211–220 of 371 posts
That was a lot of words for nothing to say... To sum up the entire article in one sentence: The author got to play with the thing, and is very excited to develop software for it.
this blogpost is the platonic ideal of hype
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A major limitation for using VR devices as "virtual monitors" has been the screen resolution. Vision Pro appears to have significantly higher resolution than anything available on the market right now; in your experience, was the resolution high enough for the pixels to disappear and not be a distraction, especially when e.g. reading text? Have you used other VR headsets to compare it to?
I've used other VR headsets and it's significantly better than everything I've tried. You'll be able to put up virtual monitors at the same density as real life and read stuff fine, I couldn't really discern pixels at all. Reading physical monitors through passthrough is a bit harder (I increased text size a few points when I needed to do this) but isn't really something you'd do for actual work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That can't be right. The human FoV is huge, more than 180 degrees. To cover that range without visible pixels requires much more than "4k" type resolution. Either one of those statements can be right. Not both at the same time. It's time someone with real measuring equipment looks at of these and gives a more technical review than just "wow Apple magic".
each eye is not getting "4k resolution" they are claimed to be each capable of rendering a 4k screen in natural resolution. meaning a couple 4k screens can be rendered in the visible area without a noticeable difference in quality to real screens at a similar "apparent" distance
We also know 23 million pixels for the whole system. So, 11.5 million for one display. a 4K display is 8.2 million. So it's not a whole lot more than 4K, and lower than their own 5K display (which has 14 million), which matches what they claim ("more than a 4K display"). That's not enough to cover the full field of human vision and still have pixels so small they can't be seen.
With corner waste it's just barely enough for one 4K display this way (and stretched to the full limits of vision it will be pretty unwatchable so close). You can't display two as you mention, because AR/VR projection works by using the 2 screens to display the same content just from a slightly different position (parallax) causing the 3D effect. The more overlap between the eyes the better and more comfortable the 3D effect (some headsets try to get an ultrawide FoV this way but shoot themselves in the foot with low overlap).
If it has a really wide FoV its sharpness will be pretty much on-par with a quest 3/Pico 4, if it's got the same FoV it will be a lot sharper. I expect the truth to be somewhere in between. Wider than a Quest and also sharper, but pixels visible if you look well and not quite full human FoV.
What I expect Apple will have done is sacrifice a bit of vertical FoV for horizontal FoV. Vertical FoV is important in VR (especially 'roomscale') because of orientation issues, and not quite as important in AR. Also most of their marketing material promotes a seated position so moving around is not an issue. Most VR headsets have an almost-square resolution per eye, but I expect this one to be closer to 16:10 (maybe not quite that wide). I think it will come out at around 4300x2600 pixels per eye which is slightly over 11 million pixels.
Still very impressive (which it must be at that price point obviously!). But real-world and not magic. Makes sense because Apple's engineers, as good as they are, are bound by the same laws of physics we all are. Their marketeers would love us to believe otherwise though.
It's really time for some real-world specs on this thing instead of marketing blah. But I think Apple specifically doesn't want this, it's no wonder they let only the most loyal media outlets (like Gruber) get as much as a short hands-on with this thing. And even those experience are white-gloved in detail (they even prepared custom adaptive lenses). They just want to keep the marketing buzz on as long as possible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 l…
> But if you spot something's off, you need to adjust it. Go directly for the kill, and make that surgical series of edits. LLMs are still a really immature technology. The hype is about where it could go in future, not necessarily where it is now. Think about when compilers were immature technology, and the science of parsing/etc and optimizations were not well understood. You could make the exact same argument you…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 l…
You do realize you can use a keyboard with this? And that the VP can plug in for infinite power?
> 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…
The real question is, can you make two devices sync to each other simultaneously.
Probably not I'm imagining
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From your experience with it, what do you think about the fatigue factor, either visually or just neck strain? From all accounts it’s quite heavy.
For reference I was already pretty used to gaming in VR on inferior headsets before working on the Vision Pro, so I might be more forgiving of issues than your average person. I'd say that eye strain wasn't really an issue at all for me. When you take off the headset after a while inside of it you kinda get a jarring transition back to normal vision instead of passthrough, but passthrough doesn't have any noticeable…
I'm not sure how common this is for neurotypicals with VR headsets. With Vision Pro have you experienced losing track of time? Or does the AR passthrough seem to help with this?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ...doing work in headsets... Is it possible to use Vision Pro to build and publish a Vision Pro app? Because it seems to be another Apple device separating producers and consumers just like iPad and iPhone.
This is a valid question and should not be downvoted. Are we going to be able to create a large software project using it without carrying around a MacBook as well? It’d be nice to be able to run macOS when I travel and not have to bring my MacBook.
basically is it a laptop (fully independent), an ipad (excellent secondary device that can do focused work on it's own), or a smart monitor (peripheral with some built in usability)?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be honest I'm not entirely sure what reprojection is like on the final device or even if it exists at all, so my experience might be off. There may have been things that changed since I left and I'm not sure what the final plans were.
I didn’t necessarily mean reprojection but whatever ‘trick’ is done to hide that the cameras aren’t in the same physical location the users eyes are without the headset on. Either way, very fair.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right, it sends the message that the developer is better served by using a Mac, or that the Vision Pro is not capable. Maybe that was honest/intentional?
It’s got a full M2 and (reportedly) 16 GB of RAM. In theory it’s capable. That doesn’t mean Apple will expose that. Maybe just not today. The original iPhone had a full OS capable of multitasking but it wasn’t a feature given to the user due to memory and battery constraints. We’ve now had it for years. This was the first we’ve seen of it, and I suspect the on device development story was not one they wanted to spend…