Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset • Hacker News Board

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#331

Post by brandall10 » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 5:32 AM UTC

juunpp wrote: post #270

kumarvvr wrote: post #244

" By contrast, every demo that they showed was a person sitting on a couch by themself." Wait, I thought an Oculus does the same thing too. Its a blindfold on your face, and it doesnt matter if they are alone or in a crowd. Mark has got to be terrified. The power of Apple is the tight and efficient integration of hardware and software. Regarding battery power, I woukd not rule out versions that stream the video and o…

The $3500 price tag and closed ecosystem is self-sabotaging, so MZ doesn't need to be worried at all. Carmack's vision was a cheap device that could hit mass market, and that's where the real game still is. Also, games.

But they're different classes of devices in a way. It's a new (primarily) standalone computing platform vs. just a peripheral. As far as vision, Meta's ultimate goal is to be the modern version of Linden Lab while Apple is providing the next step in personal computing. Meta's product is the metaverse. Apple's product is this device bolstered by their ecosystem.

Give it a couple iterations and you'll have something that costs $2k many will purchase in lieue of another Macbook. It will be lighter/more compact, with somewhat palatable battery life. There have been reports Apple is also working on a simpler version, so there could be an Air in a few years that starts just north of $1k.

If this platform is successful, that is. I have my doubts everyone will want to strap a device to their head a large chunk of the day, every day, no matter how incredible.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#332

Post by alaskamiller » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 5:33 AM UTC

pavlov wrote: post #169

Invictus0 wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 shipped their first public beta in 2007. Its development overlapped the iPhone, and similarly the development of the standalone Quest systems has overlapped the Vision Pro. There are most likely enough patents on both sides to render these portfolio boasts moot, once again.

No one was using Android phones in 2007. It was BlackBerry and Moto Q days.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#333

Post by Xenoamorphous » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 5:34 AM UTC

corndoge wrote: post #291

kumarvvr wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thats what I am saying. They had 3 iterations, yet, are technologically behind Apple. I mean, just pure technology wise, the screens, number of sensors, processing power itself is mind boggling. I am sure that all their hadware decisions regarding oculus were constrained by the compute hardware. Apple has the moat of world class custom silicon that means, the constraints on its designers are far less. And we are seei…

One is priced at $300 and the other is more than 10x that. I don't understand why people keep comparing the two as if they were designed with the same objectives.

Yeah it’s like saying that a Honda Civic has had many generations but it’s not as fast as the latest Ferrari.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#334

Post by fomine3 » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 5:35 AM UTC

jsnell wrote: post #195

Foxhuls wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As others have mentioned, I’m sure that this will support controllers such as a PlayStation controller like the other iOS devices. I also just personally view this as more of a computer worn on your head than a VR headset. I personally purchased the first Vive that released and sold it shortly after. I’ve also tried a few other headsets afterwards. I have yet to experience a time that VR headsets have seemed to be mo…

You're not going to play VR games with a vanilla console controller. And if you're thinking of emulating non-VR PC games on the headset, that seems like it would not be all that compelling. What's the draw?

Gaming is always 2nd class citizen for Apple. It will continue for Apple Vision

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#335

Post by nailer » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 5:35 AM UTC

zmmmmm wrote: post #284

elefanten wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The open secret is that the units they’ve sold get very little use. The typical user plays around with it for a few weeks and then it sits on the shelf.

yep .... and Apple has the same problem The fundamental question is what are they really useful for after the novelty wears off. It's not clear to me that Apple has done anything to change that fundamental issue.

Apple device mainly seems to be for productivity. Meta’s mainly seems to be playing VR games.

If the vision pro is good for productivity, people will leave it on at work.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#336

Post by Xenoamorphous » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 5:35 AM UTC

johnnykree wrote: post #301

A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FB does not appear to be attracting young people. Apple appears to be a magnet for them. FWIW, Apple does PR and presentations a lot better ( I honestly can't remember FB VR rollout, but I was interested in Apple's toy ). If FB is not worried, their CEO may not be doing his job.

I'm a middle school teacher in Europe. None of my students use Facebook. They even don't use Whatsapp that much anymore. FB has a big problem.

What do they use instead of Whatsapp?

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#337

Post by NBJack » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 5:36 AM UTC

kumarvvr wrote: post #264

baby wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should they be in panic? They already iterated on 3 headsets, they definitely have the advantage (weren't people complaining that they spent too much $$ in VR? Now they should be terrified?)

Thats what I am saying. They had 3 iterations, yet, are technologically behind Apple. I mean, just pure technology wise, the screens, number of sensors, processing power itself is mind boggling. I am sure that all their hadware decisions regarding oculus were constrained by the compute hardware. Apple has the moat of world class custom silicon that means, the constraints on its designers are far less. And we are seei…

I disagree on the tech part. I suspect much of the raw onboard power is going straight to keeping those high density displays fluid with pixels. Ambient awareness is a nice trick, but really? A bunch of flat apps floating in front of you? I had that shit with my GearVR adapter for my phone. I also think they may have a disadvantage on some the actually useful features of the Pro, like facial tracking for avatars, due to patents.

I'm also going to call it on the dedicated floating eyes screen: it will be a joke once it hits market, and everyone will turn it off to eek out a few more minutes on the battery pack.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#338

Post by sudhirj » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 5:37 AM UTC

kumarvvr wrote: post #244

" By contrast, every demo that they showed was a person sitting on a couch by themself." Wait, I thought an Oculus does the same thing too. Its a blindfold on your face, and it doesnt matter if they are alone or in a crowd. Mark has got to be terrified. The power of Apple is the tight and efficient integration of hardware and software. Regarding battery power, I woukd not rule out versions that stream the video and o…

No, I actually think he has it spot on. While they're both headsets, I think the Vision is more a replacement for the Mac + Displays + maybe iPad line.

Just like I have a PlayStation in the family+friends living room and a multi-monitor Mac setup in my study, I'm going to have an Oculus in the living room and a Vision Pro in the study. These are complementary things.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#339

Post by nailer » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 5:37 AM UTC

seydor wrote: post #203

tjpnz wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're using it for games, but not Horizon Worlds which is arguably the vision.

That should be taken as a hint that people don't want VR video conferencing which is the target use for Apple's headset. TBH i don't want an avatar face, real faces in a simple Zoom call are more expressive.

While VR video conferencing was shown off I don’t think VR video conferencing was the target use.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#340

Post by patmcc » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 5:37 AM UTC

kumarvvr wrote: post #264

baby wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should they be in panic? They already iterated on 3 headsets, they definitely have the advantage (weren't people complaining that they spent too much $$ in VR? Now they should be terrified?)

Thats what I am saying. They had 3 iterations, yet, are technologically behind Apple. I mean, just pure technology wise, the screens, number of sensors, processing power itself is mind boggling. I am sure that all their hadware decisions regarding oculus were constrained by the compute hardware. Apple has the moat of world class custom silicon that means, the constraints on its designers are far less. And we are seei…

It's 7 times the price, I sure hope the hardware is better. I don't expect $200 phones to be on par with $1500 iphones either.

They're going for different markets. Meta is trying to be the VR kids get for Christmas and people buy for fun, Apple is aiming at...something else.