4 ms·

The first iPhone also had a lot of criticism for major missing features. I am confident that Apple will address a lot of it in the 2nd version. Then I predict t

The first iPhone also had a lot of criticism for major missing features. I am confident that Apple will address a lot of it in the 2nd version. Then I predict that the 3rd iteration will start to make inroads to the masses.

askafriend 2y ago
This is exactly how it'll happen. This is also exactly how Apple Watch happened.
- zombiwoof 2y ago
  Completely different margins
  - askafriend 2y ago
    I think the Watch is certainly more straightforward of a product cycle and happened on a faster time scale. I think iterations of Vision Pro will take years and the final cost will not be what it is today. What everyone sees today is a developer toolkit that also serves as a public demo. It is not a consumer product that can be scaled (yet).
hn_throwaway_99 2y ago
I've heard this many times, and as someone who owned an original iPhone, I don't buy this argument at all. First, when I got my first iPhone, I was amazed by it. I used it all the time. Yes, there were missing features and shortcomings, but many/most of those missing features were obvious, and it was actually pretty delightful that with every new software update I'd cross some of those missing features off the list. None of that dynamic exists with the Apple Vision Pro. Even big Apple fanboys end up leaving it unused after the novelty wears off because it's fundamentally a solution looking for a problem. People aren't leaving it untouched in a drawer because there are just a couple missing features they want. Now, all that said, as much as I would dread having this computer strapped to my face as a "normal" person, I think the use case given in this article makes perfect sense. The surgeon is doing a specific task, and the Vision Pro helps with that specific task. While I believe the Vision Pro will fail as a general consumer product, I hope it can live on for these niche use cases, although I don't know if the economics will make sense for such a relatively small market.
- shadowmanifold 2y ago
  Exactly. I remember the first time someone had an iphone. It was with a whole group of people and everyone was simply amazed by it. The use cases couldn't be more obvious. If you gave me an Apple Vision Pro, I literally have no idea what I would do with it. I would really love to get into something new like this but I literally can't think of what I would do with it. It is a technology that seems unreasonably useless. It seems like there should be many more use cases than there is.
makeitdouble 2y ago
That's exactly how it went with the first Homepod...right ? TBH the dynamic you're describing would have been Meta's glasses if they also release a viable version of Orion as the second product. But at this point nobody's in a place to make it a reality, the fact that Apple actually released the Vision Pro is the most telling sign that they don't see themselves reaching that level anytime soon.
- paul7986 2y ago
  Not AR glasses but AI glasses... Ray Ban Metas are out now. They are very handy for taking pics, videos and asking the time when my phone isnt on me. When its with me it's cool to ask it what does this thing in french translate to on a recent trip up in canada and or looking down at a town in West virginia (harpers ferry) from an overlook asking what's the name of the church im looking at in town. It's not visual information seen yet (what both Meta and Apple are working towards) just audio at the moment yet useful, fun and handy. A glimpse of what's to come. Meta hasn't sold tons but 700k for a device that needs to get past people's privacy concerns is decent and then Meta showing off Orion .. where Ray Bans are headed in a few years i think is pretty cool.
consteval 2y ago
I don't think so, because IMO VR/AR have fundamental problems with the technology itself. The elephant in the room is that we're already really good at human-computer interfaces. VR not only isn't an upgrade, it's a downgrade. The precision of tapping in 3D space is much lower than on a screen or a keyboard. Typing in VR becomes 10x harder. Voice isn't a solution either, because talking is always slower than typing. And for gestures, swiping on a phone is already really fast. Swiping in 3D isn't any faster. The most precise and fastest is, of course, keyboard and mouse. Touchscreens are a step-down, but one we took for the advantage of super tiny devices you always have on you. VR is certainly not tiny. And, even if it can be and you can just wear it whenever - what's the benefit? Going from a laptop to a phone is obvious, but a phone is already very small and already always on you. What do you gain then from a VR device? I think probably next to nothing.

askafriend 2y ago

This is exactly how it'll happen. This is also exactly how Apple Watch happened.

zombiwoof 2y ago
Completely different margins
- askafriend 2y ago
  I think the Watch is certainly more straightforward of a product cycle and happened on a faster time scale. I think iterations of Vision Pro will take years and the final cost will not be what it is today. What everyone sees today is a developer toolkit that also serves as a public demo. It is not a consumer product that can be scaled (yet).

hn_throwaway_99 2y ago

I've heard this many times, and as someone who owned an original iPhone, I don't buy this argument at all. First, when I got my first iPhone, I was amazed by it. I used it all the time. Yes, there were missing features and shortcomings, but many/most of those missing features were obvious, and it was actually pretty delightful that with every new software update I'd cross some of those missing features off the list. None of that dynamic exists with the Apple Vision Pro. Even big Apple fanboys end up leaving it unused after the novelty wears off because it's fundamentally a solution looking for a problem. People aren't leaving it untouched in a drawer because there are just a couple missing features they want. Now, all that said, as much as I would dread having this computer strapped to my face as a "normal" person, I think the use case given in this article makes perfect sense. The surgeon is doing a specific task, and the Vision Pro helps with that specific task. While I believe the Vision Pro will fail as a general consumer product, I hope it can live on for these niche use cases, although I don't know if the economics will make sense for such a relatively small market.

shadowmanifold 2y ago
Exactly. I remember the first time someone had an iphone. It was with a whole group of people and everyone was simply amazed by it. The use cases couldn't be more obvious. If you gave me an Apple Vision Pro, I literally have no idea what I would do with it. I would really love to get into something new like this but I literally can't think of what I would do with it. It is a technology that seems unreasonably useless. It seems like there should be many more use cases than there is.

makeitdouble 2y ago

That's exactly how it went with the first Homepod...right ? TBH the dynamic you're describing would have been Meta's glasses if they also release a viable version of Orion as the second product. But at this point nobody's in a place to make it a reality, the fact that Apple actually released the Vision Pro is the most telling sign that they don't see themselves reaching that level anytime soon.

paul7986 2y ago
Not AR glasses but AI glasses... Ray Ban Metas are out now. They are very handy for taking pics, videos and asking the time when my phone isnt on me. When its with me it's cool to ask it what does this thing in french translate to on a recent trip up in canada and or looking down at a town in West virginia (harpers ferry) from an overlook asking what's the name of the church im looking at in town. It's not visual information seen yet (what both Meta and Apple are working towards) just audio at the moment yet useful, fun and handy. A glimpse of what's to come. Meta hasn't sold tons but 700k for a device that needs to get past people's privacy concerns is decent and then Meta showing off Orion .. where Ray Bans are headed in a few years i think is pretty cool.

consteval 2y ago

I don't think so, because IMO VR/AR have fundamental problems with the technology itself. The elephant in the room is that we're already really good at human-computer interfaces. VR not only isn't an upgrade, it's a downgrade. The precision of tapping in 3D space is much lower than on a screen or a keyboard. Typing in VR becomes 10x harder. Voice isn't a solution either, because talking is always slower than typing. And for gestures, swiping on a phone is already really fast. Swiping in 3D isn't any faster. The most precise and fastest is, of course, keyboard and mouse. Touchscreens are a step-down, but one we took for the advantage of super tiny devices you always have on you. VR is certainly not tiny. And, even if it can be and you can just wear it whenever - what's the benefit? Going from a laptop to a phone is obvious, but a phone is already very small and already always on you. What do you gain then from a VR device? I think probably next to nothing.