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

Karl Guttag on Apple Vision Pro (Part 1)

kguttag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 105 posts

Re: Karl Guttag on Apple Vision Pro (Part 1)

#21

Post by toasterrepair »

ohgodplsno wrote: post #15
ladberg wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Foveated rendering is supported by default. Most apps will rely on the OS's renderer and not their own so they don't have to do anything with eye tracking to have it enabled. EDIT: See cma's comment below which adds more info: apps that use their own render still support foveated rendering too.

Exactly. If you want to do anything without going through Apple's benediction, you're shit out of luck. It's one more episode in the war on general computing, except somehow it's okay when Apple restricts what you can do with your three thousand five hundred dollar ski goggles.

It's okay for the general user.

Re: Karl Guttag on Apple Vision Pro (Part 1)

#22

Post by thom »

MuffinFlavored wrote: post #10

> In many ways, the AVP can be seen as the “Meta Quest Pro done much better.” If you are doing more of a “flagship/Pro product,” it better be a flagship. Ok. I'm fine with being told "you aren't the target audience" but... name 5 things I would do with it if I bought one. Why would I put it on my face/what would I gain from it? Gaming? Productivity? What can it do that a screen + monitor + mouse + keyboard / iPad / i…

It can have a slightly larger effective resolution, and requires slightly less movement to navigate.

Re: Karl Guttag on Apple Vision Pro (Part 1)

#23

Post by dagmx »

robotburrito wrote: post #17

What does it mean that guys like this and SadlyItsBradley were not invited to try the Vision Pro? Interesting to note that the experts in the state of the field were not given a chance to try it.

Not much given neither are press or developers, which are basically the only two groups that are usually invited.

Neither really do product reviews as their main gig either.

Re: Karl Guttag on Apple Vision Pro (Part 1)

#24

Post by mjamesaustin »

MuffinFlavored wrote: post #10

> In many ways, the AVP can be seen as the “Meta Quest Pro done much better.” If you are doing more of a “flagship/Pro product,” it better be a flagship. Ok. I'm fine with being told "you aren't the target audience" but... name 5 things I would do with it if I bought one. Why would I put it on my face/what would I gain from it? Gaming? Productivity? What can it do that a screen + monitor + mouse + keyboard / iPad / i…

What could the original iPad do that an iPhone couldn't? Basically zero, other than have a larger screen. Different screen size ends up making a significant difference in how you use a product.

Vision Pro presents theoretically unlimited size and number of screens to do categorically the same kind of things you'd do on an iPad/iPhone/Mac. As someone who likes to work with multiple monitors, at the least I see this enabling me to take my work on the go (coffee shop, library, plane) without significantly compromising my screen real estate.

Re: Karl Guttag on Apple Vision Pro (Part 1)

#25

Post by platers »

cma wrote: post #2

> Pancake (MQP) versus Asperical Refractive Optics (AVP) Guttag's section about the lenses not being pancake and being refractive only I think is wrong, Apple says: "combined with custom catadioptric lenses," which implies reflection is is used like with pancake. (source: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2023/06/introducing-apple-vis... ) > It should be noted that the AVP displays about 3.3 times the pixels, has more a…

> There is no vergence accommodation conflict if you have had cataract lens replacement surgery

This is fascinating to me since I am getting vision corrective surgery soon, where could I learn more about this?

Re: Karl Guttag on Apple Vision Pro (Part 1)

#26

Post by zgluck »

ohgodplsno wrote: post #15
ladberg wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Foveated rendering is supported by default. Most apps will rely on the OS's renderer and not their own so they don't have to do anything with eye tracking to have it enabled. EDIT: See cma's comment below which adds more info: apps that use their own render still support foveated rendering too.

Exactly. If you want to do anything without going through Apple's benediction, you're shit out of luck. It's one more episode in the war on general computing, except somehow it's okay when Apple restricts what you can do with your three thousand five hundred dollar ski goggles.

Yeah. To state the obvious: Apps will no longer run full screen; they will run as a 2D window in a 3D space. When Apple allows it the user will be able to ask the app to go full 3D (well, hopefully).

All of this is: Apple taking further control of the experience.

Re: Karl Guttag on Apple Vision Pro (Part 1)

#27

Post by drewbeck »

satvikpendem wrote: post #7

Anyone else worried that Vision Pro will simply be a large iPad and not macOS like, ie closed app store and not geared towards productivity? The fact that to run VSCode you need to mirror your own Mac simply boggles the mind, it's like Apple wants to cut off the potential of the device at the knees simply to continue selling services.

> not geared towards productivity? The fact that to run VSCode

Productivity !== coding. Coding is a subset of productivity, but most jobs do not require coding.

I get that you want this to be something else, but a lot of people are incredibly productive on iPads today, and adding the ability to mirror your MacBooks screen means that this platform absolutely has a future in productivity.

HN has a lot of this attitude — “I can’t code directly on it so this is a toy” — and it’s always a laugh for me. There’s … other people? Who want to do other things?

Re: Karl Guttag on Apple Vision Pro (Part 1)

#28

Post by cma »

ladberg wrote: post #14
ohgodplsno wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why worry ? It's already guaranteed to be the case. Apps will not have direct access to the cameras, meaning that the Vision Pro is destined to keep being a toy fully steered by Apple. You also cannot access any depth information, or anything that would make it useful as a general 3D computing device. You can't access eye tracking, so say good bye to foveated rendering. And since you can't have foveated rendering, we…

Foveated rendering is supported by default. Most apps will rely on the OS's renderer and not their own so they don't have to do anything with eye tracking to have it enabled. EDIT: See cma's comment below which adds more info: apps that use their own render still support foveated rendering too.

Foveated is available on native renderers/custom engines too:

(source: "Discover Metal for immersive apps - WWDC23 - Videos - Apple Developer " https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2023/10089/)

If they try to hide it by restricting access to reading the foveation texture, you can be sure anti privacy apps like Immersive Facebook will try tricks like recovering it from GPU timestamp queries (render two transparent triangles covering the screen in separate draw calls, find which took the longest, subdivide and repeat).

Re: Karl Guttag on Apple Vision Pro (Part 1)

#29

Post by rched »

ohgodplsno wrote: post #13
MuffinFlavored wrote: post #10

> In many ways, the AVP can be seen as the “Meta Quest Pro done much better.” If you are doing more of a “flagship/Pro product,” it better be a flagship. Ok. I'm fine with being told "you aren't the target audience" but... name 5 things I would do with it if I bought one. Why would I put it on my face/what would I gain from it? Gaming? Productivity? What can it do that a screen + monitor + mouse + keyboard / iPad / i…

The propaganda for the Vision Pro is somewhat similar to various crypto bullshit in the past years: "you're not seeing the vision", while it stays a mostly useless tool.

I’m not sure this is a fair statement given that the thing isn’t even out yet and most haven’t used it.

Re: Karl Guttag on Apple Vision Pro (Part 1)

#30

Post by ChuckNorris89 »

mellosouls wrote: post #5

Excellent article, I look forward to the updates. As a Meta Quest 2 owner, and Android user, I'm a bit of an Apple-skeptic when it comes to their pricing on some products; but I have to acknowledge that while the Vision Pro seems mad-expensive on first reveal, it doesn't seem to be poor value going by the previews and specs, which seems to match the article's conclusions. That is where the Quest Pro seems to have fai…

Yes, the Apple headset is miles more advanced, but to me, the massive selling point of the Quest 2 was also how easy to sideload stuff was. The Side Quest store is full of amazing apps and ports, like Doom 3 for example, that for reasons don't meet the Quest Store approval criteria or because the devs don't want to pay the 30% fee to Meta.

I doubt we'll see such freedom on the Apple headset as it looks more of a "VR iPad" than a "VR iMac". If I know Apple well, sideloading apps will be a huge no-no and you'll only be able to run what Apple approves on it, so those hoping for immersive VR porn or other wild fantasies, might be left hanging.

Post reply on HN