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

751–760 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#751

Post by __m »

Findecanor wrote: post #476
deadbabe wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s my understanding that eye tracking isn’t great as an input method, it should be used more for stuff like rendering or NPC interactions.

I think that eye tracking perhaps could be used to enhance gesture-based input methods though. It could provide a hint at which object a gesture is directed at in cases where that would be ambiguous. I have tried eye tracking as primary input method some years ago in another setting, and I very much did not like the experience.

> I think that eye tracking perhaps could be used to enhance gesture-based input methods

That's how it works on the Vision Pro. I didn't really feel annoyed by it, but make sure the device is calibrated to your eyes, or the results might not be that great.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#752

Post by klausa »

deutschepost wrote: post #740
huytersd wrote: post #700

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is it exactly. I’m surprised the HN crowd isn’t immediately picking up the bandwidth issues with streaming unlimited 4k screens from your MacBook.

Noted that this would be a non issue if you could just connect a cable between your Mac and the Vision. You already have the huge battery pack dangling off the side. This is an apple issue, not a technical one.

Not really?

Do the math of how much bandwidth like three windows/screens (because with this model each window is basically its own screen) at 4K/100hz/10bit color each would take.

You're at limits of TB4 _very quickly_.

You can compress the image, try to do something smart with foveated rendering (only stream the windows that users are looking at; but that breaks if you want to keep a window with logs in your peripheral vision), use chroma subsampling, etc; but those all are varying trade-offs with relation to image quality.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#753

Post by rpmisms »

patapong wrote: post #26

I think we are now at a stage where VR hardware has surpassed software. Between this and the Quest 3, we have powerful, polished and consumer friendly devices, but beyond a few niches (fitness, simulation, gaming to some extent), there is nothing to convince users to put the headsets on. I am hoping we will see a lot of experimentation in the coming years, and I am excited for what the Apple ecosystem will bring to t…

But at the same time, the hardware is not where it needs to be for ubiquity. We need ~60PPD, great FOV, and lighter hardware to really break the barrier. Vision Pro is at the limits, but still not quite there, and we all know the 90/10 rule.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#754

Post by huytersd »

deutschepost wrote: post #740
huytersd wrote: post #700

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is it exactly. I’m surprised the HN crowd isn’t immediately picking up the bandwidth issues with streaming unlimited 4k screens from your MacBook.

Noted that this would be a non issue if you could just connect a cable between your Mac and the Vision. You already have the huge battery pack dangling off the side. This is an apple issue, not a technical one.

No, it’s a processor and graphics card issue as well. You have to actually render a potentially unlimited number of 4K screens (at least the ones in your direct view) on the Mac Pro. It was never built to do that.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#755

Post by danielscrubs »

Steve Jobs is gone. I’ve prophesied that the Apple stock will go up like crazy (the OS is in a near duopoly after all), but the magic spark (it just works/delight/polish factor) will be worse and worse as more and more employees and processes change.

Journalists are the easiest to delight so if they can’t even do that…

All that said, I do think they will succeed eventually with this product, with years of using us as beta testers and shrinking the size of it.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#756

Post by __m »

ls612 wrote: post #490
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…

This was always going to happen. The human eye has a field of view and dynamic range no display technology can hope to match anytime soon. The future of AR is not reprojecting the outside world on a screen; it is screens which can become transparent.

For that to happen we would need a transparent display that can block light. Seeing content on an additive display will always look somewhat transparent, with no hope of displaying blacks. The augmentation on the vision pro look so much better than on a HoloLens2, it's like looking at 3d printed objects.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#757

Post by theferalrobot »

lelandfe wrote: post #706
WheatMillington wrote: post #620

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It is miles ahead of the competition I really don't think this is correct. It's a bit better at some things than any of its competition, and it's a little worse in some ways too. Other than the displays I don't think you can say it's substantially ahead at all.

Quotes from The Verge’s review: > the Vision Pro has the best video passthrough I’ve ever seen on the sharpest VR displays any normal person will ever come across > the eye and hand tracking control system… is light years beyond any other consumer hand or eye tracking systems It calls out other aspects similarly.

It can't even play games. You can do everything the Vision Pro can do and more on a quest 3 for 1/7th the price. The screen is not as sharp but the FOV is better on the quest (which they mention in the verge article), it has no battery dongle and it has actual tracked controllers if you want to use them (but you can fall back to hand tracking where it makes sense).

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#758

Post by huytersd »

parentheses wrote: post #726
ravenstine wrote: post #580

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I'm surprised we still don't have an X-like "render on the drawing device" model. Rather than sending pixel, you send a higher abstraction model from which the UI can be drawn.

Then you lose the power of a second computing device if all view rendering happens on the AVP.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#759

Post by Auracle »

tsimionescu wrote: post #746
ravenstine wrote: post #580

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> but I can't get unlimited AR desktops for software development etc? You can't because it's computationally impossible. There is simply no computing device that can render unlimited high-res desktops at 60Hz per eye. Not to mention the need to stream all that data to the headset - since you're not going to put a high-end graphics card needed to even attempt this in anything approaching a wearable form factor. Good l…

True, but apart from video/games/possibly a browser they absolutely don’t need to refresh at 60hz. I’m surprised they couldn’t somehow work in a “one nice screen, the rest refresh when needed” solution - though maybe that’s just too clunky for Apple.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#760

Post by ActorNightly »

aniforprez wrote: post #651
ActorNightly wrote: post #596

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 t…

I honestly think that people like you experienced smartphones in mid 2010s and just extrapolating back to what they think they were in late 2000s,

When iPhone came out, the mobile internet was so shit and screen was very low res, so the benefit of having a full touchscreen was minimal (mostly being able to select things directly, but that was a very small advantage). Mobile web wasn't a thing. You had to have wifi for any real speed. And if you had wifi, you were likely in a building where you could sit down, and there were things like netbooks and mobile pcs that were just better than the iPhone for doing web stuff. Even people with iPhones still mainly used them as iPods and phones before 3g cellular.

The keyboard on Blackberries was in fact better UX because it was easier to use and faster to type on, without any delay in appearance. The on screen keyboards were all shit until swipe typing became defacto standard.

And then you look at the drawbacks, like no removable battery, no microsd expansion, no shit proprietary cables that would break, no copy/paste, e.t.c, all of them absolutely make the UX horrible.

Post reply on HN