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

The saga of Apple’s troubled mixed reality headset

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 201 posts

Re: The saga of Apple’s troubled mixed reality headset

#41

Post by orbital-decay »

Geee wrote: post #30

Productivity is correlated with display size, and VR should be the next step in productivity, because it allows your whole space to become a display and an interface. When paired with powerful hardware and innovative software it should be the next step in computing. Therefore, VR should be a replacement for large displays in productive work, not a device that everyone is wearing outside or casually watching videos wi…

> Productivity is correlated with display size

That's a dubious statement. Filling the binocular field of view is fine; it's about 120° horizontally, give or take. But past that it starts to be a problem. Generally, if you look at the screen and any edge is blocked by your nose without turning your head, it's likely too large to work comfortably on. (but still fine for immersive content like games or movies)

Re: The saga of Apple’s troubled mixed reality headset

#42

Post by kalleboo »

_jaej wrote: post #29
puranjay wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

VR seems to have an insurmountable motion sickness problem. I tried the Quest with a dozen friends and half of them felt sick enough within minutes to never try it again.

You just need to start with the basics, take a break the moment you feel ill, and keep going. Within a few weeks most people are entirely used to it.

That may be, but you're going to need an extremely compelling use case for people to go through with that.

Re: The saga of Apple’s troubled mixed reality headset

#43

Post by dreamcompiler »

lostgame wrote: post #31
jitl wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, no one has released a VR system with mass market appeal. I have and enjoy a Valve Index, but it’s stayed in the box for more than a year because I can’t figure out a socially viable spot for it in my new house. Maybe Ive’s influence on this product will make a big difference.

>> On the other hand, no one has released a VR system with mass market appeal. Quest 2 would like a word with you?

I have both Quest models. They were fun for about a week and now they just collect dust. I've forgotten I own them.

Part of my problem with Quest is the "ick" factor of knowing that FB is looking over my shoulder whenever I turn the thing on. Giving up your privacy seems to be the price of just about every cool technology nowadays, and it means the tech has to be absolutely spectacular to make me pay that privacy price. My Tesla is sufficiently spectacular. Quest is not.

Re: The saga of Apple’s troubled mixed reality headset

#44

Post by elcomet »

Geee wrote: post #30

Productivity is correlated with display size, and VR should be the next step in productivity, because it allows your whole space to become a display and an interface. When paired with powerful hardware and innovative software it should be the next step in computing. Therefore, VR should be a replacement for large displays in productive work, not a device that everyone is wearing outside or casually watching videos wi…

Your first sentence is already problematic. Do you have any data or research to back this up ? It doesn't seem very true to me.

Re: The saga of Apple’s troubled mixed reality headset

#45

Post by Geee »

bin_bash wrote: post #37
Geee wrote: post #30

Productivity is correlated with display size, and VR should be the next step in productivity, because it allows your whole space to become a display and an interface. When paired with powerful hardware and innovative software it should be the next step in computing. Therefore, VR should be a replacement for large displays in productive work, not a device that everyone is wearing outside or casually watching videos wi…

Both Meta and Microsoft are exploring AR/VR in the workplace (Microsoft pretty much entirely). I’m not sure why you’re suggesting they’re not exploring this area.

Their software and hardware are generally crappy, and I don't believe they can deliver anything innovate in a thousand years.

Re: The saga of Apple’s troubled mixed reality headset

#46

Post by Geee »

elcomet wrote: post #44
Geee wrote: post #30

Productivity is correlated with display size, and VR should be the next step in productivity, because it allows your whole space to become a display and an interface. When paired with powerful hardware and innovative software it should be the next step in computing. Therefore, VR should be a replacement for large displays in productive work, not a device that everyone is wearing outside or casually watching videos wi…

Your first sentence is already problematic. Do you have any data or research to back this up ? It doesn't seem very true to me.

Just common sense. Watch -> Phone -> Tablet -> Laptop -> Desktop. You'd be least productive on a watch and most productive on a desktop, and adding extra displays would make you even more productive. Each of them has an interface that's designed to max out productivity on that particular display size. We don't yet have an interface that maxes out productivity on a VR device.

Re: The saga of Apple’s troubled mixed reality headset

#47

Post by jdlshore »

KVFinn wrote: post #25

The cost of the external eye displays seem absolutely crazy. Two extra external displays in raw hardware. But worse, they are on the front in exactly the place you want to place the passthrough cameras, so now you have to do extra image processing to virtually reposition the input as if it were on the eyes. So it makes passthrough dev more difficult. It must be extremely compelling to see those eye screens in action.…

I had assumed a single oval-shaped display and headset, along with notches for cameras. I also don’t see slightly displaced cameras as causing a significant problem. Brains are pretty adaptable to vision changes.

Re: The saga of Apple’s troubled mixed reality headset

#48

Post by Geee »

orbital-decay wrote: post #41
Geee wrote: post #30

Productivity is correlated with display size, and VR should be the next step in productivity, because it allows your whole space to become a display and an interface. When paired with powerful hardware and innovative software it should be the next step in computing. Therefore, VR should be a replacement for large displays in productive work, not a device that everyone is wearing outside or casually watching videos wi…

> Productivity is correlated with display size That's a dubious statement. Filling the binocular field of view is fine; it's about 120° horizontally, give or take. But past that it starts to be a problem. Generally, if you look at the screen and any edge is blocked by your nose without turning your head, it's likely too large to work comfortably on. (but still fine for immersive content like games or movies)

You can turn also turn your head and move around in your room, i.e. your whole room could be full of separate displays, or just pieces of code floating in space. It's not just how much you see at a time, but how easily you can switch context.

Re: The saga of Apple’s troubled mixed reality headset

#49

Post by elcomet »

Geee wrote: post #46
elcomet wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your first sentence is already problematic. Do you have any data or research to back this up ? It doesn't seem very true to me.

Just common sense. Watch -> Phone -> Tablet -> Laptop -> Desktop. You'd be least productive on a watch and most productive on a desktop, and adding extra displays would make you even more productive. Each of them has an interface that's designed to max out productivity on that particular display size. We don't yet have an interface that maxes out productivity on a VR device.

But there's also clearly an upper limit. And it's not clear what is this limit.

Re: The saga of Apple’s troubled mixed reality headset

#50

Post by HellDunkel »

xoa wrote: post #18
HellDunkel wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see the main problem with wearables in the type of media we like to consume. Text and images are almost always rectangular and 2D. It makes a lot more sense to present that on rectangular devices which you can touch (key to the success of the iphone). Wearable glasses have advantanges for 3d media but those really just make up for a fraction of the media consumed.

What? A wearable display with a basic liquid crystal as well to control opacity can trivially do a normal rectangle too, anywhere you want. It's a complete superset of all current displays, that's the most basic use of it. Doing 3D stuff or whatever if anything strikes me as by far the least important, at least for quite a while after intro most of its use would be simple HUD or just using what we've got except where…

Wearable displays can do that but they were not designed to do that. Its called „augmented“ or „virtual“ REALITY for a reason. Focus is an issue in regard to legibility even if you dont use the 3d space. If you do you get even more issues with tracking, stabilizing, more focus issues as you generate defocus, filtering, occlusion limited fov and more. These devices are designed for rendering believable dinosaurs into natural environments. It will take a while until they deliver on the promise.
Post reply on HN