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

161–170 of 863 posts

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

#161

Post by _aavaa_ »

SeanAnderson wrote: post #149
njovin wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem isn't the form factor, it's the purpose. Wearing sunglasses is beneficial because it protects my eyes and makes it easier to look at you when you're talking to me. Wearing an AR device is like telling you something more important than our conversation might come up and I need to be able to quickly shift my focus from you to it. Maybe it's my age (early 40s) but it's common for our friend/family group to s…

My assumption is that this expectation will shift as time passes. I can see a future where people use AR, there's a setting that indicates "full focus" vs "distracted", and people will ask others to stay in "full focus" mode when talking. This would minimize the number of notifications the user receives in an effort to lend focus to the conversation. It'll be the same general expectation as what you're describing, bu…

Full focus mode would have to be passthrough with no notifications or external information. I feel like anything less would just be the current phone status quo.

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

#162

Post by wolverine876 »

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…

I'm confused by comments like this one. Apple very specifically designed Vision Pro to address this problem, going to great lengths to make the outside world visible to the user and the user's eyes visible to others, and marketing that they don't want to create isolation. It is also described in the article (where the author thinks they went too far).

What do you think of how the Vision Pro addresses this problem?

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

#163

Post by rtkwe »

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…

Personally I'm betting it's not even a dev kit for future VR devices, though we will almost definitely get an iteration or two of them before we get to what I think is their true goal, AR glasses. There's so much unnecessary stuff here if the goal isn't that, mainly the ridiculous outward facing eye screen, that makes sense if it's just to simulate as close as possible using AR glasses.

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

#164

Post by dmix »

gpm wrote: post #81
fouronnes3 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The cynic in you is overly cynical. Ten years ago was pre oculus rift. We weren't saying anything about VR headsets. Five years ago was pre valve index. We didn't have CPUs in a headset. Nor a battery. Cameras were only used for tracking. The things we were saying would improve is "screen door effect" and "tracking", both of which have.

I’m still amazed Quest 2 was affordable as it was vs the entertainment I got out of it. Heavily with the novelty of being my first VR device.

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

#165

Post by [deleted] »

wolverine876 wrote: post #162
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…

I'm confused by comments like this one. Apple very specifically designed Vision Pro to address this problem, going to great lengths to make the outside world visible to the user and the user's eyes visible to others, and marketing that they don't want to create isolation. It is also described in the article (where the author thinks they went too far). What do you think of how the Vision Pro addresses this problem?

[deleted]

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

#166

Post by Workaccount2 »

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…

This is why linux perpetually has <5% adoption. It's made and maintained by linux enthusiasts who are incapable of understanding how the average person wants to use a computer.

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

#167

Post by diffeomorphism »

joenot443 wrote: post #114
fouronnes3 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

There were a lot of tablets before the iPad but it wasn’t until the iPad that tablets really took off as a serious market segment. Ditto with AirPods and Bluetooth earbuds. In the past, once Apple started pouring R&D money into a specific product type, the entire industry around it tends to advance very quickly. I’m optimistic about the Vision Pro, and I actually think the n+2 Meta release will be much better off for…

Correlation or causation?

Apple tends to jump on the bandwagon late but then turns thing mainstream. That worked well for ultrabooks (e.g. sony vaio, then MacBook air, nowadays every laptop) or earbuds.

The AR/VR or visionsomething^TM case is a bit different in that apple actually has to implement a new market. Thus far they don't seem to be trying that hard.

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

#168

Post by BobaFloutist »

rad_gruchalski wrote: post #133
adamors wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Given that they have that in Fortnite, I'm going to go out on a limb and say it wouldn't be too difficult.

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

#169

Post by wanderingstan »

montagg wrote: post #155
andsoitis wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nowadays it is quite accepted for earbuds Hard disagree. Except for brief interactions like ordering a coffee, I don’t think it is at all socially common for people to keep headphones on when they talk with others. Maybe it varies by culture, or social circle.

It varies. I’m totally fine with it if it’s clear the person can hear and interact with me, and the people I interact with a lot do it to varying degrees, and no one’s offended.

FWIW, I’ve observed in high schoolers that many leave their earbuds in all the time. At this point it’s a fashion statement too.

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

#170

Post by Kwpolska »

Retric wrote: post #131
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 st…

Prescription glasses are a necessity. Sunglasses or AR glasses are not.
Post reply on HN