To be honest I am incredibly disappointed that most of the app mockups I have seen from developers are just 2D windows floating in a 3D space with traditional simple point and click ux. I know that it's only possible to do so much in a simulator, and we'll have to wait to see what devs can really do with the tech, but if this is all we get I think this product is DOA.
Hard disagree. Pretty much a ll of the UIs I’ve tried on other headsets that try to make everything 3d really suck. Most of the content we view on devices IS 2d. Trying to turn it into 3d and making the user “move” stuff around just sucks especially with hand tracking where there isn’t even haptic feedback. Just having apps that can be contextual and pop up when and where you need them is useful and interesting. Usin…
Apple Vision Pro available in the U.S. on February 2
391–400 of 442 posts
Re: Apple Vision Pro available in the U.S. on February 2
#392Earlier quoted context omitted.
I won’t buy it because I don’t have any use it for it. But $3500 for a gadget is not crazy. I look back at what some of my computer set ups cost over the years in non inflation adjusted terms - An Apple //e with a duo disk drive, a green screen monitor, and a dot matrix printer in 1986 was $3000 - A Mac LC II with 10 MB RAM, an 80MB hard drive, a laser printer a little 12 inch monitor, and a //e card with a separate…
$3500 for a headset isn't crazy. $3500 for a headset that isn't allowed to do the overwhelming majority of VR things is. Even if it could, it's not even remotely a competitive price. 90s hardware cost what it cost because that's what was available. Today, there is plenty of competition for VR, and Apple is explicitly ignoring it.
Re: Apple Vision Pro available in the U.S. on February 2
#393Earlier quoted context omitted.
The iPhone Pro Max I referenced above is 10x as expensive as the cheaper good enough Android phone. Even the high end iPads are about 10x as expensive as a Fire Tablet. The original iPhone was unsubsidized at $700 compared to “free” phones and was laughed at by Balmer for that very reason.
How many months did it take for Apple to lower the price of the iPhone to $400 and drop the 4GB model again? Or did they do that out of the goodness of their hearts?
Re: Apple Vision Pro available in the U.S. on February 2
#394Earlier quoted context omitted.
Go look for other headsets with similar features and especially optical quality. You won’t find anything much cheaper. The quest (even considering the pro) and pico devices are toys in comparison
Right. If this was actually a general purpose VR headset, then it would be competitive. Instead, it's a toy. It's not allowed to be anything more.
Re: Apple Vision Pro available in the U.S. on February 2
#395ill have it on day 1, let me know what you want to be tried and ill report back
Re: Apple Vision Pro available in the U.S. on February 2
#396While it is incredibly unlikely I will get a version one of this product without some major feature being announced. I am excited for this to come out, and to have a company that won't just abandon it actually try their hand at this. I stand by my opinion that if anyone can manage to make a device like this mainstream, it will be Apple. They have the money and the patience to do it. Now "If" that will happen is still…
Gen 2 will be the one for normies.
Re: Apple Vision Pro available in the U.S. on February 2
#397Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 thro…
Polarization: A Key Difference between Man-made and Natural Electromagnetic Fields, in regard to Biological Activity https://www.nature.com/articles/srep14914
The article you linked to would set off alarm bells with anyone familiar with scientific publications, or even an undergraduate level of physics education. It's more like a blog post purporting mysticism.
The cited author, Dr. George L. Carlo, is a "a world recognized medical scientist, best-selling author and attorney", as indicated here [0]--a pseudo-science website that earns money by exploiting EMF fears (and sells "WiFi blockers").
"At Tech Wellness, our goal is to be your trusted source for information about EMF and all things wireless energy. That’s no small feat, because when you start looking around you’ll see a lot of pretty crazy claims and contradicting information out there—and some of it is downright scary."
The source you linked to isn't associated with Nature, despite the URL.
[0] https://techwellness.com/blogs/news/george-carlo-wireless-em...
Re: Apple Vision Pro available in the U.S. on February 2
#398Re: Apple Vision Pro available in the U.S. on February 2
#399Earlier quoted context omitted.
Polarization: A Key Difference between Man-made and Natural Electromagnetic Fields, in regard to Biological Activity https://www.nature.com/articles/srep14914
I don't mean to discount what you're experiencing. The article you linked to would set off alarm bells with anyone familiar with scientific publications, or even an undergraduate level of physics education. It's more like a blog post purporting mysticism. The cited author, Dr. George L. Carlo, is a "a world recognized medical scientist, best-selling author and attorney" , as indicated here [0]--a pseudo-science websi…
And this is the main research scientist who wrote the paper.
You do not know enough about electromagnetic radiation to keep commenting like you are.
Dimitris J. Panagopoulos
https://books.google.com/books/about/Electromagnetic_Fields_...
Dimitris J. Panagopoulos, Electromagnetic Fields - Biophysicist, was born in Athens, Greece, where he lives and works. He has a Degree in Physics and a PhD in Biophysics both from the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (NKUA). He completed his PhD on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs) in 2001, and two post-doctoral studies on the biological effects of microwaves (2004), and on cell death induction by Wireless Communication (WC) EMFs (2006). He worked as a post-doctoral researcher and lecturer at the Department of Cell Biology and Biophysics, NKUA, (2002-2014), where he gave undergraduate and graduate lectures on Radiation- and EMF-Biophysics, and performed research on the effects of various types of EMFs in experimental animals. During 2014-2018 he worked as a research associate at the National Centre for Scientific Research "Demokritos", Laboratory of Health Physics, Radiobiology and Cytogenetics, researching effects of ionizing and non-ionizing radiation on human cells. Since 2018 he has been working as a researcher at the Choremeion Research Laboratory, Medical School, NKUA. His experiments were among the first that showed damaging effects of man-made EMFs on DNA and reproduction. He has also shown beneficial effects on reproduction of EMFs mimicking natural ones. His theory on the biophysical mechanism of action of EMFs on cells is considered the most valid amongst all proposed theories and is cited by nearly 700 scientific publications. This theory has explained the sensing of upcoming earthquakes by animals and the sensing of upcoming thunderstorms by sensitive individuals through the action of the natural EMFs associated with these phenomena. The same theory has recently explained the induction of oxidative stress in cells by EMF-exposure. Dr. Panagopoulos has shown why the Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) is not a proper metric for non-thermal effects, why man-made (totally polarized) EMFs are damaging while natural EMFs are vital, and why highly varying real-life exposures from mobile phones and other WC devices are significantly more damaging than simulated exposures with invariable parameters. He has also shown that genetic damage caused by WC EMFs occurs similarly in human and animal cells. Dr. Panagopoulos has also argued that photons are strictly wave-packets, not particles of light, and that man-made electromagnetic radiation does not consist of photons but of continuous "classical" polarized waves, in contrast to what has been postulated by quantum physicists in the past 100 years. He is the first or sole author in more than 40 peer-reviewed highly influential scientific publications, which are referenced more than 1600 times by other scientific publications and has been included in the Top 10 cited authors by the Mutation Research journals.
Re: Apple Vision Pro available in the U.S. on February 2
#400Two features that are really clever from a product perspective: 1. Using the spatial cameras/features to scan your own face. I'm surprised Quest 3 doesn't do this... As soon as I saw the concept, I thought, "DUH! So smart it's obvious in hindsight!" 2. EyeSight, to enable people to still "see" your face when you wear the device. Very cool... As a Quest 3 user in mixed reality, I think I freak my family out when I wal…
The Quest 3 cannot do that, its depth sensor is far too low resolution to scan a face with a good fidelity level. Unfortunately, it also means the quest 3 probably will probably never be very good at dynamic occlusion in mixed reality (ie: hiding partially virtual objects that are behind real life objects).