3 ms·

takes time -- how long are we talking about here? Vision Pro has been released for near a year now. I don't think it got the traction that's anywhere close to

by n144q 2y ago

takes time -- how long are we talking about here? Vision Pro has been released for near a year now. I don't think it got the traction that's anywhere close to the hype when it was first announced. Not even among VR enthusiasts, let alone the mass consumer market. There is an Apple Store near where I live. When I walk by it, 9 out of 10 times there is nobody around the Vision Pro booth, when many people are playing with iPhones and iPads.

jsheard 2y ago
The Vision Pro also doesn't exist in a vacuum - Meta have spent much longer trying to make this work, with hardware that's literally an order of magnitude more affordable, and are still struggling to find any mainstream adoption.
atrus 2y ago
Honestly, I'd say that the vision pro is going to get less traction with VR enthusiasts because it's not that much better in some respects, and much worse in many others. The vision pro is much more suited to people who haven't used any VR before.
- wrboyce 2y ago
  Have you used an AVP? I am surprised at your claims. My friend has one and I’ve got a Quest 2 and I was absolutely blown away by the AVP, significantly better VR experience in my opinion.
  - numpad0 2y ago
    Then why haven't you switched - I mean, how would you replace your existing VR use cases with Vision Pro as an upgrade, not mere same ballpark alternative with workarounds, set aside its upfront price?
    - wrboyce 2y ago
      Bit of a weird “gotcha” this to be honest, but I don’t use my Quest all that often and the AVP is too expensive for my taste.
    - parasubvert 2y ago
      Cost aside, the main reason to keep using a Quest 3 or PSVR2 are controller support and PCVR support. And exclusive games. Vision Pro supporting PSVR2 controllers will help a lot. The final piece is getting something like ALVR or Virtual Desktop to support PCVR without requiring fiddling.
  - theshackleford 2y ago
    The AVP can’t meet most of what I use VR for, and is incredibly expensive in my country to boot, so by default the Q3 wins. The Q2 has horrible lenses that induce a terrible experience. I had mine for all of a week before I sold it and decided to wait another gen. The Q3 with better lenses is a significantly better product than Q2.
    - wrboyce 2y ago
      Yeah, the same friend has a Q3 too which I tried after the AVP and it was noticeably better than my Q2 (and pound for pound, held its own well against the AVP). I’ve not had any issues with my Q2 though, I can play for quite extended amounts of time and it tends to be my arms and legs that stop me playing!
      - theshackleford 2y ago
        Haha yeah, due to an injury, as lame as it sounds for most games now I resort to a backless barstool which helps me with longer sessions. Would highly recommend!
- parasubvert 2y ago
  This isn't true. It's more that the Vision Pro deliberately prioritized certain things that Meta or Vive or Valve or Sony have not: geometrically stable pass through, wide library of popular 3D movies via AppleTV and Disney+, high resolution immersive environments, seamless keyboard/mouse/trackpad migration between PC and native apps, strong iOS/iPadOS ecosystem integration, high fps / low latency wireless ultra-wide virtual displays for the Mac, etc. In some ways it focuses on what the Oculus Go was trying to do but was underpowered to really do it. It's meant to replace other iOS devices for general productivity and entertainment, and to complement a Mac. It's not focused on VR gaming though it can do that. I have a Oculus Rift dev kit, Ovulus Go, Quest , Quest 2, Valve Index, PSVR2. The AVP is much better of an experience on almost every level but three: too much motion blur when moving your head (this isn't bad when watching high fps video), lack of controller support, not so great hand tracking (which the Quest had to do well due to lack of eye tracking). The controller support should be fixed with the Sony PSVR2 partnership. Motion blur and hand tracking I suspect will be software fixed as they evolve to prioritize active fitness with the AVP.
rowanG077 2y ago
The vision pro has not been released. All you can buy is a dev kit.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
GeekyBear 2y ago
> Vision Pro has been released for near a year now. I don't think it got the traction that's anywhere close to the hype when it was first announced. In the first year, they were constrained by the number of displays Sony could produce. > Sony, the supplier of Vision Pro's ultra high resolution OLED microdisplays, can't manufacture more than 900,000 displays per year. Apple needs two displays per headset, so this bottleneck would impose severe limitations on how many Vision Pros can be produced. https://www.uploadvr.com/apple-vision-pro-production-severely-constrained/ https://www.uploadvr.com/apple-vision-pro-production-severel... As far as I've seen, their sales were in line with the number of units they could be expected to build, at least until Sony is able to ramp up production. > 2024 Apple Vision Pro Shipments Estimated Between 500–600 Thousand Units, Micro OLED Key to Cost and Volume https://www.trendforce.com/presscenter/news/20240118-12003.html https://www.trendforce.com/presscenter/news/20240118-12003.h...

by n144q 2y ago

jsheard 2y ago

The Vision Pro also doesn't exist in a vacuum - Meta have spent much longer trying to make this work, with hardware that's literally an order of magnitude more affordable, and are still struggling to find any mainstream adoption.

atrus 2y ago

Honestly, I'd say that the vision pro is going to get less traction with VR enthusiasts because it's not that much better in some respects, and much worse in many others. The vision pro is much more suited to people who haven't used any VR before.

wrboyce 2y ago
Have you used an AVP? I am surprised at your claims. My friend has one and I’ve got a Quest 2 and I was absolutely blown away by the AVP, significantly better VR experience in my opinion.
- numpad0 2y ago
  Then why haven't you switched - I mean, how would you replace your existing VR use cases with Vision Pro as an upgrade, not mere same ballpark alternative with workarounds, set aside its upfront price?
  - wrboyce 2y ago
    Bit of a weird “gotcha” this to be honest, but I don’t use my Quest all that often and the AVP is too expensive for my taste.
  - parasubvert 2y ago
    Cost aside, the main reason to keep using a Quest 3 or PSVR2 are controller support and PCVR support. And exclusive games. Vision Pro supporting PSVR2 controllers will help a lot. The final piece is getting something like ALVR or Virtual Desktop to support PCVR without requiring fiddling.
- theshackleford 2y ago
  The AVP can’t meet most of what I use VR for, and is incredibly expensive in my country to boot, so by default the Q3 wins. The Q2 has horrible lenses that induce a terrible experience. I had mine for all of a week before I sold it and decided to wait another gen. The Q3 with better lenses is a significantly better product than Q2.
  - wrboyce 2y ago
    Yeah, the same friend has a Q3 too which I tried after the AVP and it was noticeably better than my Q2 (and pound for pound, held its own well against the AVP). I’ve not had any issues with my Q2 though, I can play for quite extended amounts of time and it tends to be my arms and legs that stop me playing!
    - theshackleford 2y ago
      Haha yeah, due to an injury, as lame as it sounds for most games now I resort to a backless barstool which helps me with longer sessions. Would highly recommend!
parasubvert 2y ago
This isn't true. It's more that the Vision Pro deliberately prioritized certain things that Meta or Vive or Valve or Sony have not: geometrically stable pass through, wide library of popular 3D movies via AppleTV and Disney+, high resolution immersive environments, seamless keyboard/mouse/trackpad migration between PC and native apps, strong iOS/iPadOS ecosystem integration, high fps / low latency wireless ultra-wide virtual displays for the Mac, etc. In some ways it focuses on what the Oculus Go was trying to do but was underpowered to really do it. It's meant to replace other iOS devices for general productivity and entertainment, and to complement a Mac. It's not focused on VR gaming though it can do that. I have a Oculus Rift dev kit, Ovulus Go, Quest , Quest 2, Valve Index, PSVR2. The AVP is much better of an experience on almost every level but three: too much motion blur when moving your head (this isn't bad when watching high fps video), lack of controller support, not so great hand tracking (which the Quest had to do well due to lack of eye tracking). The controller support should be fixed with the Sony PSVR2 partnership. Motion blur and hand tracking I suspect will be software fixed as they evolve to prioritize active fitness with the AVP.

rowanG077 2y ago

The vision pro has not been released. All you can buy is a dev kit.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

GeekyBear 2y ago

> Vision Pro has been released for near a year now. I don't think it got the traction that's anywhere close to the hype when it was first announced. In the first year, they were constrained by the number of displays Sony could produce. > Sony, the supplier of Vision Pro's ultra high resolution OLED microdisplays, can't manufacture more than 900,000 displays per year. Apple needs two displays per headset, so this bottleneck would impose severe limitations on how many Vision Pros can be produced. https://www.uploadvr.com/apple-vision-pro-production-severely-constrained/ https://www.uploadvr.com/apple-vision-pro-production-severel... As far as I've seen, their sales were in line with the number of units they could be expected to build, at least until Sony is able to ramp up production. > 2024 Apple Vision Pro Shipments Estimated Between 500–600 Thousand Units, Micro OLED Key to Cost and Volume https://www.trendforce.com/presscenter/news/20240118-12003.html https://www.trendforce.com/presscenter/news/20240118-12003.h...