Live data from Hacker News

Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

theverge.com

251–260 of 1001 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#251
post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not a huge gamer, aside from fitness games like Thrill of the Fight, but I've tried a bunch of VR games just to see. And there is just no way that a lightsaber game could be good without haptic feedback, in a world where haptic feedback exists. And I think many other kinds of game. YouTube guy MKBHD even called out the lack of haptics in his initial impressions video, not even for a game: the butterfly flew over…

Oculus wands would make a barely more compelling experience of a butterfly landing on your finger. When Apple’s ready they’ll release haptic gloves that smash that experience out of the park.

Hope so! I would buy them immediately. :-D

(Not holding my breath, though...)

And yeah, the Oculus controllers wouldn't nail the butterfly on finger demo, but if they had controllers, the demo would be a hawk landing on your forearm. (And that would work, even though it doesn't quite make sense that your palm would vibrate when a bird lands on your forearm... but haptic feedback is weird.)

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a meta exclusive. Not sure why there's so many comments assuming that it is, it's one google search away.

Yeah, it’s pretty clear that it’s available on all major VR platforms including PlayStation. They made it clear when they bought it that it will not become exclusive. > Beat Games will continue to ship content and updates for Beat Saber across all currently supported platforms, now with even more support from Facebook. https://www.meta.com/blog/quest/welcoming-beat-games-to-face... I guess it’s easier to just guess a…

It was supported on PlayStation before Meta bought them, and they promised to continue supporting it on PlayStation. But that promise probably doesn’t include new platforms from other players.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#253
I've been reading all the comments on here in the several discussions that have made it to the front page, wondering if my use case is really so unique...

I'll buy it. No question. No hesitation.

The main reason is that I need a private workspace.

I work remotely and don't have a lot of physical space (I live in 80sq ft, at the moment. No, not a typo). I share it with my wife, who is a project manager and on calls all day.

This makes work quite challenging, it's easy to pull me from the "zone". Sometimes it's just because of an intense call she's on, sometimes it's because I'm so available.

She'll ask "are you in the middle of something? Can I ask you a quick question?" and just like that, I've lost 30-45 minutes of productivity.

The idea of having a virtual private workspace, surrounded by monitors, playing focus music, with the illusion of a vast space around me... This sounds like a dream.

I'd happily pay $3,500 for it.

In fact, we'll be buying two.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#254
post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly what Jobs claimed about the iPhone in 2007 and it didn’t stop Android from absorbing every relevant innovation.

Jobs was exactly right to say that iPhone was 5 years ahead of the competition. The competition at that time wasn't Android, it was blackberry.

Android was ahead for a long time 3-4 generations only recently had Apple jumped ahead, basically after Google killed affordable nexus devices that was the turning point

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#255
post #232
post #157

>could be the vision of the future of computing, but like, it’s not the one that I want. We'll have to wait and see with Vision Pro, but it's already pretty clear that Zuckerberg's vision is not one that anyone wants.

No one wants the Vision Pro. All the progress of mankind has culminated to this one point in time where we can create entirely new realities before our eyes in stunning fidelity. And what do we use this technology for? Going to work. Talking to people about work. Sitting in the dark watching pictures and videos by yourself.

Any technology can be used for work as well as other stuff.

AVR is basically a extension of our monitors on our faces. You can do any real world physical work with that thing on.

It is an excellent choice for remote control and monitoring of systems though.

I see it will be primarily used as a consumption device for movies and games.

VR gets tiring after a while, and the effects on eyesight degradation are not fully known.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#256
post #179
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…

Nothing looks dumber than wearing airPod earbuds, but almost everyone seems to have them

What other choice do they have? they literally removed the headphone jack to force people to buy them

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#257
post #76

Pricing the headset at 7x the Quest seems like an Apple power move. Ordinarily if you’re 2nd or 3rd to a category you’d expect there to be pressure to price in the same ballpark. You want customers to compare but say the new product is worth spending a reasonable amount more than the old product because it has some bells and whistles. At $3500 Apple invites no comparison. They’re basically pretending Meta doesn’t exi…

Maybe Apple doesn't actually want to sell a lot of a first generation product they know will quickly evolve?

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#258
post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By haptics you mean a buzzer? That doesn’t replicate any kind of real-world experience. But again - there is no reason gamers can’t have a control, but it’s silly to use a game controller to interact with a computing environment when you can use your hands.

I am not sure how it works, but what PlayStation calls "rumble". In the light saber game, you can feel it when your light saber hits your opponent, or your light sabers clash, and it absolutely adds to the experience immensely. I think almost all players of those types of game would prefer to have that feedback, barring some kind of disability or something. I don't think you need the haptic vibration function for int…

Yeah - I’ve tried metas controllers and it felt clumsy and effortfull to use the UI. The descriptions of Apple’s eye tracking sound far superior.

Why wouldn’t makers of light saber toys just add a buzzer? That would be far better than a game controller, and super cheap to add.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#259
The really good eye tracking seems like a big deal on the Apple device - that will feel like telepathy and I think will be significantly better than the controller nav that currently exists with meta devices.

Apple's focus on productivity is good too because it relies less on network effects for cool use cases. Part of why the Meta approach is hard is the social stuff requires everyone you know to have headsets, this (imo) is why Carmack was pushing for lighter, cheaper devices over the Meta Quest Pro - he saw growth and distribution as the core bottleneck for Meta's approach.

Since Apple's approach is around individual use and productivity, that frees them to build an expensive device that provides value to one user and then leverage that until lots of people have them, it's an easier way to bootstrap (and something they've done historically repeatedly). Of course it helps they already have a platform to extend too.

The big breakthrough IMO is commitment to pass-through for AR, this ultimately solves the "draw black" problem Michael Abrash wrote about at Valve in 2012 [0] before he joined Oculus. Ben Thompson of Stratechery makes an analogy to mirrorless cameras vs. DSLRs and I think it fits - people thought screens would never be good enough compared to natural light, but it turns out at some point they are. Palmer Luckey mentioned in 2021 that he thought this also should be the approach to it. The other major issue Abrash talks about in that blog post is latency, and Apple has solved this (though only just) because of their incredible custom silicon which was not easily visible back in 2012.

It's possible to imagine these devices getting smaller and lighter as they iterate, the AR and eye tracking means you may be able to do things like look at a light switch in your house and turn it out without anything else, UI for the real world becomes possible. Looking at little glass displays could become an anachronism of this time. Of course, it could also just be a common way to do desktop computing - hard to know.

[0]: https://web.archive.org/web/20120804140946/http://blogs.valv...

It's fun to look back on some old HN threads with predictions: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#260
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…

> 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.

market share of android vs iOS in 2023:

> Android 71.63

> iOS 27.71

Post reply on HN