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

351–360 of 442 posts

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

#351

Post by Hehohei »

Podgajski wrote: post #322
trogdor wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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.

Can you elaborate how your experiment was setup?

After all, while you do post studies which clarify details of your theory, you do not counter the 48 studies linked in the wikipedia article.

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

#352

Post by ssgodderidge »

__m wrote: post #124
ssgodderidge wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m curious to see the type of adoption here. I think this is more of an enthusiast device than anything. I suspect true success of the Vision Pro will be the introduction of a smaller, cheaper headset aimed at the masses, rather than wide-spread adoption of a $3k+ device

Companies and institutions will be a big customer

With what use case, do you think?

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

#353

Post by ssgodderidge »

acdha wrote: post #222
deadbabe wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can’t Meta Quest 3 be that device?

Low resolution displays are okay for gaming but anything oriented at professional use is going to be held back by fuzzy text.

Text sharpness is really critical, IMO. Also, if text moves at all with any head movement, its a deal breaker

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

#354

Post by Podgajski »

Hehohei wrote: post #349
Podgajski wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the second time I’ve read this Mr. interpretation of sunlight being polarized on hacker news. Sunlight is not polarized. When you use a polarizing filter, you are polarizing the light. That’s why they call them polarizing filters. Sunlight, reflecting off of a lake is partially polarized which is what creates the intensity. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3049010/#:~:tex... . Light arriving on Ea…

Wikipedia has all of its sources at the bottom of the article itself. If you could actually proof your claim, people would write an article about you.

No one wants to work with me to prove it. Of there is anyone here that wants to help me I am open to it. I am homeless and on disability.

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

#356

Post by adastra22 »

jwells89 wrote: post #350
adastra22 wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not on the most recent macOS releases. I maintain binaries of an open-source app, and used to have instructions to right-click open on first use. This stopped working recently, I forget if it was on version 13 or 14. The users would get a denial, with no option to override. I ended up having to pay $100/yr for a developer account to be able to sign and notarize the binaries. They can now open them like usual, with ju…

I keep my macs up to date and haven't encountered this. Newly downloaded unsigned stuff still works fine. Perhaps there's some sporadic/conditional bug afoot.

Is it actually unsigned? Or just not developer-signed? Those are different things! When you build an app with Xcode it automatically self-signs app bundles, even if you're not a registered apple developer. Most apps you download are probably built that way.

We use cross-compiling infrastructure on linux/docker for the app I maintain, which don't generate these signatures. This causes the resulting binaries to be rejected on recent apple devices (although they used to work just fine with user override on intel-based macs).

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

#357

Post by deadbabe »

acdha wrote: post #222
deadbabe wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can’t Meta Quest 3 be that device?

Low resolution displays are okay for gaming but anything oriented at professional use is going to be held back by fuzzy text.

I think quest 3 is reasonably sharp so something sharper than that eventually will be pretty sweet.

Personally I’m more put off by the bulkiness of the device, something very light is necessary!

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

#358

Post by Miraste »

curioussavage wrote: post #289
Podgajski wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, See my problem? I can’t seem to find any testing on Apple VR headset regarding to SAR or any other type of radiation. That’s emitted from it. All I can find is, you’ll have an extremely strong Wi-Fi signal right next to your head probably for long period and you would use a cell phone that close to your head. I’ve had to find an SAR rating for it anywhere. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/apple-vision-pro-has-alre…

Pretty sure the radios are down in the puck. Not by your head

That's only a battery pack. All the electronics are in the headset.

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

#359

Post by Podgajski »

Hehohei wrote: post #351
Podgajski wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve done it, which is why I’m so certain it affects me. I’ve had people help me do it.

Can you elaborate how your experiment was setup? After all, while you do post studies which clarify details of your theory, you do not counter the 48 studies linked in the wikipedia article.

The studies don’t only include people who are genetically susceptible to EMFs. so if only one and 10 people have the sensitivity, the probability they will be in the studies are reduced.

Then you have the problem in the studies of people claiming they have the sensitivity when it is an anxiety or psychological issue. These are widely known issues with the studies that say there’s no effect.

As for myself, the last five years I have consistently noted how I slept, and how I felt and then only afterward measuring the frequency, magnetic and electric fields, and the radio frequency electronic radiation.

If I do not know if they magnetic field or electric field is strong, then there is no way placebo effect could occur, correct?

This is the same with the laptops that I measure high magnetic fields, giving me bloody nose. Apple computers have very low EMF emissions, while most other laptops are very high. I discovered accidentally because I work a lot with computers. It was only after measuring the fields that I noticed what was going on.

My last experiment was my tinnitus. I had someone put a cell phone on the table behind my head streaming videos. One was a video off-line and the other one was a video from YouTube. They were the same video. But the one that was streaming from YouTube after 5 to 10 minutes my tent is increased. This did not occurr with the other Video playing when the phone was on airplane mode.

Regarding my sleep, I live in a minivan and I can sleep 10 hours when I am in low or absent EMF area. If I am in a high area, especially with bid man 5G, my sleep is interrupted and it must I get 4 to 5 hours of sleep.

I can guarantee you as I’ve worked as a network engineer for one of the largest networking companies that I was way more skeptical of this than you will ever be.

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

#360

Post by Podgajski »

curioussavage wrote: post #282
Podgajski wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m going to say with the electromagnetic radiation blasting you in the forehead There’s going to be other problems.

This device uses a puck. It’s going to be down on your belt right about where your cell phone with the same radios already is. This feels silly. Put on your tinfoil hat I guess? Even if you don’t own a cell phone, how often are you surrounded within several feet by up to dozens over people with one? If you live out in the woods then why do you care anyways? In other words it’s a drop in the bucket.

I just read from someone else that the puck is only the battery that the Wi-Fi is in the headset. So just imagine strapping a Wi-Fi router to your head!
Post reply on HN