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

641–650 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#641

Post by hartator »

m463 wrote: post #613
slg wrote: post #537

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The better analogy is probably something like the Apple Watch. Apple certainly wasn't the first smartwatch, but anyone who owned one before that was obviously a geek (said lovingly). Apple made the first mainstream acceptable smartwatch by smoothing over a lot of the complaints about their competitors, while adding some of their own in the process, just like the Vision Pro. It took a few iterations, but today people…

Correlation does not imply causation. I think smartwatches (and step trackers) were a thing, independent of apple. I remember a friend talking about load balancers when they were first came on the market 20 years ago. Cisco had this thing called "localdirector" which I believe couldn't handle load in the first place, while competitors did load balancing in hardware. I was puzzled why people bought them. My friend sai…

> I put my watch on the charger during my shower, which is all it needs

Same as the Apple Watch.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#642

Post by elboru »

pests wrote: post #610
ActorNightly wrote: post #592

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love how people just rewrite history on the internet lol. Iphone 1 was a collosal PoC. Slow, most of web didnt work. Its only appeal was the full touchscreen, which of course sucked to type on, but looked cool (which is the reason people bought it mostly). Everyone that needed mobile compute functionality was still on Blackberry and some other devices. There was a time during early 2010s where the iphone was better…

That's the history I remember tho. I remember the first time I saw an iPhone. It was 2am at a house party with a bunch of 19-25 year olds. Pretty much everyone stopped drinking or dancing and played with this dudes phone for three hours.

This was my first experience with an iPhone too. A rich guy (friend of a friend) had one, my friend and I spent the rest of the night trying it.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#643

Post by mvkel »

Just saw that the hand tracker continues to interpret input if you're typing on a Bluetooth keyboard.

That's... embarrassing.

This should have been a dev kit.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#644

Post by jsjohnst »

bnralt wrote: post #638
jsjohnst wrote: post #631

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This iPhone trope has gotta die It’s not a trope if it’s true. Most hard core nerds didn’t get it until they had tried it hands on (including myself, I panned the device hard until I tried it). Then it was the exorbitant price point ($650 at a time when nobody really paid for phones). Then it was the lack of hardware keyboard. No “real” apps. No copy and paste (even my older at the time Symbian S60 devices had that…

People thought Apple making a phone was odd. No one thought mobile phones, or even smart phones were odd. Mobile phones were common when the iPhone came out, and even smart phones weren't uncommon. And once the iPhone did come out, there was immediate interest. AR though, that's something the public hasn't shown much interest in yet. These products are looking more like the Segway (which was once supposedly going to…

To be clear, not disagreeing with your core point, but as a reference comparison, the Meta Quest 2 sold more units in its first 2-2.5 years than Apple sold iPhones (and iPhone 3G) in the equivalent time period.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#645

Post by stevage »

I love the tone this writer strikes. It's just perfect.

One thing I really notice about this stuff is that unlike mobile phones and TVs, this will not be for everyone. There's a big chunk of society that does not want home automation, VR/AR, fitbits, smartwatches, etc etc. Me included.

Seems like kind of fun if you're into that sort of thing, though.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#646

Post by hammyhavoc »

bnralt wrote: post #638
jsjohnst wrote: post #631

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This iPhone trope has gotta die It’s not a trope if it’s true. Most hard core nerds didn’t get it until they had tried it hands on (including myself, I panned the device hard until I tried it). Then it was the exorbitant price point ($650 at a time when nobody really paid for phones). Then it was the lack of hardware keyboard. No “real” apps. No copy and paste (even my older at the time Symbian S60 devices had that…

People thought Apple making a phone was odd. No one thought mobile phones, or even smart phones were odd. Mobile phones were common when the iPhone came out, and even smart phones weren't uncommon. And once the iPhone did come out, there was immediate interest. AR though, that's something the public hasn't shown much interest in yet. These products are looking more like the Segway (which was once supposedly going to…

Nobody thought Apple making a phone was odd. Even prior to the announcement of the original iPhone and prior to any rumors about actually making a phone, the internet was full of amateur 3D mockups of what an "iPhone" could be like, including looking like an iPod with a click-wheel. They had conquered the personal media player market, and now people wanted a phone with the design of an iPod to carry less stuff in their pockets.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#647

Post by steveBK123 »

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…

> if you want to use your actual Mac it can't do multiple monitors

lol, literally the only use case I could convince myself to spend this money on (hey its cheaper than an XDR ).

Even then I was having trouble convincing myself since.. all indications were you wouldn't want to wear this more than a few hours at a time, so ultimately you still need the real physical monitors for the other 80% of your workday.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#648

Post by stevage »

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…

> Even if they have a Vision Pro, I haven't yet seen any sign of ability for multiple people to do these things together.

No idea if it does this, but the obvious use case is for people who aren't physically present - but letting them somehow share a physical space. It could potentially be awesome for friends/partners who live far apart.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#649

Post by righthand »

I was able to try Apple’s VR headset and I just didn’t see any advantage. Overly simple to use to the point where it was annoying in the day-to-day. Heavy on the head.

I went back to my Arch laptop instead.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#650

Post by hollandheese »

lapcat wrote: post #502
mbreese wrote: post #478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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).

> 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). Completely untrue. The original iPhone required a 2-year contract with AT&T/Cingular. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone_(1st_generation)#Releas...

>Completely untrue. The original iPhone required a 2-year contract with AT&T/Cingular.

That's completely untrue. The original iPhone DID NOT require a 2 year contract, you could absolutely buy it on a prepaid plan. Yeah, you had to "fail" the credit check to get offered the prepaid plans, but all you had to do was put "999-99-9999" as your SSN in the activation screens to get them.

Post reply on HN