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

461–470 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#461

Post by jedberg »

jamespo wrote: post #445
jedberg wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When is the last time they launched a "so so" product? All of them! The first version of the iPhone, iPad, iPod, watch, AirPods... They all had similar reviews. "Seems like a tech preview, not really ready for general use, too expensive", etc.

First iPod and iPad were fine.

The first iPod's wheel would break and skip all the time. And so would the hard drive. And the OS was really simple, and the syncing was terrible.

The first iPad was ok only because it truly was "just a bigger iPhone". But they didn't really make features that were unique to the iPad and took advantage of its bigger screen for a few versions afterwards.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#462

Post by threeseed »

MBCook wrote: post #137
jhatax wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This review from TheVerge answers some of your questions: https://www.theverge.com/24054862/apple-vision-pro-review-vr... I recommend the video review as well. Seeing the video call between Nilay, Joanna, and MKB shows how much the tech has advanced but also how much it still needs to evolve to be at the level of FaceTime Video.

I’m excited about the Vision Pro but I now see why some reviewers called the FaceTime “Personas” creepy. They’re like talking paintings in the Haunted Mansion ride with bunch of blur and depth of field. It’s way too weird. Joanna’s looks a bit like she’s been stuck as the replacement person in the Mona Lisa. A static picture of you or maybe your Memoji (remember those?) would be far preferable. I’m surprised Apple is…

> I’m surprised Apple is shipping Personas.

They do make it clear that it's in Beta so they know there is work to do.

But if you're having a Zoom meeting with a divorce lawyer or negotiating an M&A a Memoji is the last thing you want.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#463

Post by nmstoker »

I don't wish to imply any insult to the reviewer but the Persona image seemed fairly well aligned with how she looked when she did the scan. The poor lighting may have contributed to her slightly pallid colouring in the Persona.

Presumably the main concern is the uncanny not-very-lifelike nature that's putting people off and the rest is self-consciousness. Maybe they need longer scanning to build a more accurate facial movement model?

I still find it very odd when the eyes the device displays to others have such a raised position compared to the true eye position. If I had one, I would rather something static went there or nothing, and maybe overlay that with a gaze direction indicator "spot" instead of faux eyes.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#464

Post by makeitdouble »

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.

We should bear in mind that at the time it launched many early adopters were on the fence and kept a second phone around (most people around me did until basically the iPhone 4). We look back at it as a fun area, but it was in part because we accepted it was flawed and limited.

When trying to use the iPhone seriously, at some point it wouldn't receive calls anymore (just silently crash the deamon receiving it, you'd never know if not told by the caller afterwards), drop active calls when battery was too low (single digit), call quality could be horrible, stuff would crash from time to time.

Memory would leak like a sueve from everywhere so rebooting the phone every now and then was good hygiene. It's only after the 3GS that it stabilized, otherwise antennagate would have been just another tuesday IMO.

It was still a stellar device, but not a fully reliable device in any way shape or form.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#465

Post by nedt »

Johnie wrote: post #424
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…

Reminds me of iPhone 1. Everything you've said is reminiscent of the reviews of the first iPhone.

And before that the iPod. CmdrTaco wrote: "No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame." Couple of years later the Nomad was gone.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#466

Post by vunderba »

wtallis wrote: post #152
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…

Streaming an arbitrary collection of windows instead of a single finished, composited framebuffer increases the bandwidth requirements by at least an order of magnitude. That's never going to work well over WiFi.

Use the touted eye tracking feature and compress that particular applications stream inversely to how much the user is focusing on it within the Vision Pro.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#468

Post by jamespo »

jedberg wrote: post #461
jamespo wrote: post #445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First iPod and iPad were fine.

The first iPod's wheel would break and skip all the time. And so would the hard drive. And the OS was really simple, and the syncing was terrible. The first iPad was ok only because it truly was "just a bigger iPhone". But they didn't really make features that were unique to the iPad and took advantage of its bigger screen for a few versions afterwards.

The os was simple, it played music, that's it?

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#469

Post by mgh2 »

Johnie wrote: post #424
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…

Reminds me of iPhone 1. Everything you've said is reminiscent of the reviews of the first iPhone.

Sales: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39184136

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#470

Post by wahnfrieden »

pulisse wrote: post #357
Wingy wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The watch is a new product category under his leadership isn't it?

AirPods, too.

AirPods weren't a new product category, they were an iteration of the Apple EarPods which looked the same, had the same remote features, etc.
Post reply on HN