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

411–420 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#411

Post by astrange »

jackschultz wrote: post #246

How much talk is there about how these headsets are going to be used to talk to AI models? I don't see comments about that, but that's what I imagine they'll be used for. Models will be quicker, more efficient, and be able to capture audio, and able to be run on self owned GPUs. Take a google thing, throw a fake looking person and some type of voice on top and presto, you're talking to models. I feel like that _has_…

That's not how development cycles work. Conversational AI being any good is a 1-2 year old thing, and VR development of this quality is 5+ years.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#412

Post by mrguyorama »

Kirby64 wrote: post #23
atbpaca wrote: post #4

I read somewhere that the FOV is only 100-110, as opposed to full immersion as seen on their marketing material.

I've got an HTC Vive which is also ~110degrees. Although you do initially get the 'looking through ski goggles' feeling when you first put it on, that feeling VERY quickly goes away when you start doing anything inside. It's plenty immersive. Sure, more FoV would be nicer, but it's not like looking through a telescope or something.

Right, your brain really does not give a crap about the very edge of your vision. Instead of spending thousands on way more screen and optics real estate that you will barely notice because you barely notice ANYTHING outside of your focal point, we'd probably be just fine with a couple RGB LEDs shining just colors at your periphery.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#413

Post by jojobas »

wombat-man wrote: post #138
joshstrange wrote: post #106

I know it's v1, I know it's expensive, I know it's limited but I cannot wait to get my hands on it this Friday. Even with just 1 4k floating screen I think it would be a winner for me but I'm also really excited to see what people come up with in VisionOS itself. I think for a while the sweet spot (for me) with be using a virtual monitor and a handful of VisionOS apps as well. Eventually I hope to be able to pull mac…

Well it's QHD not 4k. I don't think you'll be able to pull windows out of the mac screen, but apps you might need are in vision OS anyway like safari or messages. I think my dream would be dual 4k monitors, or maybe a double wide?

It's a far cry. This thing is a little more that 4k for the entire field of view. Resolution required to render two 4k monitors at comfy distance is more than an order of magnitude away.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#414

Post by Rapzid »

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.

I remember what I was doing when I first saw it. Eating lunch with a work friend who bought it. I remember what I was eating.

It was incredible and obviously a game changer.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#415

Post by chaostheory »

Mistletoe wrote: post #365
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.

Apple Maps could be improved with classic hard work on the software etc. Apple Vision Pro is against the same problems of physics and usability that other VR and AR headsets are up against. I’m leaning towards they will never be “solved”, because using a monitor and keyboard or tv and controller works really well.

Portable monitors do not work as well. Monitors in general could also always be bigger speaking as a programmer.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#416

Post by rib3ye »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #355
MuffinFlavored wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder given all this... what the expectations are at Apple from a higher up/board/executive standpoint are Most of Apple offerings are good: Watch iPad Mac iPhone services Are they really expecting this to just be a hard problem initially that they get better at over time? When is the last time they launched a "so so" product?

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...

For 5 year-old me, the first Mac was pretty amazing.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#417

Post by thelastparadise »

electroly wrote: post #331
MuffinFlavored wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder given all this... what the expectations are at Apple from a higher up/board/executive standpoint are Most of Apple offerings are good: Watch iPad Mac iPhone services Are they really expecting this to just be a hard problem initially that they get better at over time? When is the last time they launched a "so so" product?

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.

> That was no small feat given how good Google Maps already was when Apple Maps started.

Gmaps also helped by enshittifying itself.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#418

Post by worksonmine »

electroly wrote: post #331
MuffinFlavored wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder given all this... what the expectations are at Apple from a higher up/board/executive standpoint are Most of Apple offerings are good: Watch iPad Mac iPhone services Are they really expecting this to just be a hard problem initially that they get better at over time? When is the last time they launched a "so so" product?

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.

Duckduckgo uses Apple Maps and it's completely unusable. Might be a Duckduckgo issue but last I tried a few weeks ago I couldn't even pan in Firefox without randomly snapping back to the pin. When I wanted context I'd work around it by just zooming out and be done with it. Still have to turn to the Devil if I want a decent map experience.

Ridiculous.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#419

Post by chaostheory »

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.

That opinion was so widespread that it was still common for people to dismiss the second iPhone version.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#420

Post by shilgapira »

joshspankit wrote: post #306
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…

On Windows of all places (95ish to MEish) there was a remote tool called radmin and it had something that I wish companies had embraced: it hooked in to (maybe even before?) the window-rendering functions and sent the changes over the network. It’s hard to explain exactly what I mean because everyone is so used to streaming pictures of the screen over the network (if they even use remote access at all), but you could…

Windows does this very well since at least a few years back. When connected via Remote Desktop any native application will get the behavior you describe, so the UI gets updated with almost no latency.

Applications which bypass the native APIs to render their window contents, in particular video players or games, get a compressed streamed video which has very decent performance. The video quality seems to be dynamic as well, so if there's a scene with very few changes you can see the quality progressively improve.

All of this is done per window, so a small VLC window playing a video in a corner gets the video treatment, while everything else still works like native UI.

Post reply on HN