Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Vision Pro: What we got wrong at Oculus that Apple got right

hugo.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 863 posts

Re: Vision Pro: What we got wrong at Oculus that Apple got right

#131

Post by Retric »

throwaway74432 wrote: post #101

If people wanted to wear a phone screen taped over their eyes out in public, the technical limitations wouldn't barely make a dent in that desire. But the vast majority of people want to have real in-person human interactions when they're out in the world. That's what the makers of these devices fail to see. But they can't see that because they're self-described VR enthusiasts. If they talk to non VR enthusiasts (whi…

> Most people think it's rude to talk to each other indoors with sunglasses on.

Nobody finds it rude to talk to each other with actual glasses on. If AR had similar utility and minimal impact on seeing each others eyes, then the same would be true. Sunglasses prevent people from tracking where people are looking which is why they come off as rude.

> That's the slimmest form factor you're going to get, and it still steps on the toes of human connection.

The minimalist form factor for AR is contact lenses not glasses. Several companies are working on them though it's a long way from a consumer product.

Re: Vision Pro: What we got wrong at Oculus that Apple got right

#132

Post by arnaudsm »

idontknowifican wrote: post #99
arnaudsm wrote: post #37

After obsessing on thinness and weight for a decade on the iPhone and MacBook, Apple inexplicably did the opposite and missed the opportunity to focus on the major painpoint or VR : every headset hurts after 30 minutes. The Vision Pro is heavier than most flagship headsets. I have 1000 hours on SteamVR, but coming back is a chore. And my face is red after every session.

isn't it 10 grams heavier than an oculus?

26% heavier (135g) than the Quest 3. And the default Apple single-strap band favors aesthetics over weight distribution, which makes it even worse.

Re: Vision Pro: What we got wrong at Oculus that Apple got right

#133

Post by rad_gruchalski »

adamors wrote: post #105
skc wrote: post #96

I recently saw Dune 2 on IMAX. If the Vision Pro can soon replicate that experience they will print (even more) money and could lock the big film studios down forever pretty much. That is the killer use case. Everything else seems like fluff.

Solo-movie watching seems like _a_ usecase, but I'd argue most people don't watch movies alone.

How difficult would it be to build an app where your friends could join remotely, watch the same movie, and appear right next to you? With good enough latency you could talk to each other like you were sitting right next to each other?

Re: Vision Pro: What we got wrong at Oculus that Apple got right

#134

Post by bradly »

fouronnes3 wrote: post #67
noneeeed wrote: post #30

I think the description of the VisionPro as a dev kit is spot on. It's also a beta product in many way. Apple know full well that this is not a mass market product, they have made no attempt to make it even remotely affordable to most people. But they also know that every aspect of the hardware will improve over the next decade, and as it does they will have ironed out many of the problems with how we use AR/VR and w…

Hopefully you're right, but the cynic in me thinks we've been saying the same thing about every VR headset that has come out in the last ten years.

Apple has a history to sticking with things like this. Watch and HomePod were both seen as over-priced and sold poorly the first iterations. Apple leadership had the confidence to see through those initial versions. This was part of the internal culture during my time at Apple.

Re: Vision Pro: What we got wrong at Oculus that Apple got right

#135

Post by andsoitis »

bunnie wrote: post #128

Maybe I'm old fashioned but one of the biggest barriers for me adopting VR/AR is there isn't a socially acceptable way to "duck out" of a VR experience you're just not into. I've been given a couple of demos of headsets by friends and more often than not by the end I feel trapped -- you're strapped into a thing that fully occupies your visual field, yet it's obvious and socially awkward when you take it off. And your…

> And your eyes are both covered so there isn't a good way to non-verbally communicate waning interest levels...I suppose a solution is to simply care less if I hurt my friend's feelings but I'd also like a way to spend time with friends without feeling trapped.

I hadn’t considered those antisocial patterns that the technology is foisting on users, but I suppose one can also juts directly communicate verbally. Could work in low context cultures but not so well in high context cultures.

> The eye tracking thing also kind of weirds me out from a privacy standpoint.

Indeed. While I am less worried about Apple “going after me in a direct targeted nefarious way”, I don’t appreciate more levers for technology to disintermediate my manipulate my behavior, emotions, or interactions.

Re: Vision Pro: What we got wrong at Oculus that Apple got right

#136

Post by ugh123 »

IMHO Meta's #1 mistake with VR thus far has been presentation. No good press has ever come with screenshots of silly cartoon avatars (with or without legs). The focus on games highlighted its lack of utility. AVP only highlighted utility, which draws instant connection to our daily lives.

Re: Vision Pro: What we got wrong at Oculus that Apple got right

#137

Post by Cthulhu_ »

throwaway74432 wrote: post #101

If people wanted to wear a phone screen taped over their eyes out in public, the technical limitations wouldn't barely make a dent in that desire. But the vast majority of people want to have real in-person human interactions when they're out in the world. That's what the makers of these devices fail to see. But they can't see that because they're self-described VR enthusiasts. If they talk to non VR enthusiasts (whi…

People used to think it's rude to stare at a phone screen too, but here we are.

I'm not saying VR will become as normalised as smartphones, mind you, just that it's a possible outcome. That said, VR / AR as we know it now has been a thing for a while now and it hasn't taken off as much.

Re: Vision Pro: What we got wrong at Oculus that Apple got right

#138

Post by diffeomorphism »

throwaway74432 wrote: post #101

If people wanted to wear a phone screen taped over their eyes out in public, the technical limitations wouldn't barely make a dent in that desire. But the vast majority of people want to have real in-person human interactions when they're out in the world. That's what the makers of these devices fail to see. But they can't see that because they're self-described VR enthusiasts. If they talk to non VR enthusiasts (whi…

It used to be extremely rude to not take off headphones when people talk to you. Nowadays it is quite accepted for earbuds and "transparency mode" is even a selling point.

My guess would be that once AR allows easy sharing, e.g. showing others a funny AR cat video, it will quickly become socially accepted to wear frequently.

Re: Vision Pro: What we got wrong at Oculus that Apple got right

#139

Post by whynotminot »

ilrwbwrkhv wrote: post #28
ramboldio wrote: post #12

> The Apple Vision Pro is the Northstar the VR industry needed, whether we admit it or not I think that sums it up pretty well. More companies should launch products like that!

It's not though. It has all the problems of previous VR headsets. Heavy, digs into your face, gets warm and sweaty, field of view is limited.

It has many of the problems, but it also has crucial improvements (mostly nails the user interface, vastly better pass-through, massively better screens). Did you read the article or just immediately come here to drop comments?

Re: Vision Pro: What we got wrong at Oculus that Apple got right

#140

Post by ryandrake »

homefree wrote: post #53
whywhywhywhy wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's gone through so much reshuffling and clearly been kicked around internally between managers/PMs. The earlier versions were much easier to use and the later ones can become quite a nightmare to setup navigating the oculus/meta/facebook account silliness then ultimately it all feels a lot jankier than very early versions of the software both in Rift and Quest respectively. Think if Zuck believes in this going forw…

Yeah it's wildly, embarrassingly bad - to such a point it feels like Zuck must not be using it. Maybe most of his attention is on the AI stuff and the Ray Bans? There's a ton of half-baked old ideas in the UI, it's extremely confusing. Even basic stuff like trying to add my dad as a friend is super hard to do. Literally every person I've helped set it up has also had to do a full manual restore (holding down hardware…

Attaching a computer-tethered VR display should be as much of a non-event as plugging in a monitor. The Rift’s software experience is so unnecessarily sad.
Post reply on HN