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

Apple Vision

stratechery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 582 posts

Re: Apple Vision

#331

Post by browningstreet »

Tepix wrote: post #260
mdanger007 wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1st generation apple products are never for the masses. If you want to see what Vision will be in a few years, look at their other product trajectories.

The 1st generation iPhone was successful.

Lots and lots of people were waiting for the iPhone 3G model and skipped the first one.

Considering it's the only model with the cell tech in the name (there's no iPhone 5G), I think even Apple knew the first model was a ground laying device, not the "pave the world" model the subsequent versions would become. They still weren't even committed to the app store yet.

Re: Apple Vision

#332

Post by partiallypro »

screye wrote: post #189

Now I am a lowly programmer + VR enthusiast, so my opinion does not count. But, how do big companies allow Apple to get away with such easy wins !?? Apple said : "We are going to throw infinite money at a pilot product that's basically a tech demo, and convince the market that this tech is for-real-for-real." Meanwhile, Facebook refused to create a balls-to-the-wall VR headset for years and still ended up with a cons…

I'm not convinced it is or will be an "easy win" because the entire space is still so fundamentally flawed. Everyone I know with a VR headset has one...and barely ever uses it (similar to the smart speaker, which Apple also failed at.) Not because of quality of hardware or software (Meta's stuff is actually pretty impressive now), but that it's awkward and it's strapped to your face. I don't see how this really addresses that aspect.

Apple can surprise you with how successful things they make can be, but I can't think of a product they have now that wasn't already in space with tons of successes. Phones, tablets, watches, earbuds, all were already fairly popular. Tablets maybe being the one they really brough into the fold of common use, but the others already existed they just "perfected" them. This is...mostly a failed space with very little penetration. It will be much harder.

Re: Apple Vision

#333

Post by TheNewsIsHere »

htag wrote: post #314
randmeerkat wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One thing which ties this all together is that Apple has a full-blown legitimate OS that can run professional software that already exists. Throw it into a headset, driving up the price significantly, but potentially make a computer replacement. There’s no reason that the iPhone or iPad couldn’t be a computer replacement. The issue is that Apple locks down devices preventing them from being fully utilized. I’m expe…

It's a long way away for corporate to buy it's developers a headset like what your describing. As far as Work goes, if you cannot get a corporate office to buy them then it's never going to take off.

Yeah, there’s a big up front cost and it’s an almost total gamble.

My spouse’s company bought an engineering team Oculus headsets. The thinking was they might generate new ideas and concepts worth exploring further.

My understanding is that they use it for virtual golf games in lieu of Zoom meetings sometimes, and that’s about it.

I think VR has a future, but I don’t think it has a broad workplace future. Medicine? Absolutely! Gaming? Sure! Office work? Ehhh

Re: Apple Vision

#334

Post by js2 »

> I’ll be honest: what this looked like to me was a divorced dad, alone at home with his Vision Pro, perhaps because his wife was irritated at the extent to which he got lost in his own virtual experience. That certainly puts a different spin on Apple’s proud declaration that the Vision Pro is “The Most Advanced Personal Electronics Device Ever”.

> Indeed, this, even more than the iPhone, is the true personal computer. Yes, there are affordances like mixed reality and EyeSight to interact with those around you, but at the end of the day the Vision Pro is a solitary experience.

Absolutely. I can imagine myself using an Vision Pro from my home office. I can imagine myself using a Vision Pro while on a plane. So I can imagine using it either where I'm already physically alone or where I want to be physically isolated from other humans nearby.

I can also imagine myself using a Vision Pro to connect with other humans who are physically distant (the FaceTime demo).

What I cannot ever imagine is having the Vision Pro on my head while interacting with other people in the room (the dad watching his kids demo), nor can I even imagine using them as part of a shared entertainment experience. e.g., I cannot imagine my wife and I each having a pair of these and using them to watch a movie "together".

But, watching a movie with other people when we are all physically distant from each other? Yes, that I can imagine.

I can see myself buying a pair of these. I'm fascinated by the technology and by the ability to use them in my home office.

I don't really see them taking the place of my home theater, but maybe... 95% of the time I use it alone because my wife prefers to read a book.

> I am completely serious when I say that I would pay the NBA thousands of dollars to get a season pass to watch games captured in this way. Yes, that’s a crazy statement to make, but courtside seats cost that much or more, and that 10-second clip was shockingly close to the real thing.

Personally, I think that watching a game while being virtually part of the crowd would leave me feeling lonely and isolated. It's one thing to watch a game alone, seeing the other people cheering. It seems like an altogether different experience being part of the crowd while not really being part of the crowd.

Re: Apple Vision

#335

Post by scarface_74 »

tootie wrote: post #267
screye wrote: post #189

Now I am a lowly programmer + VR enthusiast, so my opinion does not count. But, how do big companies allow Apple to get away with such easy wins !?? Apple said : "We are going to throw infinite money at a pilot product that's basically a tech demo, and convince the market that this tech is for-real-for-real." Meanwhile, Facebook refused to create a balls-to-the-wall VR headset for years and still ended up with a cons…

Quest 2 is the best-selling headset to date. This Apple device will have an even smaller addressable market at the $3500 price. Meta can add more pixels faster than Apple can drop their price by 2/3. Really, Apple does a lot of things well, but their market supremacy is primarily due to marketing. They are incredibly well-positioned as a necessary luxury brand. They are "cool" while Android and Microsoft are not.

Yes it’s all marketing. People have been saying that for 20 years. It couldn’t possible have anything to do with having hardware that is literally years ahead of the competition, tight integration between products, a better user interface, etc.

Re: Apple Vision

#336

Post by throw74775 »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #289
screye wrote: post #189

Now I am a lowly programmer + VR enthusiast, so my opinion does not count. But, how do big companies allow Apple to get away with such easy wins !?? Apple said : "We are going to throw infinite money at a pilot product that's basically a tech demo, and convince the market that this tech is for-real-for-real." Meanwhile, Facebook refused to create a balls-to-the-wall VR headset for years and still ended up with a cons…

This "Apple DNA" provides both advantages and disadvantages. The Apple Vision has a shell of metal & glass. On a product where weight is super important. How many grams could be shaved if they used plastic instead?

Aluminum is about 3x the weight of ABS, but is significantly stronger. It’s not at all obvious that any weight could be ‘shaved’ while still making the device as durable.

Re: Apple Vision

#337

Post by wslh »

petersellers wrote: post #232
screye wrote: post #189

Now I am a lowly programmer + VR enthusiast, so my opinion does not count. But, how do big companies allow Apple to get away with such easy wins !?? Apple said : "We are going to throw infinite money at a pilot product that's basically a tech demo, and convince the market that this tech is for-real-for-real." Meanwhile, Facebook refused to create a balls-to-the-wall VR headset for years and still ended up with a cons…

> Carmack had been pushing for an all-out device but got sidelined by Zuck's push towards cheap and scale Is that true? From this article[1], it sounds like he had been pushing for cheap headsets, not expensive ones: > There he talked about his internal efforts to push for the development of a "super cheap, super lightweight" Meta VR headset that could come in at "$250 and 250 grams." Instead, Meta has put its recent…

Well, as an Oculus customer I can say that the Apple vision is far far from Meta one, beyond what, with all due respect, Carmack thinks about Meta failures.

Apple includes a complete vision of an operating system on a new device while Meta vision is much narrow: run VR apps in a VR device (which runs Android). In the vision of Apple you will run the same, again the same!, apps but with a new experience in a new form-factor. In addition of that you will run the obvious specific apps. I imagine that they will launch GarageBand anytime and use a piano or guitar in VR. Microsoft tried to bring a new operating system for multiple form factors (e.g. tablet) which turns to be an messed UX. I really don't think many people understand the Apple edge.

Also, I think the Meta apps strategy is completely catastrophic: I don't see a significant amount of apps in their ecosystem. When Nintendo, Microsoft (Xbox), and Sony launch a new device they have a good list of games in the pipeline.

I can also add that I contacted several people at Meta about a specific VR initiative and nobody answered...

Re: Apple Vision

#338

Post by distortedsignal »

randmeerkat wrote: post #287
thrashh wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing which ties this all together is that Apple has a full-blown legitimate OS that can run professional software that already exists. Throw it into a headset, driving up the price significantly, but potentially make a computer replacement. The only other company in the world that has an extensive OS ecosystem like that is Microsoft. Everyone else never really had a chance to make a new class of device.

> One thing which ties this all together is that Apple has a full-blown legitimate OS that can run professional software that already exists. Throw it into a headset, driving up the price significantly, but potentially make a computer replacement. There’s no reason that the iPhone or iPad couldn’t be a computer replacement. The issue is that Apple locks down devices preventing them from being fully utilized. I’m expe…

https://store.steampowered.com/valveindex

Re: Apple Vision

#339

Post by gavinmckenzie »

taeric wrote: post #326
gavinmckenzie wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thankfully it does pair with a Bluetooth keyboard and trackpad for the scenarios where you want to use it to do “work”.

This makes me realize that the gestures it is being demonstrated with are going to be hilarious if they are misidentified. I'm /assuming/ that the thing will not pick up gestures between you and someone else. Such that if I pick up a paper with a similar hand shape as their "pinch and move things" gesture, it will realize it wasn't the same. Or will this be akin to how siri does a shit job understanding anything that…

Hopefully the troubles with Siri are understood enough in Apple that they won’t make that mistake, because Siri is truly awful on my HomePods for thinking I’m talking to Siri when I’m not.

Thankfully many of the people in the demo videos were people of colour, so I’m fairly confident Apple has gotten that bit right and hopefully their gesture detecting cameras have IR or dot-pattern emitters to work in the dark as well.

Re: Apple Vision

#340

Post by scarface_74 »

pavlov wrote: post #35

"The company was fairly mum about how it planned to make those cameras and its format more widely available, but I am completely serious when I say that I would pay the NBA thousands of dollars to get a season pass to watch games captured in this way. Yes, that’s a crazy statement to make, but courtside seats cost that much or more, and that 10-second clip was shockingly close to the real thing." The author was shown…

He went into more details on the Dithering podcast. He was able to have a much fuller demo than a few clips.
Post reply on HN