10 ms·
Takeaways from the Vision Pro after 6 months
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- doctorpangloss 2y agoA device with 2-3 hours of battery life cannot provide the 4-8 hours of unsupervised entertainment that parents are most willing to pay dearly for.
- LeoPanthera 2y agoWhat a bizarre take. The Vision Pro is not designed for, or marketed to, children.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- doctorpangloss 2y agoIs the iPad?
- crooked-v 2y ago4-8 hours is a pretty excessive goal for battery life. A Switch Lite will only do just under 4 hours in the best case with a newish game (e.g. playing Smash and not just NES emulators), and plenty of parents are happy with that. Of course, that's leaving aside that the AVP is (for good or ill) obviously targeted at working adults and not kids or even college students.
- leptons 2y agoI don't think giving a child an even more isolating way to escape reality is going to end up well for the child.
- holoduke 2y agoI think the moment when vr/ar becomes really popular amongst regular people is when the size of the device is the same as a pair of sunglasses. Maybe just slightly more bulky. But till that time its not becoming a successful story. People feel akward wearing the thing. Its uncomfortable and a bit of a gimmick without a real purpose. When the thing could replace my raybands. It looks awesome and contains software that enhances the real world I see with information, it might become something.
- 0max 2y agoThere's an anime from 2007 called "Denno Coil" that focuses on AR compute with devices that look like normal glasses and integrated with everyday life. This is the piece of culture I'd compare against, and use as a barometer to compare where this type of interface can reach a critical mass.
- duggan 2y agoThat's interesting, Dennou Coil is actually the first thing I thought of (and rewatched) when the Apple Vision Pro was announced. I thought that if it lived up to the hype and I wanted to build something for it, then it would be good to have some sci-fi use cases fresh in my mind. It seems like there are several high technological barriers to surmount though. I don't expect to see that kind of AR for decades.
- spogbiper 2y agohttps://www.ray-ban.com/usa/ray-ban-meta-smart-glasses https://www.ray-ban.com/usa/ray-ban-meta-smart-glasses These are a start.. taking the opposite approach of the Apple device and limiting functionality to what will actually fit in a reasonable form factor right now.
- wlesieutre 2y agoThough to avoid any confusion for other readers, these aren't "AR" at all. They're a voice assistant and camera that happens to be attached to the same body part that AR goggles would be. No visual display included, because that would require a clunkier form factor still.
- snapcaster 2y agoMy take has been that there is literally no good software for it, and it's a real shame because the hardware (and low level eye/AR/etc.) fucking rules. Just do whatever you have to to let me run mac os x apps on this thing and I'll use it everyday edit: also, i'm an apple fanboy and still very disappointed in how poorly apple handled the launch. They spend billions on R&D and wont even throw a few million at some game developers to port to the platform? what the fuck?
- guitarlimeo 2y ago> They spend billions on R&D and wont even throw a few million at some game developers to port to the platform? what the fuck? Porting good games might cost more than a few millions, considering that Metal is a proprietary graphics stack that doesn't have good support (or at all) in AAA engines.
- snapcaster 2y agosure, but this was a problem they really needed to solve and as far as I can tell they didn't even attempt it
- wvenable 2y agoThe lack of controllers make the Vision Pro poor for games; it can't handle even bog standard VR games like Beat Saber.
- reaperducer 2y agoThe lack of controllers make the Vision Pro poor for games; it can't handle even bog standard VR games like Beat Saber. I'm pretty sure I remember Apple demonstrating hooking it up to an Xbox controller. I think the only thing more bog standard than that is an Atari 2600 joystick.
- wvenable 2y agoThat won't help you with Beat Saber!
- gjsman-1000 2y agoIt’s the story of VR all over again: - Awesome technology. - Strong “wow” moment. - Doesn’t do anything particularly better than the devices you already have. It’s technology in search of a problem. There are legitimate problems it solves, but they are always elusively niche.
- m3kw9 2y agoAR isn’t a technology in search of a problem. It’s solving a problem, one of them is allowing you to bring 5 screens without hauling 5 screens.
- gjsman-1000 2y agoNot really. Even on Apple Vision Pro, the text quality is lower than native pixels and less comfortable to read. In addition, it turns out that five screens isn’t as useful when there’s only one you, who can do only one thing at a time. It saves a few clicks for most, not much more; and certainly not enough convenience to wear a brick on your head. If people found multiple screens so useful that it’s worth lugging an extra bag around, external 13” monitors should be bestsellers.
- user_7832 2y ago> If people found multiple screens so useful that it’s worth lugging an extra bag around, external 13” monitors should be bestsellers. While I mostly agree... I partially disagree. IMO, the problem isn't so much about screens not proving to be helpful - but about good screens. Here in The Netherlands it's very common to find assistants/secretaries having multiple monitors. Heck, (some of?) the staff at the court in The Hague have curved ultrawide monitors. Evidently people recognize the benefits of screen real estate. The big problem, IMO, is that "standard" portable screens - 99% of which are 16:9 - are simply not tall enough. My 13.5" FW13 screen (3:2 ratio) is about as tall as a 15" 16:9 screen, but is much smaller than a 15" laptop. Windows particularly is excellent/terrible at having a ton of horizontal bars, making usable vertical height terribly little. Why would someone bring another monitor to see more bars?
- bitpush 2y agoDisappointed with the article. I was expecting a bit more depth since the title claimed "after 6 months". Especially because the article claims - The Apple Vision Pro debuted six months ago. I was hesitant to provide any detailed thoughts on the device and its implications until I (and others) had a few months to use it. Here are my eight takeaways on the Apple Vision Pro after six months. Takeaway #1: Apple Did Not (and Does Not) Want to Manage Expectations for the Vision Pro -- Talks about keynote and marketing quotes from the day of the launch -- Revolutionary company believes their product is revolutionary. Takeaway #2: The Vision Pro Probably Cost Tens of Billions to Develop -- Company spent truckload of money making a new product Takeaway #3: The Vision Pro Is Not Really From The Future -- Talks about what Zuckerberg thinks. This isnt really a "takeaway", nor a "personal experience" Takeaway #4: EyeSight is An Expensive Feature —and Not Worth It -- First true experience, and interesting to read Takeaway #5: The Vision Pro is, Today, Mostly a VR device (Even Though Apple Claims Otherwise) -- Good. VR headset is being used as a VR headset. Takeaway #6: The Benefits of Using a Vision Pro Fall Significantly Short of its Drawbacks -- The product isnt as revolutionary as we thought folks. Takeaway #7: Developer Adoption Remains a Problem -- Not really a personal experience, but an observation. Takeaway #8: Apple has Promptly Reshaped Terminology, Customer Perceptions, and Competitor Plans -- Has it though? So many words to say Vision Pro is a disappointing mess. Of the 8 takeaways, only 2 takeaways were made based on experience. Others were either fluff, or repeating news articles or mere observations.
- m3kw9 2y agoJust by envisioning what AR can do, you can tell that AR is the future. It just needs miniaturizations and cost reductions
- jasonlhy 2y agoI have a apple Visio pro, I personally think it is a very good device, control by finger is impressive, except it is way too expensive
- monkeydust 2y agoNot it's biggest problem and before you think it's lack of killer app I would say it's form factor. Get that right and people wearing it more often and naturally the applications will come. Yea Meta onto this now with Rayban tie-up
- axoltl 2y agoCurious what the problem what the form factor is? I wear it several hours a day every day and have had no complaints. (I will say I use the double-loop strap instead of the adjustable head-band you see in the ads all the time. The top loop seems to take enough weight off of your cheeks where it's comfortable enough for all-day wear)
- twiceaday 2y agoThe difference between a million dollars and a billion dollars is about a billion dollars. The difference between Meta 'smart' sunglasses and an AR headset is an AR headset. How are they 'onto' anything by selling sunglasses with a sneaky phone camera strapped to them? People wear them like sunglasses, because they are?
- synicalx 2y agoI'd love to try one, but their price in my country (Australia) is absolutely bonkers. For the same money I could literally buy a perfectly usable secondhand car. If it was at most, the same cost as a Macbook Pro or ideally a Macbook Air I might think about getting one.
- honkycat 2y agoConsumers are way more wary of shovelware and getting stuck on the hook with an abandoned product these days. It's a cool device, but does Apple have the balls to stick with it, and built it into the platform they believe it can be? My magic 8-ball says: Doubtful
- zitterbewegung 2y agoApple is making a 3D movie for the device and coming out with more immersive experiences . Also, they are upgrading the OS with more features . Which Apple device has Apple abandoned recently?
- honkycat 2y agoWhen was the last time Apple released a totally new product vertical in the same vein as vision pro? 10 years ago? 15?
- zitterbewegung 2y agoThat would be the Apple Watch most likely.
- reaperducer 2y agoMy magic 8-ball says: Doubtful Considering how long Apple supports its other products, I'd take a chance on Vision Pro before a Google product. My nine-year-old iPhone 6S got a software update a couple of weeks ago. Still, before I'd drop that kind of money on a device, I'd like to see an Apple Graveyard website, like the Google Graveyard site, to reassure myself.
- knodi123 2y agoI'm less worried about them supporting it with drivers/security, and more with them supporting it with new software. It will take compelling experiences for adoption to take off, and if they don't keep adding experiences....
- 2y ago
- theogravity 2y agoI'd like to try one, but I require prism in my lenses (my eyes have a slight cross to them when viewing anything perceived as distant) which is something they currently do not support when ordering lenses. I'm able to get them for my Quest 2, however.
- LarsDu88 2y agoI got a Quest Pro for free from Meta, and only realized that it was great for watching TV after Vision Pro came out, lol
- xk_id 2y agoWhat we need is a cheap, “dumb” headset which simply mirrors screens from the computer (including virtual ones), with low latency and in crisp resolution. No standalone apps, no gesture controls, etc. Just plug it into your computer and start streaming the screen contents in VR space. Right now the only contender in this niche is the upcoming Visor from Immersed [0], which is a proprietary, value extraction, user-hostile nightmare, with compulsory online activation + monthly subscription + jailed OS and probably overpriced. But at least they’re proving that the form factor is already possible. [0] https://www.visor.com/ https://www.visor.com/
- SkyPuncher 2y agoThere are a bunch of options right now, Xreal and Rokid are the two most common. They currently only do effective 1080p, but I suspect 4k is around the corner. The devices are rather unremarkable in of themselves. They're essentially just a Sony micro-screen with lens systems. https://www.sony-semicon.com/en/products/microdisplay/oled.html https://www.sony-semicon.com/en/products/microdisplay/oled.h...
- xk_id 2y agoUnfortunately these two don’t track head movement. An essential feature is being able to position (and size) an arbitrary number of virtual screens in 3D space around you. Otherwise it’s pointless, just a normal screen in front of your eyes.
- SkyPuncher 2y agoYes they do. I own the Xreals.
- cassianoleal 2y agoI would hardly call the Xreals and Rokids as having "crisp resolution". I could live with having to move my eyes and not my head to see the corners but everything is blurry, especially around the edges, getting much worse on the corners. Even the centre is not so crisp! These glasses are fine for entertainment, watching videos, playing games. Working on them for a short time in the lack of something better is ok. I would never want to use them for hours of work though.
- Freedom2 2y agoIt's frustrating because after reading the announcement thread I purchased one after many reputable Hacker News commenters stated this was the next big thing, the 'next iPhone' if you will. Being an early adopter and sharing in the innovations with other members of the community here was something I was really looking forward to, especially as some claimed we would get weekly threads showing what cool things people achieved with the product.
- beefnugs 2y agoThey can't say it replaces a computer until it does full generic computing. Until then it replaces a monitor maybe. Come on people, full 3d world where there are pipes representing all the IPC and network connections, random arbitrary switches and buttons you can hook up to automation scripts, unlimited windows you can program how they are created / moved/ and managed and manipulated. for ALL operating systems, not reinventing the damn wheel for every operating system. This will never be in ubiquitous use unless it does universal generic OS interface
- angoragoats 2y agoThe article's claim that Apple "priced the device quite reasonably, given the devices it could replace" is dubious at best. Yes, if you buy a high end TV, surround sound system, a computer with multiple displays, and so on, you'd spend more than the Vision Pro costs, but the difference is that all of those devices are individually much better at doing what they do than the Vision Pro is. In fact, one of the devices mentioned (a computer with multiple high-definition displays) is simply not possible to replicate at all on the Vision Pro, as you're limited to one Mac display. Similarly, there's no way that the spatial audio tech built into the headset, as impressive as it is, would actually rival a true multi-speaker home theater setup. So you're spending $3500, a serious chunk of change to most people, to get a somewhat passable facsimile of the devices the headset replaces. That doesn't seem reasonable to me.
- GnarfGnarf 2y agoI got a demo in Cupertino, and was blown away. I’m not a sports fan, yet I would get one of these to watch sports games. The realism is mind-blowing. One second you’re behind Team A’s net and watch the oncoming attack. Next second you’re at the other end. It’s better than being there in person. If they can figure out how to keep up with a running attacking player, that’s the killer app.