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

411–420 of 1001 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#411

Post by bushbaba »

nologic01 wrote: post #393

There is something quite remarkable and puzzling about the VR/AR and now SC (spatial computing) space. All major (ad)tech companies are convinced that this is a major market that will materialize and be profitable if the right combination of hardware and software is developed. Their VR "visions" differ but only at the margin. No matter how you execute it, we are talking about people (homo sapiens) putting a major som…

Not joking. Checkout VR porn. Then it hits you. Holy shit this is the future of media and entertainment. Something about perspective in VR gives a human touch of interactivity not possible with other media forms.

I have no doubt this new medium will revolutionize mainstream TV and Movies.

The infinite desk. Infinite whiteboard. Improved conferencing. Are just added bonuses.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#412

Post by seanhunter »

brandall10 wrote: post #397
seanhunter wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For sure. This is the key insight imo: > Meta's product is the metaverse. Apple's product is this device bolstered by their ecosystem. One way or another, that's the bet here. 1) Apple didn't mention the metaverse at all (as far as I can remember) 2) The user experience looked great, without those moments that would make someone who was neutral think "Err, ... that's a bit .... creepy"

The technology is incredibly compelling - which is the main thing, that people are exciting about it - but there are definitely things about it that area creeping people out... I've noticed these pop up in discussions - The isolation aspects of consuming TV/movies (Mark has a point here IMO) - The whole taking 3d images/videos of your children with a headset on - The uncanny valley Facetime avatars - The external scr…

Agree with all of those. I think the interaction between people with headsets on and no headset on is one of the things we'll really need to see play out to see how it works in a real social context once the device itself isn't a novelty. At the moment it seems incredibly distopian at best. Apple is the first attempt to actually try to address that it seems (eg by fading people who are in your periphery into the picture in the headset so you at least see them and fading an image of your face onto the outside of the headset so they at least sort of see you). But it's still weird af, no question.

I was specifically speaking about the interface, which when meta introduced theirs had all these weird things "Why has nobody got legs? Why does it look like absolute arse? etc". It didn't have those. It looked slick, like you would expect from Apple.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#413

Post by hagbarth »

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.

No it's not. It wasn't for any of the products Apple make.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#414

Post by mettamage »

nologic01 wrote: post #393

There is something quite remarkable and puzzling about the VR/AR and now SC (spatial computing) space. All major (ad)tech companies are convinced that this is a major market that will materialize and be profitable if the right combination of hardware and software is developed. Their VR "visions" differ but only at the margin. No matter how you execute it, we are talking about people (homo sapiens) putting a major som…

Wasn’t this the same with computers? I remember that people didn’t want to use them about 25 years ago

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#415

Post by bushbaba »

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.

People said the same about the first iPhone. Give it time. They shipped basically the foundation. The house has yet to be built.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#416

Post by machdiamonds »

byvirtueof wrote: post #394
machdiamonds wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best gaming headset on the market would have to be able to connect to a Windows PC. The M2 chip in the headset doesn't have the power to run an intensive game at 4K resolution for each eye. Even if the headset could be tethered to a Mac for additional power, the GPUs in Macs don't come close to the capabilities of the 4090, which itself struggles to support 2K per eye for demanding games. One potential solution c…

I still believe that for the masses (think console gamers and pc gamers without the gaming rig) cloud gaming will be the future. I've been playing fps/rts/rpg games through GeForce Now on a MacBook M1 and so far there's few obvious drawbacks - good internet required, slight input lag which can be annoying for some FPS games sure, and not all games are available yet - but for those who only play a few games regularly,…

I agree, the prospects for cloud gaming do seem promising. However, we can't forget that in VR, latency is a much more important factor. One solution could be for companies to establish datacenters near high-population areas to guarantee low latency. But, I believe a more effective approach might involve advanced foveated rendering coupled with technologies like DLSS. At present, it seems like a viable strategy for both Apple and Meta would be to sell "boxes" equipped with console-grade hardware that can wirelessly connect to their headsets, providing additional compute.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#417

Post by Hasu »

nologic01 wrote: post #393

There is something quite remarkable and puzzling about the VR/AR and now SC (spatial computing) space. All major (ad)tech companies are convinced that this is a major market that will materialize and be profitable if the right combination of hardware and software is developed. Their VR "visions" differ but only at the margin. No matter how you execute it, we are talking about people (homo sapiens) putting a major som…

> All major (ad)tech companies are convinced that this is a major market that will materialize and be profitable if the right combination of hardware and software is developed.

Does Google have a VR play? They explored this with Glass 10 years ago, but that's dead and they don't seem interested in developing a successor.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#418

Post by mynameisvlad »

vjjsejj wrote: post #409
mynameisvlad wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ew. Fat shaming is not a good look. You don’t know them. You don’t know the reasons for their weight. They very well could be using the device daily to exercise for all you know and it could be an issue with his metabolism. Or another medical condition. Or a side effect of drugs. Or literally hundreds of other reasons.

[flagged]

I actually changed the pronouns once I saw the video that was pointed out and which multiple people pointed out was news to them (like seemingly everyone else, I don’t follow their channel and it was announced only 2 weeks ago so it’s not like it’s common knowledge yet), but I’m not the one that literally dead named them along with using their old pronouns.

Could you possibly be more misguided here? Like come on.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#419

Post by nolok »

nologic01 wrote: post #393

There is something quite remarkable and puzzling about the VR/AR and now SC (spatial computing) space. All major (ad)tech companies are convinced that this is a major market that will materialize and be profitable if the right combination of hardware and software is developed. Their VR "visions" differ but only at the margin. No matter how you execute it, we are talking about people (homo sapiens) putting a major som…

I fully agree, and to go one step "further" in that reasonning, there seems to be two ways on that street: one is the massive headset, which is a pain and whose only viable purpose for which people will accept wearing it seem to be gaming, and the other is the invisible headset in the continuation of google glass, which is less of a headset and more of a small addition to your everyday life.

I'm very weirded out to see all of them go with the massive option. A google glass oriented solution with 2023 level of tech and that can be adapted to any/most pair of glasses but offering much more limited functions (pictures/photo, maps/gps, notification, light AR, ...) would have much more appeal to every day life.

Not saying it's easy, not saying it would work, but it feels like it would be an easier challenge to convince people to wear that all the time.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#420

Post by balls187 »

zmmmmm wrote: post #193
tjpnz wrote: 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.

20M people bought Quests. More than x-box in the same period. I find this writing off of their sales achievements as really superficial. Whatever else you want to say, they shifted units and the people buying them wanted something he was selling.

Yes, mostly when it was Oculus and not Meta.
Post reply on HN