Live data from Hacker News

Apple’s new headset meets reality

bloomberg.com

121–130 of 527 posts

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#121
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…

> Current optical designs mean that there is a large out of focus area when you look anywhere that isn't forward

You sound like you are a year or two out of date with your "current" understanding. The industry has moved to pancake lenses which make the view clear edge to edge. There's no more out of focus peripheral view, in recent headsets you read and look around using your eyeballs and not your head just like you would naturally.

It is already known that the Apple headset uses this updated optical system, along with micro OLED displays at super high resolution (approx double current industry standards). The clarity and focus are going to be absolutely amazing.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 comp…

I can imagine a headset that allows me to have the equivalent desktop space of quad HiDPI displays for the price of one display, and the ability to bring that anywhere. The ability to edit video on a display that is absolutely massive would be a win for me.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#123
This thread is amazing, and has shades of the original iPod and iPhone launch [1,2] commentary.

I can't believe that people would go on permanent written record with this stuff, but humans gotta human!

1. iPod launch thread on macrumors: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/apples-new-thing-ipod.5...

2. iPhone launch thread on macrumors: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/apple-announces-the-iph...

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#124
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?

I think even if Apple went bankrupt in 5 years, what Tim Cook has achieved is extremely good. It was not sure at all that Apple would grow this much over 12 years. It is not clear Steve Jobs himself could have had this success.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#125
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…

> What does the author consider to be a victory? Well, there's the Apple II, the iMac, the iPod, the iPhone... Apple has had a long history of products that redefined the future of entire categories, and almost all of them up to this point except the Apple Watch included deep involvement by Jobs.

Apple watch? Airpods maybe? Apple silicon for sure.

Other than that not much, but to be clear there has not really been any other inventions in this time span like those you mention. The market is more mature.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#126
post #81

"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 i…

If people aren't finding value in a product they will stop using it. People won't want to use products which displays ads in an obnoxious way. >What to call people who wear this? Why do you want to bully people?

> Why do you want to bully people?

Is there a name for the mental situation where we make fun of someone because he dares doing something that we know we wouldn't dare to do?

I think that's what OP is experiencing when wanting to give name to someone wearing the device.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#127
post #45

Here's one view for the device - FaceTime++ If it's a gamechanger for remote working, then I'll buy them for my company and have my remote employees use them If it's a gamechanger for communicating with family overseas, then I might see if I can convince one of my relatives to get one (though the price will be harder to justify for personal use - but not impossible if it's a gamechanger) Both of those are contingent…

The rumors that have come out say that Apple has achieved 1:1 3d video chat where there avatars are almost completely photo realistic. I'm very interested to see this especially. Apparently this is a big reason why the device has to bundle 2 X M2 processors and also limits it to one on one calls. I think it's going to be amazing and significantly shift people's perceptions here with how good it is. They should be able to demonstrate hyper realistic pass through as well so essentially you are looking at an almost completely realistic image of the other person teleported into your own surroundings.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#128
post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> Current optical designs mean that there is a large out of focus area when you look anywhere that isn't forward You sound like you are a year or two out of date with your "current" understanding. The industry has moved to pancake lenses which make the view clear edge to edge. There's no more out of focus peripheral view, in recent headsets you read and look around using your eyeballs and not your head just like you…

You mean like the pancake lenses in the Quest Pro? Those are still what I'd consider garbage tier old tech. Probably the best we are going to get down the path of fixed focal point acrylic lenses, but definitely not what I'd call sharp edge to edge. The edges might qualify as "very soft" instead of "totally out of focus" but that's about the best you can say.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If they can figure out how to run AI workloads at fraction of the cost of what is costs on current hardware https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laconic_phrase It's discussed quite a bit on this site, but I wouldn't expect Apple to pull ahead in the GPU department. They really lit a fire under Intel and AMD's ass with the M1's IPC, but Nvidia laughed their way to the bank with every M1 upgrade. Even the 5nm M1 Ultra strug…

What about in terms of performance per watt, rather than pure performance?

It's still not favorable, even compared to last-gen (30XX series) hardware. Here's the OpenCL scores for multiple different GPUs, including the Ultra: https://browser.geekbench.com/opencl-benchmarks

The M1 Ultra is a 200w chip, fabricated with 5nm silicon. It's being outclassed by the RTX 3060, a cheap 10nm card that draws ~170w max. In Nvidia's 40-series cards (on 4nm), the M1 Ultra's performance profile is most comparable to a laptop-class RTX 4060 that draws less than 115 watts.

There's a story in the total package draw to be made here, and it does weigh slightly in Apple's favor. Overall though, even with last-gen cards it's clear that there's a massive performance-per-watt lead in Nvidia's favor right now. Which is impressive, considering how they've been stuck with second-class silicon when the M1 Ultra debuted.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 comp…

I can imagine a headset that allows me to have the equivalent desktop space of quad HiDPI displays for the price of one display, and the ability to bring that anywhere. The ability to edit video on a display that is absolutely massive would be a win for me.

Yes, this can definitely be true, but is the context really so that you can be social with someone else - or is it for you to have the creative space to work on an idea?

I feel there's no idea of what the context is anymore - and that's what's killing all of these devices. No one can say 'this is the emphasis we gave these products for this reason' - because they all want the success of the iPhone, everyday use and wear.

We have to allow the pendulum to swing back to specialized devices - that's why Teenage Engineering is so captivating.

Post reply on HN