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

Apple Vision Pro review

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#381

Post by herval »

mikenew wrote: post #372
zmmmmm wrote: post #276

Lots of surprises on the downside from all the reviews. Pass through much more limited in quality with motion blur, pixelation, distortions, limited color and dynamic range. The eye tracking driven input method which was seen as holy grail turns out to be annoying after a while because people don't naturally always look at what they want to click on. Personas straight up aren't ready. The lack of AR features is the b…

My launch day Apple Watch was unbelievably bad. Not even good for telling time as the raise-to-wake feature was so flaky. So by the sound of it, the Vision Pro might be starting in a better position than the watch.

Watch v1 was just awful. Those laptops with butterfly keyboards and the first gen Air were also completely broken in their own ways. If Apple manages to keep iterating on this device, they might eventually have a winner

Or maybe it’ll be another homepod

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#382

Post by TeMPOraL »

deadbabe wrote: post #328
zmmmmm wrote: post #276

Lots of surprises on the downside from all the reviews. Pass through much more limited in quality with motion blur, pixelation, distortions, limited color and dynamic range. The eye tracking driven input method which was seen as holy grail turns out to be annoying after a while because people don't naturally always look at what they want to click on. Personas straight up aren't ready. The lack of AR features is the b…

It’s my understanding that eye tracking isn’t great as an input method, it should be used more for stuff like rendering or NPC interactions.

It's going to be a great, sneaky way of installing an ad blocker onto wetware - users will train themselves to not even gaze at anything resembling an ad, lest they look at it long enough for the headset to register it as a click.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#383

Post by crooked-v »

RajT88 wrote: post #87
patapong wrote: post #26

I think we are now at a stage where VR hardware has surpassed software. Between this and the Quest 3, we have powerful, polished and consumer friendly devices, but beyond a few niches (fitness, simulation, gaming to some extent), there is nothing to convince users to put the headsets on. I am hoping we will see a lot of experimentation in the coming years, and I am excited for what the Apple ecosystem will bring to t…

> I think we are now at a stage where VR hardware has surpassed software. Totally agree. I'm waiting for a usable Virtual Desktop app to come out. All the ones I have tried which work on my cheap WMR headset fall short of having floating app windows in view. I guess there is one of those which works on Meta Quest, but not PC headsets. That's really what you need to be effective working in VR. Just like is mentioned t…

I feel like the killer combination here would be a Virtual Desktop-like app for visionOS where the desktop VR passes through as an environment, but full local app layering is still available in the foreground.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#384

Post by seanalltogether »

tiltowait wrote: post #98
tunesmith wrote: post #7

One of the aspects of the device that has been under-realized is that when mirroring your desktop/laptop display to the AVP, you can't break out its applications into different areas. You can't pull them away from the desktop window. This is one of those things that Apple never claimed was supported, and yet there's something about that behavior that feels like such a natural intuitive implication to the technology t…

The inability to break out Mac windows curbed a lot of my enthusiasm for the AVP. I hope Apple will eventually add it, but I'm not going to spend $3500 on that hope.

Without a tethered connection the bandwidth simply isn't there.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#385

Post by ilrwbwrkhv »

This device isn't it. The iPhone had issues when it launched, but it was magical. The Vision Pro isn't magical. It has the same issues as the Oculus. The weight in front of the face is felt after using it for a while so definitely not something that can be used for long hours. And the dinosaurs and stuff are nice gimmicks, and really cool but wear off after a while.

What is required is a device as thin as sunglasses, which basically does AR things. That will be the gamechanger and I think that will be done by another company because it feels Apple forced this one and that's sad.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#386

Post by aidenn0 »

pavlov wrote: post #45
patapong wrote: post #26

I think we are now at a stage where VR hardware has surpassed software. Between this and the Quest 3, we have powerful, polished and consumer friendly devices, but beyond a few niches (fitness, simulation, gaming to some extent), there is nothing to convince users to put the headsets on. I am hoping we will see a lot of experimentation in the coming years, and I am excited for what the Apple ecosystem will bring to t…

It wouldn't be the first time that hardware gets ahead of software. In 1988-94, the CPUs available in desktop computers were substantially more advanced than the widely used operating systems. Windows 3 and Mac System 6/7 didn't support pre-emptive multitasking, memory protection, or many other features that define a modern OS. Maybe we'll look back at today's Quest and Vision Pro as similar transitional devices with…

> In 1988-94, the CPUs available in desktop computers were substantially more advanced than the widely used operating systems. Windows 3 and Mac System 6/7 didn't support pre-emptive multitasking, memory protection, or many other features that define a modern OS.

That was partly because RAM was over $100/MB (Nominal; ~$230 inflation adjusted) in 1990. Additionally, in the IBM compatible world, many people didn't have a 386 at that point.

Also, minor nitpick on the dates; 1993 saw OS/2 2.1 and NT 3.1, both of which had preemptive multitasking and memory protection.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#387

Post by herval »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #371
ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first iPhone was pretty terrible. I couldn't get my Marketing peers to take it seriously (which they came to regret). The first Watch was awful. I love my Series 8. Don't get me started on the first Mac...

> The first iPhone was pretty terrible. I definitely do not think that opinion was widespread. If anything I think that the biggest discussed shortcoming of the first iPhone was that it was only available on AT&T.

It was usable on any other network, I had one and it wasn’t AT&T locked

Compared to all the smartphones of the time, it was a slow toy with no apps and a 2G connection that was completely worthless

It looked nice though, and eventually it got an app store (unnoficially first), and the overall UX was a clear winner (nobody believed touch screens would ever replace blackberry style devices!)

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#388

Post by evan_ »

38 wrote: post #349
dwaite wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can just bluetooth to any device. However, pairing an audio device is an exchange of settings and encryption keys, and Apple will sync that pairing that to your entire account. Hold your AirPods near your Phone and tap the button to create the initial pairing, and they start working with your Mac and Apple TV.

that doesn't explain the previous status quo, which appears to be that previous (and maybe current) incarnations cant Bluetooth pair without an apple ID.

This just is not true, you can pair any model of airpods to any device that supports bluetooth. (Maybe there are exceptions but I'm not aware of them.)

I use my airpods with my Nintendo Switch and Samsung TV all the time. No Apple IDs on there.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#389

Post by Fomite »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #358
electroly wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple Maps falls in that category. Maps was bad when it came out but after years of effort (and a lot of money), it's pretty good now. That was no small feat given how good Google Maps already was when Apple Maps started.

In my area (Long Island), Apple Maps works great (better than Google Maps). I hear that it falls down, in rural areas, though. [ edit ] Looks like I pissed in someone’s cereal. Didn’t mean to, but different strokes, and all that… I was just recounting actual personal experience, which, I suppose, isn’t popular, hereabouts. Just for context, I have been writing Apple programs, since 1986. I am totally committed to the…

In my particular rural area, Apple Maps knows the street I live on exists. Google Maps still needs a call to delivery people to explain to them that their map is lying to them.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#390

Post by chasd00 »

TillE wrote: post #356
epolanski wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first two iWatches were borderline pointless/bad. The first two iPhones weren't as innovative as they make them,just more polished than other symbians with cameras and internet, it took off with apps really in third iteration. I think visionpro has lots of opportunities in the next iterations, early users will provide feedback this gen.

> The first two iPhones weren't as innovative as they make them Yes they were. Multi-touch in particular was a revelation. Making a big screen with one physical button is a simple idea, but making it work well was the hard part that nobody else had figured out. Those first iPhones were dog slow, sure, but they absolutely defined how smartphones work ever since.

don't forget pinch to zoom/expand on actual webpages in an actual web browser.
Post reply on HN