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

61–70 of 105 posts

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

#61

Post by bee_rider »

satvikpendem wrote: post #45
bee_rider wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your requirements seem pretty specific, it might just not be the device for you.

How is it "pretty specific?" Any developer is running code locally (unless you work for Google or some company where they have remote codespaces). Why should I not want a headset that instead serves as a replacement for a laptop?

You might want it. Apple either doesn’t seem to be able to provide it, or didn’t prioritize it.

I don’t work for Google but I often SSH to my desktop to run my code. Why heat up my lap or drain my battery?

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

#62

Post by thebigman433 »

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.

I dont think it really means anything. Neither are major press outlets or developers, inviting them only really has a downside for Apple

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

#63

Post by satvikpendem »

krger wrote: post #56
satvikpendem wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course it isn't, they want you to buy a MacBook alongside, that's my entire point. They are artificially restricting one device in order to make you buy their other devices. It's the same story as the iPad, it also has the same chip as the Mac but they restrict apps like IDEs so people instead have to buy two devices. If it were a Surface-like product instead, with full macOS, I'd have bought an iPad in a heartbea…

>Of course it isn't, they want you to buy a MacBook alongside, that's my entire point. Hardware company entices consumers to buy more hardware. Film at 11. >If it were a Surface-like product instead, with full macOS, I'd have bought an iPad in a heartbeat. Ah yes. The Surface, the device that showcases the appeal of running an OS designed for mouse/keyboard input with a thin veneer of touch support spackled on top. I…

> Hardware company entices consumers to buy more hardware. Film at 11.

Sure, they can do whatever they want, of course. Similarly, I can also call it a shame.

> The Surface, the device that showcases the appeal of running an OS designed for mouse/keyboard input with a thin veneer of touch support spackled on top. It's amazing Apple isn't sprinting to release a product along those lines.

You're right, it works great as a portable computer that I can run anything I want on. I'm sure Apple could make an even better version if, I don't know, they created a keyboard attachment for one of their devices and made that device's OS more mouse and keyboard friendly, while still retaining the ability to run whatever software the user wants. Ah, one can dream.

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

#64

Post by muricula »

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 ability to position and manipulate virtual objects "in" the physical world. It's also supposed to be capable of 3d video playback and capture.

2d screens can't really do 3d, and definitely can't put things in the room around you.

People have already dreamed up all sorts of game ideas for passthrough AR, as well as CAD and 3d design (think autocad, blender etc.).

If you're using it as a stand in for a 2d display it may not be worth it -- it's just bigger in your field vision.

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

#65

Post by satvikpendem »

bee_rider wrote: post #61
satvikpendem wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it "pretty specific?" Any developer is running code locally (unless you work for Google or some company where they have remote codespaces). Why should I not want a headset that instead serves as a replacement for a laptop?

You might want it. Apple either doesn’t seem to be able to provide it, or didn’t prioritize it. I don’t work for Google but I often SSH to my desktop to run my code. Why heat up my lap or drain my battery?

Good for you, not everyone has both a laptop and desktop to get work done.

> Apple either doesn’t seem to be able to provide it, or didn’t prioritize it.

Sure, that's up to them. I can still want what I want however.

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

#66

Post by satvikpendem »

kitsunesoba wrote: post #40
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.

Something is better than nothing.

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

#67

Post by krger »

ohgodplsno wrote: post #58
krger wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Apps will not have direct access to the cameras A restriction for which I am thankful. >Vision Pro is destined to keep being a toy fully steered by Apple. I trust Apple a lot more than I trust the "let's figure out how to fingerprint users based on how they scroll and other metrics and use it to sell ads" crowd. >You can't access eye tracking, A restriction for which I am thankful. >so say good bye to foveated rende…

Yes, yes, we know some Apple users are unable to see past the "you can't be trusted" that Apple keeps violently stabbing in your brain, you'll live in a company town with company stores and company credits and you'll be happy about it. Now can the adults use their devices? The Vision Pro does not provide foveated rendering if you do not go through the Apple renderer. There's some extremely vague wording regarding Met…

>Yes, yes, we know some Apple users are unable to see past the "you can't be trusted" that Apple keeps violently stabbing in your brain, you'll live in a company town with company stores and company credits and you'll be happy about it.

Apple isn't telling me that I can't be trusted. Apple is telling me that it's a stupid idea to trust third-party developers with unfettered access to my data, and they're not even a little bit wrong. This has been happening at least since the "Foursquare is uploading and storing every user's contacts" fiasco well over a decade ago.

> Now can the adults use their devices?

Of course. Feel free to bring to market your wonderful headset that allows VC-funded startups to create a never-ending torrent of privacy hellscape diarrhea apps you can enjoy until they implode.

>The Vision Pro does not provide foveated rendering if you do not go through the Apple renderer. There's some extremely vague wording regarding Metal supporting it, without any API documentation out.

That's because the API has yet to be released to developers. Perhaps you can wait until it is to get your mouth all frothy, sunshine.

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

#68

Post by charcircuit »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #3

I appreciate Karl as the technical Bulldog for AR, doing really good technical analysis for the field. Even as someone steeped in this space, the fact of the 3-element AVP was news to me. That is a pretty big difference from other designs and tells me they are reaching for anything they can to squeeze optimizations out. AR is really really hard.

>the fact of the 3-element AVP was news to me

It was known for at least 1.5 years https://www.macrumors.com/2022/01/05/kuo-apple-headset-panca...

I remember also seeing some shipment records from Apple ordering these lenses last year.

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

#69

Post by ohgodplsno »

thebigman433 wrote: post #54
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…

> Apps will not have direct access to the cameras Is there any headset that does allow this currently? Doesnt seem like any kind of differentiating factor

Every single headset in the world that has cameras. The HoloLens, anything that uses OpenXR and OpenVR (so, pretty much 100% of the current PCVR market), hell even the Quest has a Passthrough API.

The Vision Pro is pretty much the only one that doesn't, because Apple thinks of their users as children.

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

#70

Post by caconym_ »

the_gipsy wrote: post #41
mjamesaustin wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 en…

So that iPad made reading or watching videos better, when you don't wanna use a laptop/pc/tv. Give me one thing that those goggles let me do or do better right now.

Well, the trivial answer given your premise that the iPad's existence is justified because some people sometimes might prefer it over other screens is that some people might similarly sometimes prefer the Vision [Pro].

I think it's a lot more compelling than that, personally, but you didn't set the bar very high.

Post reply on HN