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

Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 1001 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#101

Post by veidr »

I use the Quest Pro right now, because my interest in spatial computing (I like Apple's new term so trying to use it, haha) is greater than my misgivings about Meta (even though those are significant).

I will buy the Apple thing, too.

There are a lot of interesting differences between them (obviously, the biggest one being the price, and deriving from that) but the one I find interesting is Apple's decision not to have controllers.

This is just like the infamous "if you see a stylus, they blew it" approach with the iPhone. Double down on the simplest possible input mechanism and pretend it is enough. Today, of course, Apple ships an excellent stylus that they are happy to sell you for $129.

(UPDATE: I think here I wasn't clear, based on several replies. I'm not saying this decision was wrong -- it was right, clearly. I just mean they may very well ignore the existence of controllers... right up until they release an awesome high tech controller for us to buy (as an option).)

The controllers on the Quest Pro are fantastic, and although Meta also seems to be pushing as hard as they can to improve hand tracking and gesture recognition, too, there are and will always be immense benefits to having a hardware controller compared to just waving your hands and pinching your fingers. Precision, haptics, joysticks and buttons, additional positional audio, and more.

I have no doubt that if Vision OS succeeds, it will also eventually get spatially tracked controllers as well. But it is going to start without them.

That to me seems like the main competitive advantage Meta's Quest lineup has, other than the price. It's obviously superior in terms of delivering a deeper and more varied lineup of games; Apple seems to understand that and are hardly mentioning games (although, that makes sense due to the price as well).

It will be interesting to see how Meta tries to leverage this advantage. OTOH maybe some enterprising developer will just figure out how to connect Meta's controllers (or other similar ones) to the Apple Vision Pro.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#102

Post by chaostheory »

jameslk wrote: post #54

If Apple's Vision Pro succeeds in dominating this new market, there will be competitors like there always has. Let's say the Vision Pro is #1 in terms of market share--they might not be, but Apple certainly has some obvious advantages. I find the question of who will be #2 in the market more interesting. Meta has positioned themselves as either #1 or #2 so far, but that position could easily vanish just like the Blac…

> Meta doesn't exactly have a history of producing either

Meta manufactured the Quest line after their oculus acquisition. While it runs Android, it’s heavily modified for VR AR. Overall, it’s a solid headset especially when you look at the price point and ease of use (compared to PCVR).

I tend to favor Apple, but I’m not going to overlook what other products have achieved

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#103

Post by smoldesu »

juve1996 wrote: post #91
smoldesu wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the flipside, it gives Meta a blueprint for disrupting the market. They're well-poised up to release a "Quest Pro Max" of sorts - keep the Quest form factor, but go all-in on eye tracking and screen tech. Price it at $3,000 and include a nice aluminum stand for kicks and giggles. The Hololens was a "power move" headset that had to repeatedly re-adjust its target market because the price was too high. Apple could e…

I highly doubt Meta can match Apple's tech now and in the future. The hard part is the hardware. Apple is way ahead here.

The hard part is the low end - and Meta has 20 million devices sold there. If the hardware is an obstacle to reaching market fit, I'm pretty confident Meta could get there. It's mostly a matter of scaling up what they already have.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#104

Post by juve1996 »

impulser_ wrote: post #17
mortify wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a high end Macbook Pro with a matching price tag and additional features. For a device that is aimed at developers and early adopters, it makes sense. In a year I expect to see the Apple Vision Air for less than half the price while the OS evolves.

I highly doubt it, maybe in a few years when cost of the components needed to build a Vision headset decrease. There is a lot of expensive tech in the Vision Pro. You have two processors, 4K eye pieces, expensive sensors, expensive cameras, expensive LIDAR. How are you suppose to build a similar product for half the price? You would have to gut a lot of features and you would end up with a completely different produc…

> The Quest 3 will outsell Vision Pro by 10x because of this.

Which is perfectly fine and why Apple will eventually win - they don't need to sell a ton of units right now.

Apple is going about it the right way, the same way that Tesla did with their electric cars. Eventually there will be a model 3 of the vision pro - and all that R&D they put into making it the best will pay dividends down the line. Meta simply won't have that experience because they just did the cheap thing targeted a small market.

Betting against a veteran hardware company like Apple and in favor of Meta seems ludicrous to me.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#106

Post by veidr »

charcircuit wrote: post #56
Yusefmosiah wrote: post #44

In this clash of visions, Apple wins by default. Not because Apple has a track record of setting the computer interface paradigm for the whole industry, but because Apple actually has its own vision — “spacial computing”. Zuck, on the other hand, aims to realize a sci-fi dystopia that he didn’t envision. Neal Stephenson did. Zuck didn’t found Oculus either. Now, Zuck may be the world’s greatest opportunist; copying,…

Apple didn't coin the term spatial computing. It's been used in the industry for a long time. They are both copying other's visions.

They didn't invent the mouse either, they just popularized it. Personally I like this term much better, so I hope we all start using it.

VR, AR, XR, mixed reality... these are too specific and fussy. "Spatial computing" encompasses them all in a fuzzy way that to me has the right granularity for most conversations about this stuff.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#107

Post by juve1996 »

asjfka wrote: post #47

Apple Vision will fail. It doesn't matter if it's a good product or not. Fact is, wearing it makes you look like a dork. This is why it will fail. Segway made you look like a dork too and it failed. Then the hoverboard got out and you looked cool while using it and it is successful. There is a future for Apple Vision's tech, but this is not the product that will sell. People will buy a product that makes them look co…

They said the same things about the original airpod and it used to not be cool to be into video games and comic books.

Times change. If it fails it won't be because of this reason - people won't be walking around outside with these on.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#108

Post by veidr »

machdiamonds wrote: post #105

I'm guessing that the Vision Pro will actually help Quest sales in the short term, since many people will want the Vision Pro but will settle for the Quest 3, since it'll be 7 times cheaper.

Absolutely. Also Meta would be foolish not to copy the innovative/popular things introduced by Vision OS.

The iPhone massively benefited almost every phone user in the world -- even those who never used an iPhone. Same dynamic will apply here (albeit with a vastly smaller total number of users, at least for the first decade...)

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#109

Post by veidr »

nharada wrote: post #67
ctvo wrote: post #25

This sounded weak to me. Apple is making an integrated headset: their own lenses, processor, ..., down to the operating system. The Quest uses an Android based operating system and a lot of off the shelf components. We've seen this story before and it hasn't ended well for the folks in Mark's position. A personal device like these headsets needs to be delightful . It has to be responsive. It has to have the little to…

> We've seen this story before and it hasn't ended well for the folks in Mark's position Isn't this what Android did? They seem like they're doing fine enough

I believe OP is referring to how most Android phone vendors make no profits.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#110

Post by juve1996 »

smoldesu wrote: post #103
juve1996 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I highly doubt Meta can match Apple's tech now and in the future. The hard part is the hardware. Apple is way ahead here.

The hard part is the low end - and Meta has 20 million devices sold there. If the hardware is an obstacle to reaching market fit, I'm pretty confident Meta could get there. It's mostly a matter of scaling up what they already have.

Yea 20 million cheap VR headsets that haven't taken off into the expected market at all. Any hardware company could do that tomorrow. It's easy. Just source the parts.

Apple is practically completely vertically integrated. They design their own chips. They have decades of experience in consumer hardware.

To make AR/VR into what Zuck wants, his hardware is NOWHERE near what it needs to be. And they don't have the chops to get it there. If it's possible, I believe Apple can do it.

Post reply on HN