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

281–290 of 527 posts

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#281

Post by roland35 »

jdprgm wrote: post #280

One thing which I don't get why people don't seem to get is long term (and perhaps with this release from Apple) headsets should be replacing tv's for at least a substantial amount of viewing. For example I have a fairly high end 4k projector setup but in an apartment with limits on light control. Even with a dedicated room and $3k allocated to a projector and a screen and high enough resolution (which i'm expecting…

This is so true. I have used a quest pro to watch YouTube and Netflix, and it's a great experience. My house weirdly has no good place for a TV, but with VR it's a much more immersive experience. Just need to get comfort and battery life improved.

Watching cyberpunk on Netflix was an experience.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#282

Post by SirLJ »

jdprgm wrote: post #280

One thing which I don't get why people don't seem to get is long term (and perhaps with this release from Apple) headsets should be replacing tv's for at least a substantial amount of viewing. For example I have a fairly high end 4k projector setup but in an apartment with limits on light control. Even with a dedicated room and $3k allocated to a projector and a screen and high enough resolution (which i'm expecting…

How about watching with friend and family? I would hate to watch a tv show with my wife and both have face masks on…. Or hockey game with friends and all with masks

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#283

Post by roland35 »

zamnos wrote: post #175
deet wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I strongly doubt that the campus is any more of a force multiplier than a collection of far cheaper class A office buildings of similar capacity, with similarly serene grass and vegetation connecting them.

And that, dear reader, is how we ended up with hundreds of bland copy-cat Android phones to the iPhone. There's something to be said, mentally, for working somewhere that's inspiring. A shitty office in yet a clone of all the other office parks, buried in office-park-landia of San Jose, is not it. Even a stroll through the secret underground parking lot at Apple is inspiring with all the exotic cars that are owned by…

This sounds like fan fiction. I do my best work distraction free. Seeing expensive cars... have you met engineers? We are the biggest collection of cheapasses on the planet!

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#284

Post by furyofantares »

crossroadsguy wrote: post #261
furyofantares wrote: post #243

I think Apple wouldn't ship this if it wasn't a very, very good AR headset. Something you can read in and work in for VR, and see the world around you in for AR. Maybe $3000 is just the minimum price to get such a thing right now. There are tremendous downsides to wearing such a thing on your head, it would take a magical feeling device with tremendous upsides to warrant it beyond the niche VR gaming population. I'm…

> I think Apple wouldn't ship this if it wasn't a very, very good AR headset For heaven’s sake, Apple has a laundry list filled history of releasing half baked and subpar products - both hardware and software - and has been reliably consistent at doing that. I mean it’s just that its “target audience” sets their peak of standard what Apple expects them to, or to just what Apple offers. I have been using their AirPod…

It's not that I think they've never released a half baked or subpar product - they clearly have.

It's just that it would be a spectacular failure to read the room if it's just a better Oculus Quest for a massive multiplier of the price.

If they ship a $3000 headset into what has proven to be a niche market, then at the very least I feel they MUST feel it's a different ballgame than Oculus Quest. It's not $2500 of Apple Tax to capitalize on a small market.

Ability to read and work in VR is a potential category shift, as is the ability to see your real-world surroundings clearly, and these are things plausibly in reach of Apple's technical capabilities. So my speculation is if they ship at $3000 headset it'll be because they think they've achieved this and that it's worth the very obvious problems any strapped-to-your-face headset has.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#285

Post by freetime2 »

jdprgm wrote: post #280

One thing which I don't get why people don't seem to get is long term (and perhaps with this release from Apple) headsets should be replacing tv's for at least a substantial amount of viewing. For example I have a fairly high end 4k projector setup but in an apartment with limits on light control. Even with a dedicated room and $3k allocated to a projector and a screen and high enough resolution (which i'm expecting…

I just don’t care that much about fidelity on my TVs. By far the majority on content we watch on TV is YouTube and news, where immersiveness is actually undesirable. And nobody in my house can tell the difference between 4k and HD, so I’ve always opted for the cheaper HD Netflix plan.

So for me, a more immersive viewing experience isn’t worth the hassle of needing to strap a device to my head.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#286

Post by coffeebeqn »

cubefox wrote: post #224
Dalewyn wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd pay $200 tops for a VR headset (not that I'd buy one even then...), given how jank the experience is, how much money I would spend to power and use the bloody thing anyway, and how quickly it will become antiquated. Anything more for something that is essentially a short-lived toy is a fool's errand. Fool in this case meaning someone with more money than they know what to do with. I'd get better value from a Loui…

I wouldn't say that. A For example, I think a 300 USD standalone gaming console could be the next Game Boy, or the next Switch, in terms of sales numbers. The benfit/price ratio just has to be good enough and it could really take off. Even with fairly primitive graphics.

There is the Quest 2 at that price. The problem is that it’s at least right now just not a great gaming platform. I played the crown jewel - half life alyx (by connecting to a gaming pc that can run it), and it was fine but quite awkward. The default movement scheme is one where you teleport around the room because walking is too nauseating I guess.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#287

Post by jdprgm »

SirLJ wrote: post #282
jdprgm wrote: post #280

One thing which I don't get why people don't seem to get is long term (and perhaps with this release from Apple) headsets should be replacing tv's for at least a substantial amount of viewing. For example I have a fairly high end 4k projector setup but in an apartment with limits on light control. Even with a dedicated room and $3k allocated to a projector and a screen and high enough resolution (which i'm expecting…

How about watching with friend and family? I would hate to watch a tv show with my wife and both have face masks on…. Or hockey game with friends and all with masks

Right that is why i mentioned sports viewing as probably the main exception. I would be very curious to see the stats on percentage of media viewing alone vs couples vs groups. My bet would be the majority is solo even for families and couples in terms of all total viewing but maybe I am off.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#288

Post by InvertedRhodium »

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 product that gives the wearer visual superpowers (that is the promise after all) and is an impossible to ignore distinction between classes.

Entire industries are built upon impossible to ignore distinction between classes - 100 thousand dollar watches, 10 million dollar cars, designer clothing, and a thousand other examples that come under the category of "bling".

While I have similar doubts about the short to medium term AR/XR future, I don't think it's based on people not wanting to be seen as better than everyone else. As a society we basically encourage that behaviour.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#289

Post by catchnear4321 »

drdaeman wrote: post #195
catchnear4321 wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

apple is all about ecosystem. many little niceties you hardly notice but would immediately notice the loss of. with vr and ar you are placing yourself directly within the ecosystem. (the os becomes your reality, if you will, extended… xr… wasn’t that clever of them…) the iPhone long game shows apple’s willingness to creep slowly into lower cost tiers to preserve the brand value. carmack doesn’t need to be wrong for a…

That is, if they develop and produce something nearly impossible - a wearable glasses-like (in terms of size and weight) headset that can project color images non-multiplicatively overlaying the reality in user's eyes. If they had somehow figured that out (I'm no expert, but I don't think anyone did - at least I haven't heard anything) and if there's a decent SDK then 3 grands is a discount price for such a device. B…

yet another vr headset that is measurably less awful while still not being good is still a massive advancement.

apple can afford to iterate, and their high end and business customers can afford to participate in that process.

it won’t be siri, but they wouldn’t be rolling it out if they didn’t have something that felt different.

Post reply on HN