Vision Pro: What we got wrong at Oculus that Apple got right • Hacker News Board

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

#631

Post by baby » Sat, Mar 16, 2024, 8:32 AM UTC

devit wrote: post #548

zmmmmm wrote: 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…

To support copy&paste all you need is a common format for 3D objects, like HTML is for 2D documents; glTF might be a reasonable candidate. The problem with the Apple approach is that there are no apps and games, and there probably won't be many given it's a 3500$ device with few users that Apple exerts its tyrannical grip over (or if there will be, they will be ports of Unity/Unreal, PC or Android VR apps, not using…

^ exactly this. The problem with the Vision Pro is that there is nothing to do, whereas the Quest 3 is driven by cool experiences

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

#632

Post by makeitdouble » Sat, Mar 16, 2024, 8:35 AM UTC

cruffle_duffle wrote: post #592

makeitdouble wrote: post #512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple has made a fully realized spatial operating system I'm not sure what you mean precisely. Apple doesn't seem to have done more than windows with persistent positions. This isn't nothing, but it's also not something that has tremendous value for a headset that you only wear 30 or 45 minutes at a time. And they have little to no management of these floating windows. I'm really not holding my breath for Apple to…

Other people will come up with the right way to do spacial windowing… but they’ll fuck up somehow and Apple will take it, refine it, polish it, and “win”

That's Apple from 2 decades ago.

Current day Apple and its management launches products with weird twists ("send your pulse to your loved ones", "this method of input will stay in history alongside the mouse"), to then cut it down to only the features people really care about, shut it out from competiting OSes, still get the competition to execute better on that limited set of features, and get sued and forced to remove their most advanced feature after months of media humiliation.

That's why people get back to the first iPhone 17 years ago when they want to predict a bright future for the AVP. I still want to see it push the field forward, but odds are not in its favor IMHO.

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

#633

Post by mort96 » Sat, Mar 16, 2024, 8:52 AM UTC

Aerroon wrote: post #528

Nevermark wrote: post #509

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me it is not a novelty, it has completely stuck. Yes, on comfort for 10 hours. I have even worked 12 hours, then watched a long 3D movie (Blade Runner 2049, Dune I, etc.) without hesitation. I cannot imagine going back to only physical screens. I have a 98" monitor with two 55" monitors in portrait angled towards me on either side (heights all match), all wall mounted. Truly wonderful! But this has replaced that…

> • Never needing to put on or take off reading glasses to see far, or within inches. Can you expand on this? Does it basically have built in vision correction? This actually sounds like a 'killer' feature if you don't need to mess with glasses.

It has optics to correct for vision problems yeah, you give Apple your prescription when buying the Vision Pro.

But more importantly, your eyes are always focusing at a consistent 1ish meter in front of you. That's why you don't have to switch vision correction ever when using the Vision Pro (or any VR display).

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

#634

Post by sunshinerag » Sat, Mar 16, 2024, 9:02 AM UTC

devit wrote: post #548

zmmmmm wrote: 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…

To support copy&paste all you need is a common format for 3D objects, like HTML is for 2D documents; glTF might be a reasonable candidate. The problem with the Apple approach is that there are no apps and games, and there probably won't be many given it's a 3500$ device with few users that Apple exerts its tyrannical grip over (or if there will be, they will be ports of Unity/Unreal, PC or Android VR apps, not using…

Tyrannical grip on users who paid 3500$? That indicates no understanding of said users.

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

#635

Post by jjfoooo4 » Sat, Mar 16, 2024, 9:06 AM UTC

zmmmmm wrote: 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…

To me the interesting bit is that an even a VR executive a decade plus into working in the field doesn’t find this device compelling enough to own it.

I get that the thesis is that this version is the devkit etc, but viable consumer product status (read: enough adoption for the device to be profitable) seems very far away

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

#636

Post by SergeAx » Sat, Mar 16, 2024, 9:21 AM UTC

zmmmmm wrote: 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…

Oculus is a gaming device and doesn't have a "productivity" ambition. I believe it is because 3D glasses has very limited productivity application. But who knows, for people who think that 13" laptop is okay for work, Vision Pro may become something better for comparable price.

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

#637

Post by Almondsetat » Sat, Mar 16, 2024, 9:23 AM UTC

adastra22 wrote: post #614

Almondsetat wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>disconnecting my main sense - the eyes - from my surroundings which headsets are you referring to? surely not the ones in the article since they have very good passthrough

Passthrough will never be good enough so as to get rid of the sense of disconnect.

You seem to speak from experience, which headsets have you tried?

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

#638

Post by nntwozz » Sat, Mar 16, 2024, 9:33 AM UTC

zmmmmm wrote: 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…

Software sells systems is the motto.

Apple is enamored with vertical integration which gives them control on a whole other level compared to their competitors; feels like history repeating.

What's different with AVP compared to previous products is that it starts off even better thanks to Apple's own custom chips. There's also the amazing network effects of their ever-growing ecosystem.

Competitors don't have all this, so they will struggle to compete on the high-end. The intention of Apple is clearly indicated by the price of AVP, they want the profits at the top, let the rest fight over the scraps at the bottom with crummy privacy-invasive software and poor integration/interoperability.

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

#639

Post by IshKebab » Sat, Mar 16, 2024, 9:39 AM UTC

averageRoyalty wrote: post #501

IshKebab wrote: post #499

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are drastically ahead. They have VR games, which are the only real reason to own a VR headset at the moment (and for at least 5 years).

They are drastically ahead in the VR gaming space. But the potential VR/AR market is hundreds fold bigger than that.

The potential market in 10 years. Apple has jumped the gun here. This is their Apple Newton moment for AR.

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

#640

Post by richardw » Sat, Mar 16, 2024, 9:59 AM UTC

polyomino wrote: post #618

uxcolumbo wrote: post #607

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stupid question… isn’t all that wrapped in a container? Like in HTML with divs? So if you have a virtual lamp you want to copy, all the various elements that make up the lamp are in a VR equivalent object markup as . If you want to copy specific elements you can, but you’d have specific actions, e.g copy color etc. Maybe I’m missing something though and it’s more complex.

Ok now, I have a few separate colored lights pointing at the lamp. What color is the lamp? How about when it’s on?

Interesting. I assume you’d copy the object not the lighting. If you move a real object into a different room or outside you don’t expect the colour to stay the same. But if I’m pasting it into a word doc, I guess intuitively I might want it to look the same as source, but that breaks down unless I copy the whole virtual universe. A mirrored globe inside a room of mirrors is not going to look the same unless I copy the scene. People will learn this and maybe demand eg a choice of the copy scope. You might not even have rights to copy all objects. I can’t just copy your palace and paste it into mine unless you allow it (say).