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

881–890 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#881

Post by pquki4 »

kristiandupont wrote: post #43
satvikpendem wrote: post #2

As long as it's still gimped by not having a true productive OS like macOS, ie making everything go through the app store so as to not cannibalize Mac sales, it will be relegated as simply another form factor for the iPad. The iPad could've been a true Surface competitor, where I could run VSCode on it and compile applications natively, but instead it's just become a media consumption device for most people.

It will have a browser. You can do pretty much anything in a browser.

Compile code and run code that has access to local file system and run native command?

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#882

Post by wahnfrieden »

slg wrote: post #716
SirHound wrote: post #699

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No you’d be sitting at a desk with a mouse and keyboard, like today

But that isn't 'The whole room is your "desktop".' If you are restricted to having your desk in front of you, you might as well be looking at virtual screen(s) on your desk.

I’d be sitting on my couch with my wireless Glove80 split keyboard at my sides. Or lying down with the keyboard flanking me. No desk. And I’d move the keyboard to my counter to stand when I feel like it.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#883

Post by deanishe »

zmmmmm wrote: post #634
Civitello wrote: post #567

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

they are paying the price for their obsession with super high resolution. I think it's a mistake, from my perception Quest 3 at 25ppd is nearly good enough, and its panels are nearly half the resolution. They should have traded 20% resolution for 10 deg FOV either side. In fact, with appropriate optics the effective resolutions sacrifice could be even less than that.

They only need hi-res where the user is looking, don't they?

We can't see what's in our peripheral vision clearly, so they should be able to get away with most of the FoV being blocky af, shouldn't they?

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#884

Post by wahnfrieden »

derefr wrote: post #789
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. Not on a plane they don’t. Not in a hotel room on a business trip. IMHo, the Vision Pro is for being somewhere when you’re nowhere; not for being somewhere when you’re already somewhere.

I want to watch stuff or collaborate on projects with my wife on a plane or in a hotel, you just haven’t seen these use cases from Apple yet because the product lacks it in 1.0

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#886

Post by fennecbutt »

camgunz wrote: post #860

My feeling is that Apple went entirely the wrong way here. They made an expensive device that doesn't meaningfully move the needle on AR/VR or AR/VR UX. As a result, they've narrowed the market so much that they can't convince app developers (who they've spent the last few years alienating) to develop for it, and are cannibalizing future sales (to Nilay Patel's point) by convincing people that a lot of these technolo…

Oh, but it's not VR/AR/XR, it's "spatial computing©®™"

"What's a computer©®™"

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#887

Post by fennecbutt »

AlexandrB wrote: post #166
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…

Underlying a lot of these discussions is the assumption that there is a future where this is an actually useful, mass-market device. I'm still not convinced this is true. For example, "killer apps/content" never arrived for 3D TVs and they have largely disappeared from the market. Same with various "waggling" input technologies like the Wiimote and Kinect. There were some compelling uses, like Wii Sports, but these w…

I mean it's the same problem for a lot of stuff, build it and they will come. Apple is super naive to think that they can just jump into this space and yet end up with a polished product (ie Apple's selling point).

I see on scifi all the time where someone flicks/flings a video playing on a device to move it to a larger display surface and it kills me that we actually have the technology to do stuff like this right now...but because every company works in their own interests/don't work together to create standards we don't get to have fun use of tech like that.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#888

Post by gmadsen »

crooked-v wrote: post #269
npunt wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good review. Most interesting part was at 43:00 discussing the ergonomics and weight, which is the real question for everyone hoping to make this a daily driver. He said he could wear it 45 mins before needing to take it off, that it was overstimulating so you need to slow down how quickly you use apps and move things on screen, and that gestures also were fatiguing. You could tell he was trying to be fair but positi…

I've regularly done 2+ hours of light activity (e.g. mini golf, social hangouts) with my Quest 3 without issues, though I will note this is with a third-party head strap specifically designed to be way more ergonomic and comfortable than anything first-party from Meta or Apple [1]. [1]: https://www.bobovr.com/products/bobovr-m3-pro A lot of the physical downsides here are basically self-inflicted by companies trying…

its not really self inflicted when it literally determines how many sales you will have. Plenty of people are put off of VR because of the form factor. Quest looks like a nerdy toy, which does indeed influence who buys and/or uses it

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#889

Post by vaylian »

darkwater wrote: post #798
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…

3500USD, an external battery and still "looking weird", I don't think you are going to see too many of them on planes, unless it's some die-hard Apple fanboy. If they manage to make next iteration slimmer (like, half the size) and with a battery in it, this might start to happen. But the market will be anyway smaller than the smartwatch one.

I still think it's weird how many people's eyes are glued to their phone screen in everyday situations and social settings. I think it's realistic that these headsets become acceptable and normal.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#890

Post by rocketbop »

dwaite wrote: post #232
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…

> 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. This is kinda what Managed Apple IDs are for - the work 'owns' the Apple ID it puts into its management profile and can set policy. Apps write into a separate storage container which the company could remote wip…

I suspect multi account support is not ‘down the priority list’ but purposefully not implemented at least when it comes to iOS. Why make it easier for customers to share iPads at home when they can buy multiple iPads.

I use my iPad so sporadically that it could easily be the house iPad, but I’m signed in with my email and so on it can’t be.

Post reply on HN