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

31–40 of 105 posts

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

#31

Post by cma »

platers wrote: post #25
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?

I edited that out, apparently some of the replacement lenses can flex.

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

#32

Post by chis »

Aerbil313 wrote: post #9

I’ve just learned the Vergence-accommodation conflict [1]. VR/AR, from now on is a no-go for me. It never came to my mind that those headsets had such a problem. We’re talking about an accommodation distance of what, three centimeters? I’m already on my way to reverse my myopia, sorry, I can’t take an even more unhealthy visual environment [3]. Half of the world is already on its way to be myopic by 2050 according to…

The accomodation distance can be set to any value by the headset lens design. The problem he's discussing is that you can't change the distance depending on the content shown. Probably apple is setting the distance to 1 meter since that's where they show all their content at.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vergence-accommodation_conflic...

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

#33

Post by kitsunesoba »

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.

To me it seems like less of a war on general computing and more like Apple is hoping to prevent mixed reality or "spatial computing" from becoming an extension on the privacy disaster that smartphones became.

This seems prudent, because as personal as smartphones are, a headset like the Vision Pro dials that up tenfold. Considering what third parties have done with just the information surfaced in mobile operating systems, or heck even the web, I shudder to think of what they'd do with gaze data and a high fidelity color 3D map of your surroundings.

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

#34

Post by satvikpendem »

drewbeck wrote: post #27
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…

That's great for those people but yes, for devs, it's not a real replacement for a MacBook, even though it literally has the same chip inside. It's a shame.

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

#35

Post by oh_sigh »

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #30
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…

Apple is being forced by the EU DMA law to allow support for alternate app stores by 2024 - I imagine the same would hold true for the vision pro. I guess it depends if VR goggles are viewed as an entirely separate category of product, or if they are essentially just "smart phones with a fancy display".

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

#37

Post by ConanRus »

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.

It's the same concern I heard before the 1st Ipad announce: we want a MacOs on a tablet! No you don't. Coz MacOs apps knows nothing about the touch screen interface. And they know nothing about VR also, so nothing is changed here.

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

#38

Post by ChuckNorris89 »

oh_sigh wrote: post #35
ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Apple is being forced by the EU DMA law to allow support for alternate app stores by 2024 - I imagine the same would hold true for the vision pro. I guess it depends if VR goggles are viewed as an entirely separate category of product, or if they are essentially just "smart phones with a fancy display".

>Apple is being forced by the EU DMA law to allow support for alternate app stores by 2024

As always, I'm waiting to see the final implementation before rejoicing prematurely.

Appel can always intentionally maliciously screw with the implementation of this law in so many ways, in order to make sideloading an unattractive proposition for the majority, but that is still compliant with the law, like they did with the self repair program, or like the implementation of many GDPR cookie banners use dark pattern to annoy you into just giving up and accepting tracking.

A law is one thing. It's the implementation that makes or breaks it.

Meta left sideloading relatively open without a law having to drag them kicking and screaming into it, which is much better IMHO from a hacker perspective, as it means our vision & goals for the product usage are slightly more aligned.

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

#39

Post by easytiger »

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…

How do you game on it?

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

#40

Post by kitsunesoba »

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.

Even if it could run VS Code directly, VS Code would be at a disadvantage to other editors because native visionOS apps appear to use entirely vector UI and text to ensure sharpness and readability in a wider variety of conditions, which I don't see third party UI frameworks of any sort being able to hook into easily.
Post reply on HN