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

91–100 of 201 posts

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

#91

Post by null_shift »

qgin wrote: post #77

Have to say I agree with Jony Ive on all of these points. The idea of an AR wearable that is tethered to a fixed base station is so very lame. Why even bother with AR when you can only augment the reality that is in your office or bedroom? Also the eye-view outer display is essential for situations where one person is using the goggles but others aren’t. How unsettling would it be for someone to look at you, be able…

The fixed base station is a fundamentally different tradeoff for AR vs VR.

Base station for AR would be detrimental, as you inherently want to explore and interact with the world around you.

For most VR use cases that is not the case, and I can see the argument for the benefits of a base station (higher performance) outweighing the costs (limited movement).

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

#92

Post by moistly »

I am eternally surprised that Boeing has not developed augmented reality headsets for its maintenance crew. Overlaying specs and instructions onto the components being serviced would be a godsend for productivity, compliance, and personal safety.

Edit: ditto for automotive assembly/repair. Power plant maintenance. Basically all complicated engineering fields could make excellent use of AR.

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

#93

Post by ceeplusplus »

bnolsen wrote: post #57
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.

The Oculus quest 2 definitely has fit that bill. It has game console level sales. How truly useful and confirtable it is may be questionable, but it certainly supports a market.

But not game console level software sales. Xbox has 1) recurring revenue from online subscriptions 2) recurring GamePass revenue 3) a huge library of games and gamers who tend to buy many games often. Average software spend for Quest 2 is estimated at $125/user [1], which is a mere 2 games without DLC on Xbox. By contrast I'd be willing to bet software revenue/user for Xbox is well in the hundreds.

[1] https://arinsider.co/2021/08/02/how-many-quest-2s-sold-in-q2...

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

#94

Post by layer8 »

kurthr wrote: post #85
layer8 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The parent was talking about moving around in a room filled with virtual displays. Regarding eye motion, I already use a screen filling my non-peripheral field-of-view (~120°), so any additional screen would require significant head movement.

You sit with your eyes closer than half the width of your screen? That is either a HUGE screen and/or you sit with eyes less than 14" away, which is at least novel? Of course you need two of those screens to fill your field of view, unless you have a square screen that goes below your desk, but I'm sure that's available somewhere.

I’m near-sighted, and checking now it’s really more like 90-100° horizontally, but moving my eyes outside of that range without moving my head is actually not comfortable.

My subjective impression is that the nonperipheral visual field isn’t square. I would find 3:2 displays optimal, or maybe rather 16:11. While a 16:9 or 16:10 display could be extended vertically to fill more of the visual field, that extended portion is not large enough to usefully fit a second monitor there (without head movement).

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

#95

Post by nsriv »

moistly wrote: post #92

I am eternally surprised that Boeing has not developed augmented reality headsets for its maintenance crew. Overlaying specs and instructions onto the components being serviced would be a godsend for productivity, compliance, and personal safety. Edit: ditto for automotive assembly/repair. Power plant maintenance. Basically all complicated engineering fields could make excellent use of AR.

This is the space that Microsoft's HoloLens and to a much lesser degree the prior Google Glass project stepped into.

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

#96

Post by nsriv »

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.…

EDIT: If meant to be used untethered, those screens would also soak up battery.

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

#97

Post by rpdillon »

Bud wrote: post #65
xoa wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 64% of US adults wear eyeglasses. ??? I do too. What does this have to do with anything? The lens is irrelevant for something that projects right onto the retina (trivial to correct for). Hell, I'd love it for that reason alone, would be a huge improvement for my computer usage. > We're already basically at the limits of physics for making CPUs faster and heat dissipation is a huge issue even for products that you…

Eyeglasses are relevant because you're talking about "wearable" devices that are worn in a place where most of us are already wearing something. The fact that this isn't obvious helps explain all your other blind spots on this issue. If you can't figure out why wearing hot things on your face is a problem, you are not even thinking at all about product design. I meant that humans interact WITH EACH OTHER via sight. A…

I've owned three VR headsets over the years, and used all of them wearing my glasses.

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

#98

Post by orbital-decay »

kurthr wrote: post #81
layer8 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Counterpoint: It’s faster to Alt+Tab (or using other keyboard shortcuts) than to move around the room.

Move around a room? I'd compare it to eye motion of 30-60deg, that's a saccade of about 30-40ms. I don't think most fingers can move that fast from the home row, probably more comparable to head motion

It's not about switching time, it's about cognitive load. If any dense information creeps into your far peripheral vision, it might as well not exist because you have to locate it. During any concentrated work, only something you can fit in the center of your binocular field of vision (roughly speaking) doesn't cause severe mental context switching.

I tried to work on three 16:9 displays for some time, and found it exhausting. The cognitive overload isn't worth it, workspace switching with a hotkey turned out to be far easier for me. That's not even mentioning constant neck movement.

Maybe it's just me though, I can't speak for different people; but I strongly suspect it's the same for many.

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

#99

Post by whywhywhywhy »

It’s so telling how much WWDC has been dedicated to ARKit over the past many years yet not a single viable use has been shipped.

AR through a phone or iPad is lame and close to useless. Only looks good in video demos till you use it yourself and see how clumsy it is interacting through a tiny window.

Very clear they have a headset in mind for all this but are struggling to ship.

Post reply on HN