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

521–530 of 1001 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#521

Post by evilos »

curiousgal wrote: post #487
kickbutt22 wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would agree that the putting goggles over your face is absurd and it will never be a hit, not in a million years. However! Having that proof of concept to be able to manipulate your environment with just a gesture of your fingers and simply by looking at something - this I believe can be extended to external cameras, screens, and all sorts of IoT devices.

Not to mention how dry your eyes would be from wearing that thing for hours, like seriously, why is no one talking about that?

Why would your eyes be drier? If anything they'd be more moist because there's less air movement around them right?

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#522

Post by crimsontech »

mach1ne wrote: post #497
roomey wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, but buying things on the internet wasn't laughed at, if anything people were worried about it cause of their credit card numbers. It was that basis of the dot com boom of the late 90s. Everyone saw the potential and lashed money into it. It didn't deliver at the time, but that dynamic is totally different to vr headsets. Think smart phones, they weren't pushed, people wanted them in a serious way

It was laughed at by consumers. There was a time not long ago when buying anything from internet was considered taboo because, you said it, fear of losing your credit card information to scammers.

Not just this, but you couldn't see the product. In a store you can look at the product, see how it feels, try it on, test it out, etc. Early online shopping was a big gamble with different stores having different rules. It was often a frustrating experience.

Distance selling regulations helped with it a lot. I can buy a product online and if I'm not happy with it, for any reason, I can send it back for a refund. This just isn't the case with shopping in a store.

I learned this the hard way twice buying in store from Argos in the UK, only to get home and find I had bought a used product which someone else had returned already. Argos refused to refund or replace the items because they are used.

I looked this up at the time and it seemed to be a common occurrence, I can only assume people returned items they bought online and Argos just put them back on the shelves.

Had I bought it online and had it delivered to my house I could have returned it. I buy online wherever possible now.

Interestingly "click-and-collect" services are not covered by distance selling regulations which is how I got burned twice by Argos.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#523

Post by sneak »

layer8 wrote: post #469
askafriend wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can't more immersive entertainment be an exciting goal and vision? That alone is amazing. To have an entire movie theater in any room in your house or in an airplane. Or gaming.

It can, but that only appeals to gaming or movie/TV aficionados, and otherwise is only for very occasional use as a novelty. It’s not something that would become an integral part of most people‘s life like a smartphone.

> It can, but that only appeals to gaming or movie/TV aficionados

I think you just described something like 95%+ of the US population. TV and movies and games are exceedingly popular.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#524

Post by automatic6131 »

dougmwne wrote: post #492
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…

Gaming is legitimately awesome with these devices. It’s a high effort, high reward experience. Using the Quest on a few of the highly polished and addictive games surpassed even my childhood experience of getting a computer for the first time. As a general purpose computer, I see a hint of what it could be, and I am convinced it’s the future. It has to be. It’s too powerful not to be. Imagine there’s nothing to put o…

>Imagine there’s nothing to put on. The computer doctor sprinkles some magic computer dust over you 7 minutes after you are born and you get Apple Vision++++ levels of ability, all of the time. Everything in the world becomes a potential UI. Every action becomes an input. Every surface a display.

I am begging you to consider how this is an awful future

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#525

Post by domatic1 »

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…

According to some people who have tested it, it is amazing to use it to watch a movie, watch a big screen and the 3D effect, the Vision Pro is just a television from the future.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#526

Post by saurik »

roomey wrote: post #482
darawk wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So far at least, this is a tech that is being pushed onto people rather than being pulled. I think it's very hard to tell the difference between these things ex ante. Everything that succeeds looks like it was pulled. But many things were pushed before they were pulled. Buying things on the internet, for instance. This was laughed at for quite a while, while a few people and companies were committed to the idea tha…

I'm sorry, but buying things on the internet wasn't laughed at, if anything people were worried about it cause of their credit card numbers. It was that basis of the dot com boom of the late 90s. Everyone saw the potential and lashed money into it. It didn't deliver at the time, but that dynamic is totally different to vr headsets. Think smart phones, they weren't pushed, people wanted them in a serious way

I mean, smartphones existed for a long time before anyone cared, and it was only due to Blackberry (for business) and then Apple (for consumers) that that happened: until then the entire space was seen as nerdy and pointless (and was thereby something my friends and I were excited by... despite not having any real use for any of it yet).

And like... are you sure about being able to buy stuff online? I remember when being able to buy pizza online was new and there was a TV show in Japan about some crazy guy trying to survive off of stuff he ordered on the Internet, and the entire concept was just not a thing normal people were into... remember: the dot-com "boom" was actually a bubble and a lot of the stuff that came out during it failed.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#527

Post by pjmlp »

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…

My first try with a VR headset was in 1994, with DOOM.

Since then my opinion has hardly changed that these are gimmicks, and mostly unusable by people with eye sight issues, where already dealing with natural light is an issue, let alone tiny screens a couple of cms away.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#528

Post by zeknife »

curiousgal wrote: post #487
kickbutt22 wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would agree that the putting goggles over your face is absurd and it will never be a hit, not in a million years. However! Having that proof of concept to be able to manipulate your environment with just a gesture of your fingers and simply by looking at something - this I believe can be extended to external cameras, screens, and all sorts of IoT devices.

Not to mention how dry your eyes would be from wearing that thing for hours, like seriously, why is no one talking about that?

It's not like it prevents you from blinking

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#529

Post by tuyiown »

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.

I know nothing of the VR space, but it's pretty clear that apple aims to have it being able to replaces every screen you can which for, adapted for every use, gaming, watching, producing. As good as your adequate TV, desktop or laptop monitor, except that it's the same one.

This is not something I felt on my superficial scanning of VR product news.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#530

Post by pjmlp »

saurik wrote: post #526
roomey wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, but buying things on the internet wasn't laughed at, if anything people were worried about it cause of their credit card numbers. It was that basis of the dot com boom of the late 90s. Everyone saw the potential and lashed money into it. It didn't deliver at the time, but that dynamic is totally different to vr headsets. Think smart phones, they weren't pushed, people wanted them in a serious way

I mean, smartphones existed for a long time before anyone cared, and it was only due to Blackberry (for business) and then Apple (for consumers) that that happened: until then the entire space was seen as nerdy and pointless (and was thereby something my friends and I were excited by... despite not having any real use for any of it yet). And like... are you sure about being able to buy stuff online? I remember when b…

It happened in Europe, Africa and Asia, we aren't at fault if PDAs, Symbian and feature phones were largely ignored on American continent.
Post reply on HN