Live data from Hacker News

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

hugo.blog

531–540 of 863 posts

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

#531
post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's kind of fascinating, because as you say, many of the capabilities are barely surfaced in the user layer yet. But the fundamentals are there. Take a look at this Reddit post for example: https://www.reddit.com/r/VisionPro/comments/1ba5hbd/the_most... The user is pointing out that that the real fridge behind them is reflected by the surface of the virtual object in front of them. And consider on top of that, the f…

I'm with you on how incredible it is from a technical perspective. The most fascinating thing to me is how we've gone from Apple being the pragmatic and real world product focused company, moving slower but making sure what they ship has undeniable practical value, and not promising much beyond ("we don't talk about future products and roadmap"). Compared to the "wow look at that technical prowess, not much useful ri…

completely agree!

I keep seeing people trying to shove this into the narrative of "Apple coming late but doing it better and solving real problems". But it doesn't fit that narrative well. Apple here is early to something else that just happens to look like the thing that people are viewing as the predecessor, and it's utility is highly questionable and full of all kinds of weird gaps. In a telling kind of way, they are actually in part leaning on the aspects they are not trying to sell (Here, look at these immersive experiences! But shhh don't call it VR) - to paper over the fact that the core of what they are really trying to build is just not ready yet.

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

#532

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…

Having tried the VP out for a week, I categorically disagree that VR is going to have remotely this level of impact on humanity. Having to wear something on your head to compute is fatiguing and isolating. You can’t bring your existing peripherals and audio equipment unless they’re proprietary and wireless. Passthrough video is nauseating and blurry even at the highest refresh rates. The paradigm is also intrinsicall…

> I categorically disagree that VR is going to have remotely this level of impact on humanity.

This feels like a comment from Blackberry or MS making fun of the first iPhone.

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

#533
post #481

Coming from a senior Oculus lead, the most interesting thing about this write up for me, is what it lacks: it says almost nothing about the software stack / operating system. Still 100% talking about hardware at the bottom and end user applications at the other end. But there is no discussion of the platform which to me is actually the highest value proposition Apple is bringing here. In short: Apple has made a fully…

This was my immediate takeway from using Quest 3 as well. Zuck has stated forever that he wants a platform, yet when it comes time to do the hard work, we just end up with an Android distro running a React app.

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

#534
post #532

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having tried the VP out for a week, I categorically disagree that VR is going to have remotely this level of impact on humanity. Having to wear something on your head to compute is fatiguing and isolating. You can’t bring your existing peripherals and audio equipment unless they’re proprietary and wireless. Passthrough video is nauseating and blurry even at the highest refresh rates. The paradigm is also intrinsicall…

> I categorically disagree that VR is going to have remotely this level of impact on humanity. This feels like a comment from Blackberry or MS making fun of the first iPhone.

Having actually tried the thing, and having used VR for several years before that, I’d like to think that my opinion is not just a simple knee-jerk response.

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

#535
post #486
post #481

Coming from a senior Oculus lead, the most interesting thing about this write up for me, is what it lacks: it says almost nothing about the software stack / operating system. Still 100% talking about hardware at the bottom and end user applications at the other end. But there is no discussion of the platform which to me is actually the highest value proposition Apple is bringing here. In short: Apple has made a fully…

This has been my main complaint with Oculus all the way since the Rift days. At that point I assumed it was forthcoming within a few years yet here we are 8 years later and somehow it's not all that different. I don't understand how Oculus/Meta isn't drastically ahead at this point on software.

Actually, MSFT made the same blunder when it came to HoloLens. Well .. they did start to build some of the core spatial context (and had a fabulous headstart). But somewhere along the way, they yielded to Unity/Unreal. This was mind boggling to me as giving away the keys to the platform to another party was literally the founding story of Microsoft (with IBM having made the blunder). I wonder if engineering leadership recalls history when making such strategic goofs.

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

#536
post #446
post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

^ agree with this take. If you're slow with tech, then this is amazing! And I think Apple has been great at making interfaces that are natural to use and easy to get into if you're not tech-savy. But for someone who's used to multi-task, or perform operations without looking at what I'm actually operating on, it sucks. I tried using keynote to create diagrams in Vision pro and the experience was so infuriating, I had…

Can’t you just use a mouse and keyboard as controllers? It’s hard to imagine any hardware peripheral that would improve on them for making a keynote or we’d already be using it on our desktops.

This was just one example, but yeah if the answer is always “just use a mouse and keyboard” then the experiences are going to be quite limited. I guess I’m used to the high interactivity of experiences on the Quest and the Vision Pro is just a glorified screen to me.

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

#537
post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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…

> Are their products more reliable, more fully featured, and objectivley better than their competitiors? No they are not. This is your personal opinion. My personal opinion, is very much the opposite. > 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 ye…

> > Are their products more reliable, more fully featured, and objectivley better than their competitiors? No they are not.

> This is your personal opinion. My personal opinion, is very much the opposite.

Yeah, the GP's personal opinion seems very much the opposite (like yours) as well. Quote:

"I actually love Macbook Pros. IMO they are the best Laptop ever built."

Not sure what caused the dissonance. Seems like trying to prove they're not an Apple fanboy or sth.

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

#538

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they can't fix the ever so slight blurryness for everyone it will continue to be a niche product simply because only a small niche wants to accept such a thing. Or only a small niche of people has eyes that can deal with it. Btw I consider my Meta Quest 3 to be a terrible product in almost every way, from hardware to software, from blurryness, from weight, from app availability, from PC compatability, from having…

> the ever so slight blurryness for everyone As the article mentions, this is an intentional thing they've done to cover up the remaining vestiges of the screen door effect. The better the screens get, the less and less they'll have any reason to do it.

I'm not talking about blurryness on the Vision Pro, I mean blurryness in general. I found the Meta Quest 3 to be very blurry

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

#539
post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 fo…

[deleted]

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

#540
Finally demod one of these things.

Yes the VR experience was pretty dang sick, but to be real… the pass though is not as good your own vision. Is it ground breaking? Yes. But it’s v1.0, details are fuzzy, the color palette was meh, and we’ve still yet to invent an instrument with the dynamic contrast of the human eye.

I tell you what was quite fascinating: the audio. Nearly every clip they shot they must have used a head dummy spatial microphone and hired industry best to master the audio tracks. My eyes weren’t fooled, but my ears were (other than a roll off under 142hz or so); mainly due to the phase and eq shifting and their use of multiple sources along the head band.

I’d really like to see far more focus on the audio side.

And as far as actual use cases? They need to go after live sports. Otherwise it’ll stay a gadget of the technophile.

Post reply on HN