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

Apple’s new headset meets reality

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 527 posts

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#81

Post by Animats »

"Apple’s ambition is that customers will eventually wear the device continuously all day, replacing daily tasks done on an iPhone or a Mac such as playing games, browsing the web, emailing, doing FaceTime video calls while collaborating in apps, working out and even meditating. It will feature hand and eye control and run many of the kinds of apps found on Apple’s other devices."

This concept has been well-explored in science fiction, and it doesn't look good. See "Hyperreality"[1] for one of the best visualizations. That's all too realistic.

There's a line in Ready Player One:

"We call this Pure O2. This is the first of our planned upgrades. Once we can roll back some of Halliday's ad restrictions, we estimate we can sell up to 80% of an individual's visual field before inducing seizures."

I was expecting that from Zuckerberg/Meta/Oculus.

Remember Google Glass? People wearing those were called "Glassholes". What to call people who wear this? "iDweebs"?

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJg02ivYzSs

[2] https://www.springfieldspringfield.co.uk/movie_script.php?mo...

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#82

Post by majormajor »

EnragedParrot wrote: post #50
vehemenz wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you could have UI overlayed on the world around you, it would be huge, and would change how people use computers, like the smartphone did. Is this really a game-changer? Technology adoption is all about tradeoffs. We already have location-based services and applications that are granular enough for most purposes. AR applications add sensory awareness and localized interaction at the cost of distraction and intru…

It's absolutely a game-changer. Imagine having driving or walking directions laid out on the street in front of you. Imagine using AI to help you identify things like engine parts in your car, plants, birds, other people (never forget a name again). Looking at a package and scanning the barcode to get price comparisons. Recipe directions on the counter in front of you, even labeling the next ingredient and how much o…

There's plenty of neat ideas for what AR could do - but how often are you changing tires or having to find an oilpan plug on an unfamiliar car? Some great professional use cases, potentially, but for a consumer? A lot of this sounds like an open-world video game with no design restraint, where your map gets littered with dozens and dozens of points of interest all at once and it just makes it that much harder to focus on what you actually wanted to be doing in the first place.

And with people's resistance to paying for software services, you'll have exactly the same problem with looking at something on your phone of half the crap being ads intentionally trying to sidetrack you.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#83

Post by malwarebytess »

bluescrn wrote: post #32
nickthegreek wrote: post #11

Hope the rumor in this article that Apple will sell the device at cost is true. Oculus understood that they needed to sell cheaply at first. I don't expect Apple to come in at $299, but the rumored $3k is a pretty heavy lift.

At £3K, they're not going after gamers or even enthusiasts. They're more likely going after creative professionals who're already all-in on the Apple ecosystem. Maybe product designers or architects, who want to show clients their designs in VR, and a slick Apple device will probably make a better impression than a PC VR setup with a bulky headset, cables everywhere, fans whirring, etc.

That's similar to the hololens approach to market. Didn't go well.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#84

Post by melling »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #13

I don't think there is a consumer market for head mounted AR anymore - if there ever really was. That makes me sad having been in AR since 2010 - and knowing what we could do with it if done right. I just don't think society currently has an appetite for a $3000 product that gives the wearer visual superpowers (that is the promise after all) and is an impossible to ignore distinction between classes. I honestly think…

“ I just don't think society currently has an appetite for a $3000”

Yep, that’s an easy one. Guess what. It’s not for general use.

I have no idea where AR/VR is going. However, I’m all for Apple spending part of its large cash reserve in R&D. I guarantee something useful will come out of it.

Hopefully, someone with a little vision comes along and says “you know what we could do with this technology…”

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#85

Post by screye »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #13

I don't think there is a consumer market for head mounted AR anymore - if there ever really was. That makes me sad having been in AR since 2010 - and knowing what we could do with it if done right. I just don't think society currently has an appetite for a $3000 product that gives the wearer visual superpowers (that is the promise after all) and is an impossible to ignore distinction between classes. I honestly think…

> don't think society currently has an appetite for a $3000 product

Apple currently sells a pair of 500$ headphones and a 5000$ monitor. High margin products that are sold as fashion to their top fans is Apple's thing.

They will need one killer app and a sleek enough package, and those are the main bottle necks. The money is hardly an issue.

Technologically, Apple has the distinct advantage of having the best power efficient mobile chips which Facebook did not. Other than that, I don't see how they can solve all the other open problems in VR/AR right now.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#86

Post by BugsJustFindMe »

easton wrote: post #55

I think there's a false leak here, because one of the comments on the Bloomberg article mentions them going with a design where the battery is external and connected via a wire to the headset (to prevent heat issues). That seems like such a bizarre design choice for Apple that I can't imagine they'd actually do that. Just... make the chip weaker? (Like if you don't have pockets, where does the battery go? Or if you'r…

> Just... make the chip weaker?

Making it not able to do as much is sometimes a winning move, but also sometimes not. The primary utility concerns that people have with headset products come from display resolution and framerate. It takes a lot of pixel density for readable text and a lot of frames per second to prevent display-lag-induced motion sickness. Crapping out on the displays and processing makes that worse, not better.

> Like if you don't have pockets, where does the battery go?

Clips. Straps. Bags. Hooks. People have been successfully carrying things on their person without pockets for millennia. Have you really never seen someone at the gym strap their phone into an armband?

You may as well be asking "Like if you don't have pockets, where does your cellphone go?" And yet billions of people all over the world manage to carry cellphones.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#87

Post by treis »

wintermutestwin wrote: post #58
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #13

I don't think there is a consumer market for head mounted AR anymore - if there ever really was. That makes me sad having been in AR since 2010 - and knowing what we could do with it if done right. I just don't think society currently has an appetite for a $3000 product that gives the wearer visual superpowers (that is the promise after all) and is an impossible to ignore distinction between classes. I honestly think…

>I don't think there is a consumer market for head mounted AR anymore - if there ever really was. All it takes is a killer app to come along. AR music instrument instruction is my bet. If Apple released this one app along with the glasses it would become a massive hit.

Driving, I think. Google maps overlayed onto the real world is pretty killer. Maybe night vision delivered as an IR image overlay.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#88

Post by throwuwu »

easton wrote: post #55

I think there's a false leak here, because one of the comments on the Bloomberg article mentions them going with a design where the battery is external and connected via a wire to the headset (to prevent heat issues). That seems like such a bizarre design choice for Apple that I can't imagine they'd actually do that. Just... make the chip weaker? (Like if you don't have pockets, where does the battery go? Or if you'r…

lol, just make the chip weaker? On an AR/VR headset that means potato graphics and motion sickness. Guaranteed flop.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#89

Post by pb7 »

screye wrote: post #85
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #13

I don't think there is a consumer market for head mounted AR anymore - if there ever really was. That makes me sad having been in AR since 2010 - and knowing what we could do with it if done right. I just don't think society currently has an appetite for a $3000 product that gives the wearer visual superpowers (that is the promise after all) and is an impossible to ignore distinction between classes. I honestly think…

> don't think society currently has an appetite for a $3000 product Apple currently sells a pair of 500$ headphones and a 5000$ monitor. High margin products that are sold as fashion to their top fans is Apple's thing. They will need one killer app and a sleek enough package, and those are the main bottle necks. The money is hardly an issue. Technologically, Apple has the distinct advantage of having the best power e…

Do you think the monitor is $5,000 because of high margins? It’s not. It’s arguably a bargain for its target demographic.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#90

Post by Qweiuu »

EnragedParrot wrote: post #50
vehemenz wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you could have UI overlayed on the world around you, it would be huge, and would change how people use computers, like the smartphone did. Is this really a game-changer? Technology adoption is all about tradeoffs. We already have location-based services and applications that are granular enough for most purposes. AR applications add sensory awareness and localized interaction at the cost of distraction and intru…

It's absolutely a game-changer. Imagine having driving or walking directions laid out on the street in front of you. Imagine using AI to help you identify things like engine parts in your car, plants, birds, other people (never forget a name again). Looking at a package and scanning the barcode to get price comparisons. Recipe directions on the counter in front of you, even labeling the next ingredient and how much o…

I hear your killer features and don't care for them at all in any way to put on glasses for them.

I only need real navigation on holiday and I'm pretty sure not taking some expensive glasses on travel. Neither when hiking nor in a foreign country.

And all the other Infos? I don't even use my smartphone for them. Why would I wear an expensive headset to compare a 3€ product?

Post reply on HN