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

Apple Vision Pro available in the U.S. on February 2

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 442 posts

Re: Apple Vision Pro available in the U.S. on February 2

#321

Post by unsupp0rted »

FireBeyond wrote: post #315
unsupp0rted wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Recently my optician kept getting me the wrong (Zeiss) lenses, i.e. I could see much worse with the new lenses than I could with my 3-year-old lenses. I got excuses like: "oh, these are better for computer work but worse for distance". Great... why are my old lenses more clear for both computer work and distance? I went home with the new lenses and tried them for a night and a day. Unusable. I went back and the optic…

> I expect that whatever Apple's Standard Operating Procedure will be for supplying the right lenses to people, it'll be mostly superior to your average optician. I love that your anecdote has determined that most opticians will be worse at their job than an Apple Genius who might get two-three hours training on fitting the headset.

Apple is a 2.8 trillion dollar company because they're good at process. They don't expect or rely on the Apple Genius to get the fitting right. That would be their biggest ever blunder.

Getting the fitting right is built into their products from years earlier in the design process.

The Apple Genius is perhaps the last or second-last step in an SOP that results in their customers not angrily returning hundreds of thousands of headsets and swearing off the entire ecosystem.

Now sometimes Apple get things woefully wrong (e.g. butterfly keyboards, antenna gate) and refuse to admit defeat for years.

But on average, across years and dozens of product variations, they have a good hit/miss ratio.

Re: Apple Vision Pro available in the U.S. on February 2

#322

Post by Podgajski »

trogdor wrote: post #320
Podgajski wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do people have to constantly degrade the legitimate science going on between the question of man-made electromagnetic radiation and human health? One of the biggest differences between light and electromagnetic waves created by humans is that they are polarized. Light waves are not polarized they are scattered. Light waves are also not pulsed. Cancer? Maybe. What about cataracts? What about tinnitus? What about m…

>I’m sure that’s all in my head though right? I don’t know, but it doesn’t seem too difficult to create a blind (better, double-blind) test so you can know for sure. Is that something you are interested in doing?

I’ve done it, which is why I’m so certain it affects me.

I’ve had people help me do it.

Re: Apple Vision Pro available in the U.S. on February 2

#323

Post by Ynottingten »

Podgajski wrote: post #294
Hehohei wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There have been plenty of studies for a long time regarding this and a practical 'study' going on for now a long time across the globe with billions of people. What is your specific worry? getting cancer? The paper you reference states the same: "Hence, VR headsets and mobile phones are safe." And yes light is the same thing as anthropomorphically generated electromagnetic radiation, depending on what radiation you t…

Why do people have to constantly degrade the legitimate science going on between the question of man-made electromagnetic radiation and human health? One of the biggest differences between light and electromagnetic waves created by humans is that they are polarized. Light waves are not polarized they are scattered. Light waves are also not pulsed. Cancer? Maybe. What about cataracts? What about tinnitus? What about m…

Sun light is polarized.

I literaly have a polarizing filter for my camera.

And bluntly saying: yes you do fully read as someone with a head problem. You would not survive a blind study regarding EMF and your nose bleeding and would be a very famous person if you could proof that.

All EMF fields we have and face daily are not strong enough at all for any 'ion channels'. Are you even aware how many fields you walk through every single day? Public transport, power lines, wifi etc. your own electric cable has a magnetic field.

Weird that you actually connect ion channels/EMF with blood vessal issues at all.

Feel free to read the wikipedia article about it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_hypersensitivi...

"Electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) is a claimed sensitivity to electromagnetic fields, to which negative symptoms are attributed. EHS has no scientific basis and is not a recognized medical diagnosis, although it is generally accepted that the experience of EHS symptoms is of psychosomatic origin."

Re: Apple Vision Pro available in the U.S. on February 2

#324

Post by FireBeyond »

unsupp0rted wrote: post #321
FireBeyond wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I expect that whatever Apple's Standard Operating Procedure will be for supplying the right lenses to people, it'll be mostly superior to your average optician. I love that your anecdote has determined that most opticians will be worse at their job than an Apple Genius who might get two-three hours training on fitting the headset.

Apple is a 2.8 trillion dollar company because they're good at process. They don't expect or rely on the Apple Genius to get the fitting right. That would be their biggest ever blunder. Getting the fitting right is built into their products from years earlier in the design process. The Apple Genius is perhaps the last or second-last step in an SOP that results in their customers not angrily returning hundreds of thou…

But yet a poor experience at an optician for you leads you to the claim that "strip mall opticians" are generally poor at fitting glasses. But somehow we don't have mass revolt and complaints about optical care.

Re: Apple Vision Pro available in the U.S. on February 2

#325

Post by MBCook »

c1sc0 wrote: post #308
MBCook wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The press has had two chances to try it, at most. Both being guided demos by Apple. No one has been free to just “try it out“. There may be reviewers who are doing that right now, but the articles are certainly behind a embargo. That said I don’t remember anyone saying anything other than that they came away extremely impressed. Which is why I’m really curious too.

Developers have been able to use it in workshops AFAIK.

You’re correct. However I think they only get to use their app, maybe they also get a short tour.

Either way they’re under NDA so they won’t talk about it if they want to keep their developer account. They can say they went to one of the workshops and that’s basically it.

Re: Apple Vision Pro available in the U.S. on February 2

#326

Post by MBCook »

FireBeyond wrote: post #318
MBCook wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The press has had two chances to try it, at most. Both being guided demos by Apple. No one has been free to just “try it out“. There may be reviewers who are doing that right now, but the articles are certainly behind a embargo. That said I don’t remember anyone saying anything other than that they came away extremely impressed. Which is why I’m really curious too.

That absolutely is untrue. Om Malik, for just one, has posted at least three articles discussing in depth his extended reviews of the Vision Pro. Here's one ( https://om.co/2023/12/14/why-vision-pro-will-change-photogra... ): > Over the past few months, I have had the opportunity to spend time with Apple’s soon-to-be-released Vision Pro, a spatial computer that you wear on your face.

He lists two times. The initial reveal when Apple let some of the press use it, and after 17.2 was released when Apple let some of the press try spatial videos captured on their own phones.

That’s all Apple has let the press have, at least publicly. I’m sure they’ll be getting their review units soon. But right now those two times are all we have discussions from.

Re: Apple Vision Pro available in the U.S. on February 2

#327

Post by caskstrength »

elicash wrote: post #39

While I don't plan to purchase one, I do feel a desire to buy an iPhone 15 Pro just so I can start capturing spatial video just in case this DOES succeed. I won't purchase one, because I'm always a few generations of iPhones behind, but the desire is there.

Just wait for iPhone 16 when they will pull HTC Evo 3D on you and will allow not just recording but also watching spatial video ;)

Re: Apple Vision Pro available in the U.S. on February 2

#328

Post by bilalq »

adastra22 wrote: post #121
bilalq wrote: post #19

I do hope this is successful. The cult-like behavior that Apple inspires may be the big push needed to help VR become adopted by the general public. If it fails, then I'd be pessimistic that VR will have meaningful progression in the next decade.

Serious question: why do you expect VR to take off with the general public? A decade into VR experiments, and nobody has come up with good non-gaming applications better than cartoony chat apps. It’s got a worse track record than blockchain.

I don't think it's a worse track record than blockchain. Things are clunky now, but there are some genuinely fun and cool experiences to be had:

- Playing table tennis in VR is more fun than in real life since you don't have to go chasing around the room to pick up balls.

- I've used VR headsets to show my parents and other elderly folks photosphere shots I've taken from mountain summits that they would never be able to access or see in person.

- There are some VR games that are quite well received (e.g., Half-Life Alyx).

- Beat Saber is a blast.

I totally agree that where the technology is today, it's not ready for broad adoption. But as displays, materials, and capabilities expand, so too do the possibilities. We're probably not going to hit sci-fi levels of VR anytime in the next decade, but we can almost certainly create compelling experiences that go far beyond what exists today.

Re: Apple Vision Pro available in the U.S. on February 2

#329

Post by aubanel »

FumblingBear wrote: post #4

I know a lot of people are rightfully concerned with the viability of this product, but I'm unbelievably excited! Definitely going to be pre-ordering one and picking it up on release day if I can! I'm sure it won't be perfect or anything, but I'm mostly just stoked about the possibilities I see with this thing.

Don't forget Rule n°1 : no pre-orders!

Re: Apple Vision Pro available in the U.S. on February 2

#330

Post by bilalq »

akmarinov wrote: post #102
bilalq wrote: post #19

I do hope this is successful. The cult-like behavior that Apple inspires may be the big push needed to help VR become adopted by the general public. If it fails, then I'd be pessimistic that VR will have meaningful progression in the next decade.

This won't be successful, the $3500 price tag alone assures it. It will hopefully lead to something that's actually meant for end users, though.

I think it's the opposite. A ridiculously expensive price tag is the only way it can be successful. If it was cheaper, more people would buy, get disappointed in this, and then give up. Because it's so expensive, it selects for zealots and forgiving early-adopters.

I'd define success as paving the way for broader investment in the ecosystem. If third-party devs start building useful workflow tools and other experiences, it can become a cult favorite. From there, re-investment in further R&D can keep this improving.

Post reply on HN