Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New report on Apple’s VR headset: 8K in each eye, potential $3k price tag

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 465 posts

Re: New report on Apple’s VR headset: 8K in each eye, potential $3k price tag

#341

Post by chippy »

abrookewood wrote: post #99

Do we know what the effects are likely to be of wearing a VR headset for hours at a time? I don't think our eyes are going to be happy with a fixed focal length for an extended period of time. At least when I'm working on a laptop/desktop, I'm constantly looking around the room, at my keyboard etc.

The main thing is that its often troublesome wearing glasses with them. You can get the lenses changed to your prescription and you can wear some headsets with glasses. Sometimes the light shines in the side of the lens making it distracting.

Re: New report on Apple’s VR headset: 8K in each eye, potential $3k price tag

#342

Post by TeMPOraL »

_coveredInBees wrote: post #240
Balgair wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having done a fair bit of AR/VR work in medical and industrial settings, I've always thought the 'killer app' of VR is not in gaming. It's this very weekend: The Super Bowl. Well, not the Super Bowl precisely, but in experiences like sports or other time/space limited events. Sitting ring-side for the next big match. Or at the 50-yard line at the Super Bowl. Or at the finish line of the 100-m dash. All for, I dunno,…

Ehh. I've owned a VR headset for a long time now, and I think many people underestimate how fundamentally isolating being in VR is. Humans are social creatures and unless you live by yourself and want to escape into VR, you're a lot more likely to enjoy watching the big game with friends and family so you can shoot the shit, and share the experience. Don't get me wrong... VR is and can be a lot of fun, but I just don…

Sports are a special case as, arguably, they're mostly boring and their main value is the social context - cheering for players/teams, spectating together with family and friends. In contrast, the market for serious movies or single-player videogames suggest that there is a lot of demand for "lone time" experiences.

I think a big factor in lackluster adoption of VR is... space. VR games require space, which is expensive, and people seem to have less of it in recent years. On top of that, usable space disappears very quickly once you start a family, which cuts out a good chunk of the target audience.

Re: New report on Apple’s VR headset: 8K in each eye, potential $3k price tag

#343

Post by Someone »

05 wrote: post #327
jonplackett wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They've been trying to do this but they always put the 360 camera somewhere really dumb, like next to the goal (this is soccer I've tried it with) and just normal head height, so you can't actually see the game at all. I agree if they put the camera somewhere cool, like right above the pitch kind of like god-view, that would be awesome. Not sure I'd pay 3,500 for it though....

Yeah, they should just put the cameras on the players' helmets.. (not sure if serious).

They could have tens or hundreds of cameras, and reconstruct what a virtual cameraman moving on the field with the action would record.

I think such a virtual camera technically almost is possible. Getting a smoothly moving camera image that doesn’t get distracted by ball-like objects (e.g. a bald referee, as happened in soccer recently) and tunes zoom levels to show just enough action probably is the hardest part.

Re: New report on Apple’s VR headset: 8K in each eye, potential $3k price tag

#344

Post by chippy »

tijuco2 wrote: post #207

And they will pay

They will, but the deeper question is why. People are invested in the Apple ecoystem. They have an iWatch and it only really works with their iPhone. They have iTunes with their mac pro. Apple is incredibly good at brand and interaction.

So how would a VR headset work with everything?

1) the iphone has the best facial tracking camera and software (better even than desktop and webcam and GPU)

2) like the Occulus, you should only need a phone to connect.

3) only 1 vr headset currently has an internal camera able to track faces and eyes. Facial expression, iris movement and gaze tracking is hugely missing currently, but trivial with the iphone.

I would have the iphone being the base station and do the full body tracking "just put it on your desk". I would also put their existing face tracking and eye tracking tech inside the vr headset. I'd make it so the headset only needs an iphone to connect. I'd make it cordless only.

Re: New report on Apple’s VR headset: 8K in each eye, potential $3k price tag

#345

Post by dlvktrsh »

foobarian wrote: post #154
abrookewood wrote: post #99

Do we know what the effects are likely to be of wearing a VR headset for hours at a time? I don't think our eyes are going to be happy with a fixed focal length for an extended period of time. At least when I'm working on a laptop/desktop, I'm constantly looking around the room, at my keyboard etc.

I'm not that worried about that since I already spend most of the day staring at a monitor at a fixed distance. But, I would be a lot more worried about the added weight. My posture is not the greatest and having a bulky headset weighing down the head levering the backbone could be problematic if done for long stretches of time.

VR Exercises and posture corrections add-ons

Re: New report on Apple’s VR headset: 8K in each eye, potential $3k price tag

#347

Post by rock_artist »

zepto wrote: post #95

Bear in mind that the iPad was rumored to cost >$1000 but then launched at $499. On the other hand it might sense to launch this as a pro-workstation for the usual kinds of task: architects, designers and engineers being able to visualize and interact with models directly in space. If they can make that affordable and usable for pro designers at every level, (which $3500 clearly would be), they will have a hit. A con…

> Bear in mind that the iPad was rumored to cost >$1000 but then launched at $499.

The early iPad days replaced by the Pro suffix. Or even worse. AirPods Pro Max.

Apple’s product line those days has a lot of fluctuations in their pricing. (On purpose) and they seem to have consumers for both.

Re: New report on Apple’s VR headset: 8K in each eye, potential $3k price tag

#348

Post by Fricken »

enos_feedler wrote: post #216
Balgair wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having done a fair bit of AR/VR work in medical and industrial settings, I've always thought the 'killer app' of VR is not in gaming. It's this very weekend: The Super Bowl. Well, not the Super Bowl precisely, but in experiences like sports or other time/space limited events. Sitting ring-side for the next big match. Or at the 50-yard line at the Super Bowl. Or at the finish line of the 100-m dash. All for, I dunno,…

100% this. Why not do full audio/video capture of the best seat in the house for every sporting event. I am very bearish on VR in general, but as a sports fan this is something I would use about 480 hours per season. Apple actually acquired NextVR that was doing this sort of thing: https://9to5mac.com/2020/05/14/apple-nextr-ar-headset/

Even the best seat in the house is not the best seat when the action is at the other end of the playfield. I've seen some sporting events where they have multiple cameras set up to always get the best view of the action. They have a man who watches all the camera feeds and switches to whichever one is offering the best view of the action. It's even better than the best seat in the house.

Re: New report on Apple’s VR headset: 8K in each eye, potential $3k price tag

#349

Post by JonathanFly »

hwjwill wrote: post #226
tenaciousDaniel wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, no idea why this isn’t already happening

The resolution on today's consumer headsets still isn't there to provide good experience (maybe https://varjo.com/ can work but it's not for consumers). Oculus Quest also last only 2-3 hours after fully charged. Main reason at least for me is it gets quite uncomfortable after wearing it for long (~30 min) due to weight and sweat

>The resolution on today's consumer headsets still isn't there to provide good experience (maybe https://varjo.com/ can work but it's not for consumers).

I think the display hardware is good enough, but I've only been able to get that quality by manually copying over 8k video files and playing them on the device itself. Not sure why they can't match this quality when streaming...

Re: New report on Apple’s VR headset: 8K in each eye, potential $3k price tag

#350

Post by AmericanChopper »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #342
_coveredInBees wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ehh. I've owned a VR headset for a long time now, and I think many people underestimate how fundamentally isolating being in VR is. Humans are social creatures and unless you live by yourself and want to escape into VR, you're a lot more likely to enjoy watching the big game with friends and family so you can shoot the shit, and share the experience. Don't get me wrong... VR is and can be a lot of fun, but I just don…

Sports are a special case as, arguably, they're mostly boring and their main value is the social context - cheering for players/teams, spectating together with family and friends. In contrast, the market for serious movies or single-player videogames suggest that there is a lot of demand for "lone time" experiences. I think a big factor in lackluster adoption of VR is... space. VR games require space, which is expens…

> Sports are a special case as, arguably, they're mostly boring and their main value is the social context

I think this is a bit of a fringe opinion. I can certainly see how people appreciate the social aspect of sports events with necessarily appreciating the sports. But I don’t think I wake up in the middle of the night to watch F1 alone for the social benefit.

Post reply on HN