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

111–120 of 527 posts

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#111

Post by [deleted] »

Qweiuu wrote: post #90
EnragedParrot wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

[deleted]

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#112

Post by tristanb »

fshbbdssbbgdd wrote: post #93
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…

This device is going to have color passthrough vision. That means it has cameras on the outside, and then an image of the real world is shown on the inside. If you try to just directly display the video from the camera on the screen inside the user will throw up. You need to do a lot of processing to reconstruct what the user’s eyes need to see on the inside display, which probably includes a stack of analytic method…

Or you could just use transparent lenses you can vary the darkness of... but hey I'm not building it.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#113

Post by ethbr0 »

nerdjon wrote: post #37

I continue to believe that IF (and that is a big if) anyone can make AR/VR a mainstream market it would be Apple. Just for the simple fact that Apple has in multiple occasions done 2 things: 1. Come out with something that shapes the rest of the industry. I mean how many times has Apple done something and within a year or 2 basically the entire industry follows. 2. Not captured a large (or majority) percent but conti…

A study of futurism I read made the insightful observation that things which explode in popularity don't just do things differently -- they let you do new things.

   Apple II - graphical OS
   iPod - music in your pocket
   iPhone - smartphone with cellular data
   iPad - large screen low cost
   iWatch - phone functionality on wrist
These are all different in kind, not different in amount products.

What does AR allow you to do, that you can't already do on a screen?

It's different... but different in amount. It's a better screen.

That might be enough to ship units, but it's not enough to explode in popularity.

Hell, even mystical eyeglass AR that was actually just a pair of eyeglasses would struggle. "Why don't I just do the same thing on my screen?" or "But I'm already constantly connected when I'm mobile."

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#114

Post by crooked-v »

throwuwu wrote: post #92
bluescrn wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Bit disingenuous about PC VR. There’s only 1 cable to the headset and if you have a decent rig the fans won’t be blasting. Big Screen’s new headset is going to blow Apple out of the water on weight, size and comfort too.

The Beyond doesn't fit the kind of role mentioned here at all, though, since a major part of how they've made it so small and light is by ditching the idea of being adjustable at all and just assembling each unit to match a specific person's face.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#115

Post by divan »

sf4lifer wrote: post #47

Does anyone on HN actually use VR to workout? That seems to be the killer use case, but I don't know anyone that's getting fit because of VR workouts.

I used FitXR througout this winter. Fantastic experience, I just wish I had a dedicated room for sweat-inducing activities. I especially liked HIIT training, where you hit glowing spheres and glass that appear in the air. Level and quality of multisensory stimulation (visual/audio/haptic) during those hits are just mindblowing. Reality can't offer that.

One particular thing that I believe is underexplored is using visual/haptic cues for movement learning (motor skills acquision). For example in FitXR there is a glowing semi-transparent path showing how your hand is supposed to move. If you deviate from it, it gives a light haptic feedback. There is no substitute for that in reality – we learn hand movements (like in dance or martial arts) either by proprioreception, visual feedback through mirrors or verbal feedback from teacher. All three ways are inferior to what VR can offer.

I think some progressive sports researchers are experimenting with VR (especially in Constraint-Led Approach community), but these are just first steps.

PS. I personally want to invest in learning VR programming for years, but waiting until software ecosystem will stabilize and settle on something. So waiting for the Apple announcements in that field.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#116

Post by crooked-v »

JimtheCoder wrote: post #99
sf4lifer wrote: post #47

Does anyone on HN actually use VR to workout? That seems to be the killer use case, but I don't know anyone that's getting fit because of VR workouts.

If I am going to spend $3000 on a VR headset, I don't really want to sweat all over it... Also, the sort of people who are going to work out consistently don't need a headset to work out. Or any other tech. They just do it. I know you're not implying this in your comment, but if anyone thinks you are going to take someone who is sedate, strap on a cool headset and give them some sort of virtual experience that will f…

The key to losing weight with VR for the average person isn't in exercise-specific apps, it's in replacing sitting video game time with something just as engaging but that has you standing, walking in circles, crouching, and waving your arms around for a few hours instead. You're obviously not going to get buff from it, but it can add up fast for an otherwise sedentary person.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#117

Post by anonymouse008 »

themagician wrote: post #106
jmull wrote: post #102

It will be interesting to see how this plays out, and if there really is a viable Apple-scale device here. The overarching XR vision makes sense to me -- that you could instantly drop into any kind of environment you might want to, whether for work or entertainment or socializing. But who creates these environments, and for what purpose? They seem like they'd be quite expensive if done well, and if not done well, you…

For me it comes down to optics. I've tried damn near every VR headset ever made, including many that never made it to production, and they all suffer from the same core issue: poor optics. Even industrial headsets that costs thousands are still using flat screen and lenses with fixed focal points (with few exceptions, but even then nothing truly extraordinary). Current optical designs mean that there is a large out o…

This is true - but let me say this, you couldn’t pay me to wear an Apple Watch all day and you won’t be able to pay me to wear a headset.

There’s just no dang reason to use these things like their creators want. Someone needs to be brave in these organizations and say “hey look, we tried pushing Siri for years and never gained the loved adoption that chatGPT has, why are we trying the same strategy here?”

If the compute offering is not excellent, it does not deserve to be in a new context. Period.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#118

Post by bredren »

tguedes wrote: post #110
bredren wrote: post #80

>underscoring the narrative that the company’s biggest victories were initiated under his predecessor, Apple co-founder Steve Jobs What does the author consider to be a victory? Tim Cook was elevated because he had the operational capability to grow Apple. Jobs did not consider Cook to be a product design person. But Jobs trusted Cook to find and keep people who could design products. By any stretch of the imaginatio…

Absolutely. Between Apple Silicon, Apple Watch, AirPods, and scaling operations to be able to sell the amount of products they do in a year, that is hard to argue against being an overwhelming success for Tim Cook as CEO. Is it equal to the legacy of Apple under Jobs? Definitely not. But how many other companies/people released 3 revolutionary products?

It is hard to not compare the breakthrough product release count between Jobs and Cook.

If that is the measure, then we have to bring in Jobs' tenure as not only CEO but company founder that stretched 25 years as CEO, 1976 to 1985 and 1997 to 2011.

Cook only took the reins in 2011, and at that time arguably the company should not have focused on releasing yet more revolutionary products.

iPhone is the most successful consumer product in history, focus was correctly placed in supporting that, building moats around it and positioning the ecosystem to support the next big thing.

One product often left out, which may have started with Jobs, but delivery should be attributed to Cook is the new Apple HQ. The initial impact has crumbled due to Covid WFH.

However, this campus may turn out to be a force multiplier going forward. If so, it is a victory, but not in the minds of consumers.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#119

Post by pdabbadabba »

ethbr0 wrote: post #113
nerdjon wrote: post #37

I continue to believe that IF (and that is a big if) anyone can make AR/VR a mainstream market it would be Apple. Just for the simple fact that Apple has in multiple occasions done 2 things: 1. Come out with something that shapes the rest of the industry. I mean how many times has Apple done something and within a year or 2 basically the entire industry follows. 2. Not captured a large (or majority) percent but conti…

A study of futurism I read made the insightful observation that things which explode in popularity don't just do things differently -- they let you do new things. Apple II - graphical OS iPod - music in your pocket iPhone - smartphone with cellular data iPad - large screen low cost iWatch - phone functionality on wrist These are all different in kind, not different in amount products. What does AR allow you to do, th…

If "phone functionality on wrist" counts as a "different in kind" product, why on earth wouldn't "smartphone functionality without looking down at a smartphone, watch, or other device" qualify?

For that matter, if "smartphone with cellular data" counts, why not "smart glasses with cellular data and apps"?

As you can tell, I'm a skeptic of this difference in kind v. difference in quantity construct.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#120

Post by fshbbdssbbgdd »

tristanb wrote: post #112
fshbbdssbbgdd wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This device is going to have color passthrough vision. That means it has cameras on the outside, and then an image of the real world is shown on the inside. If you try to just directly display the video from the camera on the screen inside the user will throw up. You need to do a lot of processing to reconstruct what the user’s eyes need to see on the inside display, which probably includes a stack of analytic method…

Or you could just use transparent lenses you can vary the darkness of... but hey I'm not building it.

Ok, you just gave yourself a different set of hard engineering problems to solve. Turns out that field-of-view, brightness, color reproduction, and resolution are all difficult to achieve on that kind of display. You can try a Magic Leap 2 if you want to experience those constraints.

One thing that Apple’s approach has going for it is that it could also be great at VR content like Beat Saber, Half Life Alyx, Bigscreen movies, or as a monitor for your MacBook. A Magic-Leap-esque device will suck for any of those.

However, the Magic Leap form factor may work better for a Google Glass type use case where you wear the headset as you go about your life and get some augmented features (maybe it can be an iPhone replacement eventually).

Post reply on HN