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

A developer's view of Vision Pro

david-smith.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 371 posts

Re: A developer's view of Vision Pro

#141

Post by euroderf »

BulgarianIdiot wrote: post #38

> In short, my brain has crossed a Rubicon and now feels like experiences constrained to small, rectangular screens are lesser experiences. The funny thing about this statement is that Vision Pro is in fact the smallest rectangular screen of any device he's written code for. He's hyped up. That's normal. In time he'll understand Vision Pro doesn't provide any better UX for common activities. In fact it's worse in man…

It will absolutely rule for wargames (i.e. board-based simulations). High resolution, zooming into "counter" stacks, limited intelligence (yes!), calling up rules, procedure checklists, odds calculation & combat resolution, the list goes on and on methinks.

Grognards with sufficient disposable income - rejoice! At last you can (for example) play Operation Barbarossa at regiment level - and retain your sanity!

Re: A developer's view of Vision Pro

#142

Post by BakeInBeens »

htag wrote: post #58
chrisrogers wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eye tracking will probably lose the productivity metric, though. When you remove the ability to look at one thing and interact with another, you get farther from the way that humans tend to interact with their immediate physical environment. I can cut vegetables without looking at them. I can use that dynamic to offset the planning and acting phases of my thought process. Falling short of that efficiency will feel li…

I don't click without looking at my mouse pointer. I think it's possible eye tracking is just better than mouse/trackpad.

I often am looking at another element before interacting with it with my mouse. With eye tracking enabled menus hovering over an element immediately because I'm looking at it becomes an annoyance.

Re: A developer's view of Vision Pro

#143

Post by BulgarianIdiot »

fooker wrote: post #138
BulgarianIdiot wrote: post #38

> In short, my brain has crossed a Rubicon and now feels like experiences constrained to small, rectangular screens are lesser experiences. The funny thing about this statement is that Vision Pro is in fact the smallest rectangular screen of any device he's written code for. He's hyped up. That's normal. In time he'll understand Vision Pro doesn't provide any better UX for common activities. In fact it's worse in man…

>To code, for example, you need to hook a bluetooth keyboard and mouse. I have a hunch that coding as we know it is going to look very different in ~5-10 years.

Maybe, but not in terms of needing code.

You see, the rules of formal languages that encode formal rules of system constraints pre-date computers by centuries. Think of math proofs, for example. Sure, we can encode symbols as emojis, or geometric figures or whatever. But in the end, it's sequences of symbols, that's the nature of it. And tapping symbols one by one with a headset will suck, no matter how programming looks.

The rules of formal languages that encode formal rules of system constraints pre-date in fact our species too. Think about what DNA is. Oh yeah, spooky, isn't it. A sequence of symbols (GTCA) encoding a sequence of more complex symbols (proteins). Spooky! But yes, DNA is our code. And it works the same as our programming code.

Now I know where you're going. LLMs. Let's assume an LLM writes the code for you. You still have to read it, which you can do fine with a headset (if it's not as encapsulating and heavy, and with short battery life as Vision Pro v1). But if you spot something's off, you need to adjust it. Go directly for the kill, and make that surgical series of edits. You know? Or... maybe you can spend the rest of the day hopelessly trying to explain to Siri 2030 year edition what you want to do, instead of going in and doing it, for that "last mile".

Because if AI can do the last mile itself, to the point you don't need to even verify it... first, that's the fast way to AI shipping code we don't understand and basically giving up our entire civilization to it. And second... we don't need to code, but we also won't need to exist, and therefore not need headsets.

So in the worldlines where we DO exist... Vision Pro sucks for coding, because it's a shitty human interface to editing code.

And in the worldlines where we DO NOT exist... Vision Pro sucks for coding, because AI doesn't need headsets.

Re: A developer's view of Vision Pro

#144

Post by jmiskovic »

As a VR hobbyist dev I'm divided on how I feel about the device. Price thing is already well discussed, for me it's a tool worth investigating if I should invest time in the ecosystem.

Without a doubt, the Vision Pro hardware is a marvel. Having the 3D capture camera in a consumer device would feel like living in the future. The headset design is top notch and seems comfortable. I do have slight worry about how these devices will look like after a year of use.

The holographic eye reconstruction screen. A bit unsettling and strange design idea. We're messing around with people's eyes to make the headset friendlier?

The frosted glass user interface is classy, aesthetically pleasing and very well put together. Lighting and soft shadow interaction with your environment is amazingly well done. I felt the UX the current user experience seems rather lackluster and limited to a 2D format. The first iPhone also had an old fashioned interface, so my guess is they are building the compatibility bridge for the first release. Maybe the next iteration would be actually spatial and not just panels floating in space?

Moreover, the over-reliance on swipe and tap gestures is a point of concern. This design decision is focused on media consumption and limits the overall versatility of the interface. Feels like a very low-bandwidth control method.

A significant drawback, for my use at least, is the lack of control over the hardware. Developers are restricted to building Unity applications within a sandboxed environment, which is a privacy feature intended to prevent apps from accessing the eye gaze point. Good idea, better than what Meta's doing. But too restrictive and frustrating for a developer wanting to run their apps on the bought device.

Apple is once again marketing an expensive device-platform that caters mainly to larger corporations looking to offer their own 'immersive' experiences. Everything about this screams 'coorporate'. I would like to be proven wrong with some creative apps, but those will probably come through the web browser or streamed from Mac, and not as approved native apps running in gimped Unity engine.

Nevertheless, the Vision Pro sets a new benchmark for future headsets. Maybe AR/VR is slowly entering the mainstream?

Re: A developer's view of Vision Pro

#145

Post by bamfly »

goosedragons wrote: post #128
bamfly wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because it seems to be another Apple device separating producers and consumers just like iPad and iPhone. The persistent framing of i-devices this way on HN, after all these years, is baffling to me. Tons of creation happens on them, or using them as a tool in service of creation, much of which would be harder or impossible with traditional computer. Just not a lot of software creation.

Because with the exception of very few tasks like digital art the limitations placed on iOS make it worse. Some tasks are just straight up impossible (e.g compiling code), others are just hampered by things like file management and sandboxing or lack of support for hardware/accessories. Sometimes they can be worked around but often it's an exercise in frustration to do something that would be brain-dead on a desktop…

All I can figure is difference in perspective is because such a large part of the potential of i-devices (or phones and tablets more broadly) for creation involves using them as a tool to get something done in the real world, and/or for the kinds of creative tasks that get overlooked by the hackerspace crowd (running an Instagram, say, involves lots of creation; tradespeople and home DIYers routinely use phones and tablets to help get things done in situations where a laptop wouldn't be a useful alternative; that kind of thing). Desktop computers are mainly good, outside of industrial uses, for creating more stuff for computers. I-Devices shine when most of your task's not on a computer, and the computer's just one of many tools at your disposal. If "creation" is making stuff for computers, they seem bad. If "creation" happens in the real world and the computer's just a tool to help with that, and nothing more, they're pretty appealing. A smart slab of glass packed with sensors that can become different tools. Super handy, and a "real" computer couldn't replace it.

For most creation-oriented tasks I do that aren't computer-centric, I'd much rather have an iPhone or iPad than a laptop. They're great tools for creation & work, just not so much for creating stuff for computers, certain exceptions aside, and for those they're mostly just about as good as a laptop, or even not-very-good but usable in a pinch, not better.

Re: A developer's view of Vision Pro

#146

Post by greedo »

MBCook wrote: post #100
bee_rider wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect the only play would be: develop developer tools for those developers who do have the budget for a long play. If Apple wants AR in their normal non-gaming, non-niche segment to work out, they are going to have to come out with a sleek $1000 device in a couple years. They’d have to be very stupid to not realize that, and it couldn’t possibly be the case that you get a trillion dollars by being stupid, right?

Don’t forget the iPhone wasn’t an instant hit. It got a lot of discussion but it took a few years/versions before it became THE phone. Same with the Apple Watch. And even the iPod didn’t take off until it was on Windows after a few years. This will likely be similar. When the iPhone came out, not only was it limited it was $600 and no subsidy at a time most people were getting free camera phones. It took a while (and…

I don't expect the Vision devices to really drop much in price in the coming years. To lower costs, they'll have to go with lower quality displays, or cheaper cameras/sensors and less battery life.

If you look at the iPhone, it hasn't gone down in price much if at all.

I think we're at least 5 years away in terms of tech capability to provide the level of experience Apple is looking for at an "SE iPhone" type price point.

Re: A developer's view of Vision Pro

#147

Post by ladberg »

derefr wrote: post #85
ladberg wrote: post #20

> In short, my brain has crossed a Rubicon and now feels like experiences constrained to small, rectangular screens are lesser experiences. I left Apple 1.5 years ago but was working on the Vision Pro while I was there. I have spend many hours working in the headset and I know exactly the feeling he's describing! Leaving felt like going back in time to using clunky technology and I've been waiting for outside world t…

You sound like you're measuring this leap as the Vision Pro vs. not using a headset at all. How much of a leap is it if you're already using e.g. an XREAL Air for display mirroring — and you're planning to mostly use the Vision Pro for that same use-case?

I haven't used the XREAL AIR personally but I've used similar devices and it's pretty night-and-day I think:

- Sensors: It looks like the XREAL AIR doesn't have any sensors so just displays the monitor in a fixed position on screen, which is pretty different than loading up monitors in a fixed point in space and being able to look away at other stuff. Also eye tracking is a pretty killer feature that totally changes the game in my opinion, I wouldn't personally buy a headset without it after having experienced it.

- VR vs AR display: As I'm sure you're aware, with AR sunglasses you can't really have anything darker than the actual light passing through so you're limited to only rendering stuff brighter than the surroundings. Maybe for text it's fine but not for images or video in my opinion. I can't find any footage taken through the XREAL AIR lens (and their website doesn't faithfully show this effect) so idk exactly how big the difference will be for you.

- FOV: I'm not actually sure what the FOV is of the Vision Pro but it's significantly higher than 46°. And because usable area increases with the square, you'd be able to fit a few times more displays and other stuff in.

- Resolution: XREAL AIR looks to be 1080p, Vision Pro is way better than that (per-degree too), so you can have better looking and smaller text.

Re: A developer's view of Vision Pro

#148

Post by andrewmunsell »

gpm wrote: post #79
andrewmunsell wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It could work, with a Mac (which is unfortunate, given the Vision Pro's HW is equivalent to the Mac you "need" just to run the right software). It's an unfortunate limitation that you can only run one 4k "virtual monitor" from a Mac, but presumably your IDE & terminal would live in the virtual Mac screen and all of your documentation, etc. would be "native" in the headset

For the vast majority of my work vscode stuffed into a browser-like window using SSH remotes would be fine, and would remove the "single 4k screen from a mac" restriction.

I tried this with the iPad for a while but it ended up just being too buggy (weird cursor and scrolling errors, in particular). I wonder if it'll be any better using eye tracking as a cursor

Re: A developer's view of Vision Pro

#149

Post by wincy »

ladberg wrote: post #131
hebrox wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did team members actually use it to develop it?

I was developing stuff to be shown inside the headset that wouldn't have worked in the simulator, so I was frequently using the headset regardless. It was often easier to just leave it on and develop than constantly put it on and take it off to test things out. As for development of non-VR stuff I personally didn't because I already had a fully-featured desk setup and the OS at the time was buggy enough to not want t…

Do you think it’ll allow Xcode for development? When you say you were wearing it while doing dev work were you pairing it with a MacBook? From what I understand the OS is more similar to iPadOS (no Xcode, ability to compile binaries) vs MacOS.

Re: A developer's view of Vision Pro

#150

Post by wincy »

crooked-v wrote: post #80
TillE wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's true though, the device is clearly intentionally overbuilt, it's not like Apple is adding some huge arbitrary markup.

From the previews people have had so far, I feel like they decided their target was "could plausibly and comfortably replace a computer day 1 even for someone who had never used a VR device before", then went backwards from the hardware needed for that to figure out their price point.

Can I write software using Xcode day 1 for this? Do I need to also have a Mac? I mean I do have a Mac but an extra $3500 is steep.

That said I’ve planned to get one since I heard rumors years ago that this was in the works.

I sort of expected it to be a full replacement for a MacBook though.

Post reply on HN