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

581–590 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#581

Post by landswipe »

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…

Expecting the same, this is going to be a MASSIVE flop. VR is not for the masses until the goggles go away.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#582

Post by jfoster »

Apple should've called this a dev kit to save face, hedge bets, explain the price tag, and most accurately represent what this is. It clearly does not belong in prime position on apple.com yet.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#583

Post by hamburglar »

askonomm wrote: post #579
JacobThreeThree wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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. This has always been the case and this technology has been around for a while. I'm surprised Apple would have chosen to use it for user input.

I was curious about this so I tried surfing the web and seeing how I click on things. I am literally unable to click on buttons or text inputs without actually looking at them. If I try to only use a corner of my eye, I miss the buttons 90% of the time. How do people not look at what they are clicking?

My guess is that people actually do look in order to aim their mouse but by the time they click, their eyes have already moved onto wherever they’re looking next.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#584

Post by ec109685 »

nightski wrote: post #444
Johnie wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

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.

Apple was paid a monthly fee by Cigular per user for the iPhone 1, so it was just subsidized weirdly.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#586

Post by prawn »

hwbehrens wrote: post #48
ghaff wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean the front cabin where they have big screens for every seat? I couldn't see carrying one of these instead of just an iPad for movies. (But then I'm a very light packer.)

I think it will be more like the proliferation of noise-cancelling headphones; it's not about what it brings (music, dialog, etc) but about what it blocks out (the ambient sounds). Yes, you can watch a movie on a plane now, but with a headset you remove the depressing, crowded, and claustrophobic visual environment.

And watching content on a plane's built-in screens is a miserable experience: poor interface, lag, constant forced interruptions for even the most boring announcements (captain, donating foreign coins, meal schedule).

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#587

Post by khazhoux »

throwaway2037 wrote: post #545
nedt wrote: post #465

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

If anyone does not understand the reference, "CmdrTaco" was the editor of Slashdot many years ago. Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rob_Malda

If anyone does not understand the reference, "Slashdot" is a link-sharing site oriented at tech news, that was popular many years ago as HN is today.

https://slashdot.org

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#588

Post by FireBeyond »

mbreese wrote: post #515
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…

> 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 Appl…

And yet you literally have early access reviewers regurgitating talking points about how this will redefine the television-watching and movie-going experience.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#589

Post by TaylorAlexander »

Civitello wrote: post #567
al_borland wrote: post #565

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The biggest thing for me, from the Verge review, was the limited field of view. Apple sold it as filling the users entire field of view and it sounds like that isn’t the case. When I first saw the reality of the Microsoft HoloLens, that was my disappointment there as well… Google Glass as well. I don’t want to feel like I’m wearing an AR device, as so far, that’s what everything has looked like. Limits of the technol…

> field of view...Limits of the technology It really isn't though, at least not for long, as of mid 2023 there are publicly showcased compact lightweight prototypes with 240° FoV.

Well there’s FOV and there’s pixel density which are both too low right now and antagonistic to one another feature wise. There’s also display brightness which is an issue and I’m not sure how that fits in to the FOV/density spectrum. And then more pixels means more compute… That prototypes exist doesn’t necessarily mean much in a space that is full of prototypes showing off one particular feature. The very hard thing is to combine all of the desired features in to one consumer ready headset.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#590

Post by TaylorAlexander »

ravenstine wrote: post #580
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…

Wow, I remember when it was announced, to press materials gave the impression that it would be closely integrable with macOS. I was picturing using VS Code from within it. Which I guess I could do if I set up VNC... but I'm not paying thousands for that. Is an AR productivity tool really so hard? Apple owns the whole stack here. Nintendo can do Mario Kart AR in your living room with an RC car, but I can't get unlimit…

Yeah I’d love to use one for PCB design at a cafe, but I don’t even own a Mac. I’m not going to drop $5k for an experience I can already do with my old laptop just a little bit fancier.
Post reply on HN