Live data from Hacker News

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

hugo.blog

211–220 of 863 posts

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

#211

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 in my late 30’s, and I was a high school educator for about a decade. Teenagers have become quite comfortable holding an entire conversation while wearing earbuds. As an ancient and outdated old person, my initial gut reaction was that it was… a bit rude(?); however, these teenagers just internalized that audio pass-through was a thing, and wearing earbuds didn’t indicate a lack of attention to the conversant. My point being, we may not be comfortable having a conversation indoors with sunglasses on today - but that could change in a flash and only ‘old people’ would even notice.

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

#212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dunno. Some people have trouble reading emotions from other people's facial expressions. A heads-up display that conveys this sort of information in real-time could help improve the conversation. Or pulling up highlights from the last time a conversation occurred so you can more easily pick up where you left off. Of course, some people will feel like these changes reduce the humanity of the interaction because you'…

I agree that a CRM mode would indeed be very valuable, but I'm skeptical of such a feature shipping given that a similar thing could be surfaced on the phone but I've never even heard of people using it.

I agree it would be breaking some new grounds. The only things that I can think of right now are tech like Babel Fish earbuds, which strive to translate conversations in real-time, and Google Lens for real-time visual translations.

I did make good use of Google Lens when traveling to France last year. I found myself engaging with the world by looking through my phone's camera frequently as it made understanding restaurant menus much easier.

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

#213
post #185

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 would encourage you to try out both the Quest 3 and the Apple Vision Pro for an extended period of time. If you had asked people during the advent of the television, they would have expressed the same opinion about people wanting social connection instead of sitting in front of a box.

And they would be right. Television did fuck social connection. And the smartphone did it much worse.

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

#214
post #203

The author of this article and quite a few people in this HN thread all seem to be mainly looking at Vision Pro through the lens of VR gaming. Why else would the author return his Vision Pro? What makes Vision Pro truly interesting to me is that we can replace our laptop screen with a view containing a larger display and multiple ancillary displays.

Except most reviews find the fov and resolution inadequate for desktop work, and eschewing gamers cuts out the majority of existing VR enthusiasts.

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

#215

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 in my late 30’s, and I was a high school educator for about a decade. Teenagers have become quite comfortable holding an entire conversation while wearing earbuds. As an ancient and outdated old person, my initial gut reaction was that it was… a bit rude(?); however, these teenagers just internalized that audio pass-through was a thing, and wearing earbuds didn’t indicate a lack of attention to the conversant. My…

I appreciate this observation.

It identifies that rudeness comes from lack of attention and that communicating attention can change within a cultural context.

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

#216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I found the killer app for me with AVP: working. I have my screens in front of me while I'm in front a roller-standing desk with really nice passthrough being able to see my garden outside. Everything looks crisp and the music quality is excellent

What kind of work do you do?

Software eng. It's been amazing to have my terminal, IDE , github in Safari on one side, apple music in the back, news tickers above the screen, and being able to resize, bring them anywhere with me

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

#217

No matter how much I contemplate about it, there was still no “killer” app that affords me to buy a VR set. I’ve tried them, it’s nice. But it really has no place in my life. And how could this change? Even with better displays etc. the whole idea of disconnecting my main sense - the eyes - from my surroundings is so strange to me that it seems irreconcilable. Can anybody relate?

Racing sims are the killer app, because depth perception really helps with sense of speed, and tight corners on a monitor are often outside the field of view and you can't just turn your head to look at them. Even then, it's not something I can do indefinitely. I've played GT7 on a friend's PSVR2, and sometimes elevation changes in particular tend to mess up the brain for a moment. It's somewhat disconcerting. Also,…

No offense, but I think you either don’t understand how niche racing sims are or don’t understand that “killer app” is meant to convey an app which justifies the existence of the device for a broad segment of the market.

And, if anything, Half Life Alyx remains the killer _gaming_ app (and it probably isn’t either if I’m being honest).

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

#218

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 think you could make the exact same argument about almost any tech device, like the iPhone itself which is wildly popular along with the spinoffs.

Also VR isn’t what companies, Apple at least, care about. It’s a stepping stone to AR which is why the AVP does a “fake AR” of sorts as its primary mode of operation. You have to walk before you run which is also why Apple pushed VR/ARKit so hard even before they had a device to really take full advantage of it (as in a device that’s not just holding an iPad up and pointing it at table, all of 5 people care about that).

The Overton window will shift if people get true utility out of VR/AR in the same way it’s shifted on everything else. Right now there just isn’t anything compelling enough to force that shift but I think it will happen quickly when there is.

And before “I find X compelling”, ok, that’s great for you, for the vast majority of people the tech and/or use-cases are not there yet.

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

#219

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.

But, how the average person wants to use a computer is extremely, irreconcilably different from how the 5% (or 2% probably but whatever, doesn't matter) want to use their computers.

So... sniff sniff what's that smell? The market working is it then?

Both Vitamix blenders and recumbent bicycles have less market share than desktop Linux. Is that because recumbent bike makers just really have no idea how people want to ride bicycles, or...

yeah

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

#220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

There's an important difference: the subtle face mimicry is extremely important for sub-conscious (and conscious) communication. Having headphones on is rude because it indicates that the other person is not interested in hearing what you have to say. The problem with having an opaque visor covering your face is not that it's rude, it's that you completely lose the non-verbal part of communication. This is why email…

It used to be rude because people understood it to signal that.

With younger people earbuds seem more like a fashion statement (you also don't take off ear rings to talk to people) and the noise cancelling/transparency will actually do the opposite: filter out background noise so that you can be heard more clearly.

Similarly taking out a Nokia used to signal that you will not be paying attention for a while. Nowadays it might instead be you taking a nice photo, showing off something to others etc.

VR headsets are definitely not at this point yet, but I am not so sure they never will be.

Post reply on HN