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

261–270 of 863 posts

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

#261

Post by jamespo »

veidr wrote: post #231
evan_ wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it won’t. It will still be seen as 4x the price of the Quest 3.

So what? the iPhones have 4x the price of mid-tier Android phones the whole time. The point is, for now the AVP is the only iPhone-tier (Pro Ultra Whatever) VR headset. Meta's crap (I have all of them) is analogous to the mid tier budget phones, in this metaphor. (Even the fantastically expensive Quest Pro is just like... an insult, even though it does have eye tracking which is now absolute minimum table stakes (and…

People can justify the price of an iPhone as they use it ALL the time.

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

#262

Post by outworlder »

> Vision Pro is a meticulously over-engineered “devkit” that is far too heavy to have product-market fit but good enough to seed curiosity into the world

That's exactly what I think. And that's exactly why I bought it.

I have:

* Oculus Rift 1 * HTC Vive * Quest 2

None of those made me want to write apps for them. They have nice games and I spent quality time with them, but just playing. I tried watching videos and it was ok, but it was still better to do that on my TV. I tried actually working with them, and the resolution was not enough.

The Vision Pro? It's the opposite. Games, such as they are, are underwhelming. It doesn't even have many '3d' experiences, windows are mostly flat (for now). And guess what? It excel at all the tasks the others fail at, because it's an iPad with a different form factor. If you can work from an iPad, you can work from the Vision Pro. Even watching videos is a better experience due to the passthrough, as you can still interact with people around you(if you so choose) – you can passthrough with the Quest, but you have to choose between your content and the world.

So now I'm spending my time learning how to work with it. It has incredible potential. It is not the mass market device yet, but the next one should be transformative.

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

#263

Post by gizmo686 »

germinalphrase wrote: post #211
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 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…

There is a major difference between earbuds and sunglasses. There is a lot of subconscious communication that goes on with facial gestures (including but not limited to eye gestures). This is where the sterotype of poker players wearing sunglasses comes from.

Would the new generation be get used to it? Probably. But that does not mean it is healthy. We have gotten used to a lot of things that are objectively bad for us.

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

#264

Post by zitterbewegung »

_heimdall wrote: post #246
gpm wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Didn't Microsoft's hololens first launch around 10 years ago? It was AR rather than VR, but it was absolutely pitched as an early product meant for very specific use cases to act as a proof of concept before consumer versions.

I personally used a HoloLens for a few minutes and it had severe problems with field of view and brightness of the display. AR works for enterprise or the military to train people or present information at least the US military for the HoloLens [1]. Google finally axed the Glass Enterprise project in 2023 which was much longer than the original version.

[1] https://www.theverge.com/2023/9/13/23871859/us-army-microsof... [2] https://support.google.com/glass-enterprise/customer/answer/...

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

#265

Post by divan »

jwells89 wrote: post #70
divan wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not a gamer, but I found shooter games in VR to be extremely cool for procrastination. I can play Contractors for hours. Last winter I had limited opportunities to excercise, so I tried FitXR and it turned out to be insanely engaging. Reality can't give that level of engagement and multisensory feedback. I did boxing and HIIT daily, and while I don't like to sweat like crazy in my living room, that was extremely…

This is a bit of how I feel about Beat Saber modded with community maps. It’s engaging and challenging in a way little else I can do at home is, and it’s pretty good for getting some movement and cardio in to boot. The days I play it’s almost always for an hour and if it weren’t for physical exhaustion I could go longer (once when live-streaming my play to and audio chatting with a family member, I played for closer…

Oh yeah, I listen Prodigy only in Beat Saber now :)

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

#266

Post by whynotmaybe »

whynotminot wrote: post #104
whynotmaybe wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you watch a movie on the vision pro with your family?

People keep vastly overestimating the amount of content that is consumed in group settings. I watch a show / movie with my girlfriend a couple times a week. A nice TV is still better for that obviously. But I watch stuff on my own every single day. Personal media consumption for me is probably 8x my group-based consumption. I would wager most people these days have similar habits.

It's the opposite for me so I'm outside of your "most people"

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

#267

Post by outworlder »

Jasper_ wrote: post #94
gpm wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The optical pathway is pretty much locked in. LEEP was invented in the 80s, and that's still the optical system used today. Compare the size to NASA's VR system from the early 90s. https://images.nasa.gov/details/ARC-1992-AC89-0437-6 It's been 30 years of massive improvements to all of the rest of computers, and VR has only shrunk a couple inches. There's not much else we can do to make it smaller.

I am looking at that picture and to me it definitely looks like way more than a couple of inches.

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

#268

Post by outworlder »

hedora wrote: post #95
65 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll only buy a VR device if it's in the form of glasses, not big goggles I need to strap to my face.

My main concern with the vision pro is that all use cases I know of (other than gaming) work better with some sort of pass through HUD display like the HoloLens. They spent a ton of company resources, weight and power making the wrong form factor emulate the right form factor, and are shipping with zero killer apps. You can’t even let your friends play with it without getting it re-fit to their head at the Apple Stor…

> and are shipping with zero killer apps.

That's ok. That's exactly why they released the 'pro' first.

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

#269

Post by outworlder »

eggbrain wrote: post #65

His point on the significant motion-blur / image quality issues that exists with pass-through is my biggest complaint with the device hardware-wise. I got the prescription lens inserts that Apple had suggested, and when I first put on the device I thought that either my eye doctor had gotten my prescription wrong, or something was defective with my device. The blur is distracting -- and looking further away makes it…

Stupid question: Are you wearing it in an environment with good lighting? Passthrough camera performance suffers a lot in low light, and the blur increases with the longer exposure.

I can read screens "fine" while wearing it (fine as in, I can read them, I wouldn't want to do it for an extended amount of time).

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

#270

Post by divan »

jwells89 wrote: post #70
divan wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not a gamer, but I found shooter games in VR to be extremely cool for procrastination. I can play Contractors for hours. Last winter I had limited opportunities to excercise, so I tried FitXR and it turned out to be insanely engaging. Reality can't give that level of engagement and multisensory feedback. I did boxing and HIIT daily, and while I don't like to sweat like crazy in my living room, that was extremely…

This is a bit of how I feel about Beat Saber modded with community maps. It’s engaging and challenging in a way little else I can do at home is, and it’s pretty good for getting some movement and cardio in to boot. The days I play it’s almost always for an hour and if it weren’t for physical exhaustion I could go longer (once when live-streaming my play to and audio chatting with a family member, I played for closer…

Shooters are less energy demanding though. Even a bit disappointingly so. I even used to put gym hand weights so my muscles get more work to do while playing (also helps with stabilizing the gun, as I don't have gunstock).

Contractors demo:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gjRRoYwPTQ

Post reply on HN