glasses on" not "oh, I'm looking at a screen". In no world would I have the same reaction to the passthrough on any other VR headset I own. The latency, lack of screen door, minimization of warping artifacts, and yes, even the resolution, are at a place where someone who doesn't have the privilege of 24/7 perfect vision could easily mistake it at first glance. There's lots of places to improve (mostly the blur when moving your head), but we're at the point where "not literally indistinguishable" is the point of contention. Also, keep in mind "lifelike" has never even meant "literally undisguisable" in the first place. People have been using it to describe graphics since the PS1, so I think it's fair to use to describe something that looks more like life than the majority of even present-day "realistic" 3D games.

petesergeant 3y ago

> I owned one and this article is perfectly accurate. This guy hit the nail on the head on everything. Strangely enough, I don't own one, but just assumed this guy had hit the nail on the head with everything. Everything else I've read felt like it was pushing an agenda, this guy's writing just seemed like it was accurately weighing the pros and cons as he saw them.

throwup238 3y ago

> I feel significantly more disconnected from my family when I have it on because I have no easy way to share my content with them. A massively improved guest mode, better casting, or something else would go a long way here. This whole paragraph sounds downright dystopian. “A family that shares content together, stays together”

samplatt 3y ago
You're right that we need to be aware of this because we can and WILL be exploited via these avenues, but for now at least, it's kinda the other way around - a family that stays together naturally wants to share content with each other. "Hey, let's play a game!" What sort of game? "One we can play together" Welp looks like this multi-thousand-$$ toy is out then, lets go back to traditional games.
- throwup238 3y ago
  > a family that stays together naturally wants to share content with each other. “Content” is the worst euphemism I’ve ever heard. You have been fully exploited. Real families want to share quality family time in the real world, not “content”
  - samplatt 3y ago
    Okay: "naturally wants to share experiences with each other." Or is that too web 1.0? VR/AR has the capacity to bridge technology platforms that have hitherto been kept separate, sometimes by cultural forces, and sometimes for good reason. Words like 'content' are ripe for misinterpretation - I'd be more careful about assuming too much about strangers on the internet, mate. To be fair, I should have been less vague, especially on a thread about an apple product where people tend to get a bit evangelical.
  - mckn1ght 3y ago
    > You have been fully exploited. That's a bit harsh. "Content" can mean a wide variety of things, and smartphones/tablets are capable of displaying such a wide variety of things. We strive to curtail our own usage of devices around our young daughter at home. The extent of her screen time is maybe 1-2 movie nights per month. But she and I do around 5-10 minutes of Duolingo/Pimsleur every day. She asks every morning if we're going to "do French" today (even though we switched to Hungarian for most of this year). Are we fully exploited?

nox101 3y ago

What is the UX experience for basic web HTML input elements? (text/date/range/slider/select/...) Have they been changed for visionOS? How about flutter apps like https://flutter.github.io/samples/web/material_3_demo/ https://flutter.github.io/samples/web/material_3_demo/ I've been complaining that flutter is the next flash, meaning that by rendering their own UX instead of using the platform's they're basically making dead end apps. They'll claim devs just need to reship their apps with the latest version but that's means all old flutter apps are abandonware. It also ignores that the next platform they'll run into the same problem again.