Live data from Hacker News

Apple Vision Pro review

wsj.com

511–520 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#511
post #424
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.

Can you elaborate on this?

The first iPhone, yeah, it had some detractors, but I don't think the kinds of criticisms the parent poster gave ever really applied to the iPhone. To succeed, the iPhone didn't have to be this utopian product; it just had to be more useful than its main competitor, which was dumbphones. People who complained that it was missing features the Blackberry had were working from an unstated major premise that the iPhone was initially targeted at enterprise users, and I think that everyone who wasn't too busy being a pundit to see how the world works could see that that quite transparently wasn't the case. There was even a time period where I had both an iPhone for personal use and a Blackberry for work.

And I think the criticism about entertainment is spot-on. By contrast, despite being extraordinarily limited compared to even the very next modal, the first iPhone was fantastic for entertainment, precisely because it was good for fostering shared experiences. It didn't take long after the device came out before you'd see groups of people clustered around an iPhone, looking at photos together on that big, vibrant, gorgeous screen. That was something that none of its competitors could do. And you better bet that people saw that happening and started wanting to have one of their own so they could have fun, too.

I do think we're still in the "wait and see" phase for this product, but, unlike some of the original iPhone criticisms or cmdrtaco's original dismissal of the iPod, the criticisms this article points out feel really personally relevant to me.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#512

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…

Yeah, I don't think "mirroring" is quite the right term. It's effectively a 4K monitor for the laptop, with the laptop screen going black. Most (all?) Mac laptops don't have a 4K screen, so you have more screen real estate than "mirroring" would make you think. But this is sufficient for many use cases (or at least, mine). I pre-ordered one with the idea that my main work will be on the 4K monitor, with most of my su…

I think Slack is native already: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2024/01/apple-vision-pro-avai....

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#513
> Does it live up to the stratospheric hype? Not so much.

Oh sorry, that's from CNET's review of the first iPhone in 2007: https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/original-iphone-review/

It's way too early to tell if this product line will succeed in the long term. Will the first gen Vision Pro be a runaway success? Of course not! Will later generations look as obvious as the iPhone does now? I sure hope so!

For comparison, Apple sold 1.4 million iPhones in 2007. Supposedly Apple is expecting to sell around 500k Vision Pro units this year. Given the 3x price difference (in 2024 dollars), that effectively means the first gen Vision Pro is expected to bring the same revenue as the first gen iPhone.

We all have rosy retrospection about how great and obvious the first iPhone or first iPod was, but honestly nobody had any idea if Apple's crazy bet would pay off. We all agreed it was magical tech, but it was expensive, had tons of limitations, and nobody really needed it. Sound familiar?

All I know is betting against Apple has rarely paid off. They do have failures too though and this is clearly technologically more ambitious than any other launch, so who knows! And honestly that's what makes this launch most exciting.

It's been so long since I've had child-like wonder about some new technology that I'm just glad Apple took a chance on launching such a crazy device, even if I don't know what to do with it... yet.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#514

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The iPhone was subsidized by mobile carriers and/or interest free payment plans. I don't see that same path for this VR device, but maybe I am missing something.

The original iPhone wasn’t subsidized… it was bought outright. It was only after Apple proved the potential of the iPhone did the carriers get on board (and even then, it was limited support for quite a while).

It was sold with a subsidy in the uk in a weird way. Iirc you had to buy it from apple but o2 subsidised it as it they were the only ones with edge (so assumed they would also sell you a contract). Worked out £50-100 which was mad as o2 couldnt actually make you get a contract.. quite a few people i knew boight a bunch of them and gave them away as gifts.

Also it was a totally stand out appealing device accessible to everyone with immediate value to everyday people.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#515
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…

> Want it for entertainment? people want to enjoy photos, videos, movies with other people and it can't include them

This is a disingenuous argument. Your other points are much more valid than this one. You don’t have a VR headset to interact with other people in the same room. If you want to watch a movie with other people around you, there are many other (cheaper) ways to do that (and Apple can sell you a nice AppleTV to do it).

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#516
post #424
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.

iPhone 1 launched without cut/copy/paste

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Want it for entertainment? people want to enjoy photos, videos, movies with other people and it can't include them. Even if they have a Vision Pro, I haven't yet seen any sign of ability for multiple people to do these things together." This is not accurate, FaceTime has Share Play. Any app that leverages it can build a synced entertainment. Example out of the box, Apple TV, Freeform, Apple Music. I wish the SDK for…

I think OP meant you can't include other people _in the same room_. If I want to watch Netflix (well, Apple TV, since Netflix doesn't have an app yet), my partner is completely out of luck if I do it on an Apple Vision. Unless he too has the money for one and we FaceTime each other to sync up our watching experience.

I once had a roommate who stopped playing video games a decade ago. We bought a PS5, and he kept trying to find games like 'Gears of War' and 'Lord of the Rings' with a multiplayer split-screen campaign in the same room. Aside from classic 1v1 fighting and sports games, the new games being released did not offer that. They were all built for high-quality solo gaming or optimized online gaming. Expecting a VisionOS experience with people in the same room reminds me of that. I'm not saying there won't be apps for it, but it would be niche.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#518

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.

Are current watches good? I genuinely don't know and am interested. I hadn't gotten one because I was an early iPhone adopter (Gen 1), but haven't been willing to be an early adopter since then. But I would like a watch, if they are good now.

Yep. They've been great since v7 or so. My S0 watch was... something. Apps took forever to load. Battery life sucked. The UI was still clearly highly experimental. Now even complex apps like OmniFocus launch instantly, and I charge my Ultra every other day. In short, it's a mature product now and works like it's supposed to, without qualifications like "...eventually".

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#519
post #424
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 the touch bar, and the magic mouse, and ping, and mobile me, and hi-fi.

They're just a consumer goods company. Sometimes they make good things people don't appreciate at first. Sometimes they make bad things that people don't appreciate ever.

Their track record is better than the mean, but comparing every criticism of a first-gen Apple product to the iPod/iPhone launches is unserious. Of course some people panned any given new thing on Earth.

And this isn't even in response to someone predicting that AVP would fail, but just that the 1st-gen AVP is an immature product. The 1st-gen iPhone was an immature product! It's delusional (and discrediting to Apple!) to think the iPod, iPhone, OS X, Intel Macs, M1 Macs, etc. were as mature at launch as the later iterations we associate those technologies with now.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#520
post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

iPhone 1 was the effectively the first mass market smartphone This however is coming after a decade of existing AR/VR consumer electronics and still misses the mark

> iPhone 1 was the effectively the first mass market smartphone

... no?

Windows Mobile, BlackBerry, Palm, Nokia, Symbian, Maemo?

Post reply on HN