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

Notes on Vision Pro

notes.andymatuschak.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 700 posts

Re: Notes on Vision Pro

#231

Post by zmmmmm »

throw74775 wrote: post #142
zmmmmm wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you don't have to guess - I bought a Quest Pro which allows side loading As far as this goes ... > it won't have the same level of investment. Meta is constantly mocked for how much they have invested. You can argue about how much it paid off, but they certainly invested.

Right - and the Quest Pro isn’t well compared to what Apple is marketing here. I couldn’t accept a job working with a VR company because I couldn’t get past the nausea the Quest Pro induces in me. I think the point is that Meta’s investment is weak compared to Apple’s full court press. It really is laughable.

> I couldn’t accept a job working with a VR company because I couldn’t get past the nausea the Quest Pro induces

Ouch. I'm sorry to hear that, I feel sorry for folks like you that are sensitive to nausea. There's so much potential in this tech but I can see a whole new class of disadvantaged people coming who aren't able to fully utilise it.

Re: Notes on Vision Pro

#232

Post by MBCook »

o1y32 wrote: post #224
dvt wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have a product that's 5x as good, but 2x as expensive, literally everyone will buy it. The iPhone is the perfect case study.

...if you are in the US. Outside US iPhones are nowhere nearly as popular. In many markets Android phones have about 90% of the market share

I believe they were referring to the original iPhone compared to the other “smartphones“ of the day.

Not todays market, which has evolved.

Re: Notes on Vision Pro

#233

Post by sho »

o1y32 wrote: post #224
dvt wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have a product that's 5x as good, but 2x as expensive, literally everyone will buy it. The iPhone is the perfect case study.

...if you are in the US. Outside US iPhones are nowhere nearly as popular. In many markets Android phones have about 90% of the market share

> Outside US iPhones are nowhere nearly as popular. In many markets Android phones have about 90% of the market share

In my opinion, with the possible exception of South Korea, that is purely a matter of apple's global pricing vs local purchasing power and a huge number of those android users would have an iPhone if they could afford it.

Re: Notes on Vision Pro

#234

Post by MBCook »

ojbyrne wrote: post #202
dvt wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have a product that's 5x as good, but 2x as expensive, literally everyone will buy it. The iPhone is the perfect case study.

If you’re comparing the Quest 2 to the Vision Pro, it seems more like 2x as good for 5x the price.

Based on the hands-on impressions I’ve read it sounds significantly more than twice as good.

Five times the price, yeah. Today. This really feels like a product aimed at developers right now not the mass market yet.

Which fits. The iPhone took a few years to really take off. The Apple Watch took a few years to really takeoff.

Re: Notes on Vision Pro

#235

Post by Auracle »

Aeolun wrote: post #120
mikenew wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I guess it was just too obvious to demo. Or is it? Gaming can't be good, because there's no controllers. Even if the hand and eye tracking is absolutely S-tier, you're never getting something like button input from swinging your empty hands around, twitching your fingers. Just the occlusion from the back of your hand would be enough enough for that to be impossible. Fitness might be more doable, but even then I thi…

Gaming is pretty good with a keyboard and mouse. No controller necessary.

VR gaming is different from regular gaming. You largely want to feel like you're interacting with the environment (in most games).

Re: Notes on Vision Pro

#237

Post by TX81Z »

bombcar wrote: post #192
TX81Z wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The regression in autocorrect is also nuts. It seems to aggressively modify grammar to the point of regularly changing the meaning of what I’m writing. It’s like a CS undergrad project where they went too hard on Markov chains.

It’s absolutely horrible- it will go back and modify correct words for whatever forsaken chain it decided it wants. I hate it.

I also have a fairly expansive vocabulary and talk about esoteric technical matters on my phone frequently. As far as I can tell Siri was trained on 8th-grade level text and constantly dumbs down my text and distorts the meaning.

Re: Notes on Vision Pro

#238

Post by robomartin »

JohnBooty wrote: post #21

But it does put an enormous amount of pressure on the eye tracking. As far as I can tell so far, the role of precise 2D control has been shifted to the eyes. I've got one good eye and one bad eye. The bad eye is legally blind, has an off-center iris and is kind of lazy w.r.t. tracking. I'm extremely curious to know how Vision Pro deals with this. One certainly hopes there's some kind of "single eye" mode; certainly s…

Strabismus and amblyopia are common enough (4% of the population) that one would hope these types of systems would make sensible provisions to accommodate people with these conditions.

https://www.childrenshospital.org/conditions/strabismus-and-...

Re: Notes on Vision Pro

#239

Post by eclipxe »

kalleboo wrote: post #88
cubefox wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Quest Pro has actual VR games and proper VR controllers though. I doubt that such games are possible or probable with eye pointing and finger clicking alone. Apple also didn't include any VR games into their presentation.

VR gaming is a flop. Lots of people bought headsets, played with them for a day and now they're all gathering dust. Apple is right to ignore it.

It’s a billion dollar business.

Re: Notes on Vision Pro

#240

Post by samplatt »

JohnBooty wrote: post #213
XorNot wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple don't need you to defend them here. They presented what they presented, and whether we're interested is based on that. It's a legitimate concern and a valid point of discussion.

The interaction paradigm you describe (where it's literally impossible to look at one window while actively using another) makes so little sense that we can almost certainly rule it out. Certainly no press members who demo'd the unit are describing the interface that way. That's not "defending Apple", that's just... gosh, I can't think of any word besides common sense. From all of the presentations and press accounts…

I don't disagree with your other points AT ALL, but given how repeatedly proven that common sense is entirely a fiction, if any argument falls back on it you have to be immediately suspect of it.
Post reply on HN