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

661–670 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#661

Post by adkaplan »

dieortin wrote: post #459
TeMPOraL wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's going to be a great, sneaky way of installing an ad blocker onto wetware - users will train themselves to not even gaze at anything resembling an ad, lest they look at it long enough for the headset to register it as a click.

Apps are not able to register where you’re looking. Only the headset itself does.

Does ios not rely on hovering/mouse over for alt text or similar? Im mostly on windows but i wonder if theyll eventually concede a second gesture for "put cursor here"

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#662

Post by antoniuschan99 »

Was thinking they should have made it an accessory to the iphone instead. Have the iphone do all the compute and glasses just have sensors. It’s already wired because of the battery: it would weigh much less, iphone has magsafe portable battery for that extra juice, and would cost less (more adoption too)

Won’t be surprised if some android manufacturer like xiaomi release something like this.

Also, makes sense why Meta kept the form factor because they never had their own mobile device!

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#663

Post by alchemist1e9 »

It’s not realistic to strap a computer to your head and walk around and pass through is a bad idea generally. In my mind EDITH glasses are what should be real today and that’s where my focus has turned. I recently bought a Viture Glasses and their Neckband, they are actually pretty neat but still not viable for walking around in an AR sense. However their Neckband is onto something imho, it’s a good location for wearing computing power. I’m now personally going towards the BLE HUD style glasses for investigating ideas, bought several developer and enterprise kits to tinker with.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#664

Post by kj99 »

nvarsj wrote: post #505
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.

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.

How can you assure us that Vision Pro is nowhere close to that? Do you have one?

As someone who bought the original iPhone, it was extremely impressive, but had many many flaws. The browser was practically unusable over 2g and the whole pinch to zoom the New York Times desktop site was never actually practical.

I think the parallels are clear.

I also bought the original MacBook Air. Now that truly was terrible and stupidly overpriced. More expensive than the Vision Pro when adjusted for inflation, and with major functional problems. Today it’s the world’s most popular laptop.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#665

Post by kj99 »

jnaina wrote: post #654
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…

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 o…

I think you have rose tinted glasses. I had one too, and the browser was garbage over 2g. You forget how much time was spent looking at that checkerboard pattern.

As for email. Proper email client? It was pop3 only, and you had to manually tap to fetch new messages.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#666

Post by slg »

wkat4242 wrote: post #658
steveBK123 wrote: post #647

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

But what is your actual physical work environment like then? Are you standing in the middle of the room and typing into air? I always imagined productivity minded people would still at least use a physical keyboard which limits mobility.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#667

Post by kalleboo »

wkat4242 wrote: post #658
steveBK123 wrote: post #647

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

I don't think Apple wants you to use Mac apps. They want developers to make Vision Pro apps. That's why the Mac integration is the minimum they could get away with.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#668

Post by lmm »

jsjohnst wrote: post #644
bnralt wrote: post #638

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Yep. People forget that the original iphone that could only run built-in apps really was a failure; it was only when they opened up the app store that it exploded (perhaps aided by this Cartmanland marketing strategy).

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#670

Post by Animats »

mvkel wrote: post #615
Animats wrote: post #611

It's a good review. Basically, the thing gives you some screens fixed in world space. You have to be mostly stationary for the effect to work. So it won't replace walking around staring at your cell phone. A lot of thought has gone into the interface for this sort of thing. That's the real achievement here, and that matters. Workplace of the near future - a room full of people, crammed together as on an airplane or i…

I think your description is the absolute best case scenario. In reality, it will collect dust. It needs to "do work" faster, or at least more conveniently, than a computer can. Just needing to put the thing on is a massive hurdle for regular adoption.

> I think your description is the absolute best case scenario.

I tend to agree, but Apple has a big fan base. If anybody else shipped this thing, it would be a very niche product. We know, because others have shipped such things and gone nowhere.

Post reply on HN