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

651–660 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#651

Post by aniforprez »

ActorNightly wrote: post #596
diebeforei485 wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first gen iPhone had a much better UX than other phones, so missing a few features like copy and paste was palatable. I do think future generations of AVP will do well. Iterating and applying learnings and customer feedback will make this a good product.

iphone by far did not have a better UX. It looked nice, but it had no more functionality than other devices at the time. In general, UX design is the argument people used to (and still do sometimes) run to "prove" that the device was better when it was clearly not. Fancy icons dont make a good UX, functionality does. You dont say copy and paste is good UX, you say its a feature.

Functionality does not make good UX. Good UX makes good UX

Not sure how people don't remember what a revelation the capacitive screen was. It was miles better than most Nokia phones that mostly used resistive screens (not saying that Apple invented capacitive screens but they most certainly made it popular) and the navigation with the simple home button and everything else being instant feedback with the buttons on the screen was better than anything else on the market from what I remember. The keyboard especially was incredible with that light tapping sound and instant keystrokes appearing. While it wasn't functionally better than most phones (famously less functional than a Blackberry), it was very much the leader of the pack in details that ACTUALLY contribute to good UX. Just as the iPod and the clicker wheel was ahead with the instant feedback and usability of rotating the wheel to scroll at high speeds through hundreds of songs

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#652

Post by bkfh »

aloer wrote: post #132

It is interesting how many here are excited about this for productive computer work. It’s also what Apple advertises with. But what is the account situation like? For years I’ve been complaining that I can’t easily use my private iPad with my company Mac because they have separate Apple IDs. Things like sidecar for a quick virtual whiteboard are basically impossible. AirPods have gotten better over the years where to…

You are so right.

The moment you use different Apple IDs you lose a lot of nice features of Apple‘s products

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#653

Post by chii »

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…

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

may be apple expect every person to buy one. Didn't facebook recently try something similar?

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#654

Post by jnaina »

ActorNightly wrote: post #592
nvarsj wrote: post #505

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This iPhone trope has gotta die. I worked at Motorola when the iPhone came out. Every single engineer knew this thing would blow everything else out of the water. It was one of the largest leaps in consumer tech devices ever. I assure you the Vision Pro is nowhere close to that.

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…

Not sure what you are going on about, that the original iPhone was a PoC.

Given what was available at that time (I was using a Windows Mobile O2 XDA AND a Blackberry at that time), the iPhone was simply magical. The ability to browse the full web on the go and a proper mail client, was amazing.

Worth the money to travel to San Francisco from Singapore just to get one (and the cost of the AT&T SIM masker to spoof it on the local Singapore telco network)

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#655

Post by verdverm »

steveBK123 wrote: post #647
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.

Keep an eye on Immersed.com, they have an app that does this with a slew of VR devices, and I expect they will support Vision Pro if they can. They also have the Visor.com that is supposed to release later this year

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#656

Post by hollandheese »

ssl-3 wrote: post #401
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

For example: It didn't multitask, even though other pocket computers for a Long Time had at least the appearance of multitasking. It didn't have the ability to install any additional software, even though other pocket computers for a Long Time handled third-party software just fine. It didn't even have a copy/paste function, even though [WTF? Srsly, Apple?]. All of these things were eventually corrected by Apple, but…

>For quite some time, the iPhone was just a rather fancy touchscreen music player with telephone and SMS programs tacked on.

It had the only truly usable mobile web browser. Windows Mobile's IE was trash, and the browsers on Palm OS, Blackberry and Symbian were laughable. This was the killer app (especially on Wifi, EDGE was not great).

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#657

Post by muppetman »

hartator wrote: post #641
m463 wrote: post #613

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Every day though. I charge my Garmin once a week when it gets down to 50%. The Garmin is a fitness watch with a few basic smartwatch features though. The Apple watch is a Smartwatch (with a lot of fitness features) The two aren't really comparable I don't think.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#658

Post by wkat4242 »

steveBK123 wrote: post #647
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.

Instead of having multiple virtual screens I would prefer a lot more if I could simply spread individual Mac windows around my virtual space. In mixed reality the whole concept of a virtual monitor makes no sense, it's just an unnecessarily limiting abstraction you could easily do without. The whole room is your "desktop".

It's basically what the SimulaVR guys are aiming at, and I'm surprised Apple didn't go this way with their Mac integration. Especially because the native visionOS apps do seem to behave just that way.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#659

Post by kevindamm »

IggleSniggle wrote: post #532
nvarsj wrote: post #505

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This iPhone trope has gotta die. I worked at Motorola when the iPhone came out. Every single engineer knew this thing would blow everything else out of the water. It was one of the largest leaps in consumer tech devices ever. I assure you the Vision Pro is nowhere close to that.

I remember being angry that my Moto Razr V3 had the power to run awesome software but as a teenager I didn't have an easy way to boot stuff up on it. IMHO it was a perfect phone, except there was no way to run what I wanted. The best I could do was program text messaging services and use those. They discontinued the phone rather than give consumers the freedom to just use the hardware. I thought the iPhone was dumb,…

IIRC, moto X was the first phone made by the Google-owned Motorola. The devices were made and assembled in the US.

I was hopeful for the post-acquisition Motorola but it didn't quite pan out. The IP salvaged from the purchase was always a big part of the deal so it wasn't really a loss, just not really much of a win either.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#660

Post by kj99 »

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…

[flagged]
Post reply on HN