Live data from Hacker News

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

hugo.blog

331–340 of 863 posts

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

#331

The current model is not going to work, but it is a large leap to the ideal state of the future world to come. Probably we will adjust but it will be an odd world to adjust to when we have this thing over our face all day

I don’t see it as an ideal future if they don’t let you have root and run unsigned code. A dystopia created by the ad industry seems way more likely.

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

#332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As long as Apple keeps it locked down like an iPad, I don’t see much of a future for the device replacing general purpose computers in the workforce.

50% of all our employees choose Mac over PCs. When you wear an Apple Vision Pro and look at your Macbook, it transfers the screen to Apple Vision and allows you to duplicate and extend. No other PC will have this level of integration.

>No other PC will have this level of integration.

"640K software is all the memory anybody would ever need on a computer."

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

#333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

My question is why does it seem like only Apple can do this, over and over? Why are they the only ones who seem to be able to knock a product category out of the park and legitimize it? Is it just the vast amount of money? Are they the only ones who can create products? Is everyone else that bad? Competitors work for ages and ages fighting each other, refining v1, v2, v2.1, v2.2, v2.25, and then suddenly Apple comes…

This. I consider myself a VR/AR enthusiast and I've had many VR headsets since the DK1, included Hololens 2 (and now Vision Pro). The day I started using Hololens 2 I just though "Wow, I could wear this for hours and even do real work on this if the displays and performance were a bit better". The product was simply amazing but it had a few issues (mainly performance) that it limited the device to very specific use cases.

Microsoft decided to mostly abandon the project, move/fire most of the team and give up rather than keep spending resources on a product that had an incredible potential... What would happen if Microsoft released a headset like Hololens 2 capable of running Windows apps for consumers at a similar price to AVP? They have Windows Mixed Reality, an almost infinite software catalogue, and the capabilities to do it... buy they simply don't (think about the Surface).

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

#334
post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple have only had 1 successful product, and thats a flat device with a screen for media consumption. iPod, iPhone, and iPad are just different sizes of this device. The only thing Apple have done which elevated themselves above their peers is have marketing which positioned them higher in the market. Remember those Black and White ads of Steve Jobs next to Ghandi, Malcolm X, and Charlie Chaplin? They are paying off…

That interpretation seems pretty out of sync with their financial history across divisions, their operating margin across divisions, their customer loyalty across divisions, and pretty much everyone's experience of the world, but maybe you're right. You may not like their products, and you may think their customers are idiots hypnotized by villianous marketers or something, but that's kind of the point of it all: by…

>You may not like their products, and you may think their customers are idiots hypnotized by villianous marketers or something.

Thats quite a stretch to assume that opinion from my comment?

I actually love Macbook Pros. IMO they are the best Laptop ever built. However in the global market of laptops they are not patrticularly successful. The entiety of the MacOS ecosystem (of which Macbook Pros are a small percentage) barely breaks 20% of the market share.

Are their products more reliable, more fully featured, and objectivley better than their competitiors? No they are not. The reason they are regarded as a more premium option in the market is not because they make less product with more profit margin, its because they have had an incredibly clever marketing department for the last 20 years meticulously curating their brand presence and public perception into being the most premium tech company which produces the best products.

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

#335

My two cents (as an owner of a Vision Pro): 1) This is a beta product and I wouldnt recommend it to anyone that is not a developer or in a position to create apps for it, 2) this is going to have as big of an impact on humanity as the computer or the internet did and every engineer or aspiring entrepreneur should pay it attention. This device is magical. Yes it's too heavy, yes there are not enough apps, yes sharing…

Did you own prior VR headsets? If so, what is different about this one?

I also have been telling people that VR is magical and that while both current hardware and the current software has issues it will get better and that this stuff is going to have a big impact on humanity... only, I've been telling people this for just shy of a decade now ;P. I don't see the Apple Vision Pro as either the product that made any of this magical nor is it the product that made any of this viable... it is just yet another incrementally-improved product in a category that has been on the verge of getting it right for, well, forever.

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

#337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Has Apple ever put out a "Pro" version of a product before the "normal" version? Yes they introduced the MacBook Pro before the MacBook.

I did not know that, however that is a bit different since they had the Powerbook. So that's more of a rebranding than a new product. I do realize that the name change came with a switch from PowerPC to Intel.

Even with the PowerBook, the PowerBook came before the iBook.

The Mac (Pro) came before the iMac/Mini etc too

The pro moniker is just branding but they usually start with the pro line for more expensive hardware.

Even with the iPhone, the current pro line is a continuation of the main line iPhone that evolved via the X.

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

#338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It would also be nice if a company as big as Meta could invest enough to make the Mac experience not literally "go and buy a different machine."

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

#339

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?

I own 2 VR headsets, primarily for gaming. I've had a lot of fun with stuff like Beat Saber or Superhot VR, and Half Life Alyx is an incredible experience that could only exit with VR. Despite that, VR is pretty much just a cool toy. Yes there are cool and interesting experiences in VR, but there are also a lot of limitations, not all of which are technological. I think VR will stay around for a while, but I don't se…

The fact that superhot is mentioned so little here tells me what i should think of the opinions of these posters. Q3 + superhot is an amazing experience. It’s fun for social game nights and also decent exercise.

AVPro is the best thing to happen to Q3 because the Q3 is ready for prime time at a price point people want and, despite metas reputation, with an open enough platform to support general computing. If you aren’t a gamer or aren’t consuming 3d content, yeah VR isn’t for you. But otherwise, yeah it’s a pretty cool experience for the price.

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

#340
post #335

My two cents (as an owner of a Vision Pro): 1) This is a beta product and I wouldnt recommend it to anyone that is not a developer or in a position to create apps for it, 2) this is going to have as big of an impact on humanity as the computer or the internet did and every engineer or aspiring entrepreneur should pay it attention. This device is magical. Yes it's too heavy, yes there are not enough apps, yes sharing…

Did you own prior VR headsets? If so, what is different about this one? I also have been telling people that VR is magical and that while both current hardware and the current software has issues it will get better and that this stuff is going to have a big impact on humanity... only, I've been telling people this for just shy of a decade now ;P. I don't see the Apple Vision Pro as either the product that made any of…

Other headsets are like a DC film and the Vision Pro is like a marvel film before endgame. The differences (that matter in GP’s context) are qualitative rather than quantitative, and a big distinction is the shift from VR gaming, which most incumbents and current VR fans won’t “get” nearly as fast as the public will (once things get going).

Somewhat ironically, I have no interest in showing people my AVP, I use it for hours everyday but showing it to people feels weird in the same way showing your neighbor your workstation and monitors feels weird. (Part of that is, of course, that I’m not going to give them my laptop to run Mac virtual display, which means they won’t fully “get” it anyhow.)

In contrast the quest devices are practically begging to be shown off but lie in disuse a majority of the time, especially if you don’t have time for gaming.

Post reply on HN