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

661–670 of 863 posts

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

#661

Post by speg »

gcanyon wrote: post #659

A very interesting video take: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQKMoT-6XSg tl;dw -- reviewers are understandably focusing on the technical specs, but ignoring the much more simple metric: conceptually, does the device fool the mind into accepting what it sees as "real"? And the answer for the Vision Pro is yes. It will get lighter, better, cheaper, but even now, it's important to realize that the AVP can transport yo…

I found the demo a bit underwhelming, if only because it was guided. However I must admit the scene on the mountain, in front of the piano, and on the football pitch were amazing.

If that is the future of content, sign me up.

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

#662

Post by bsdpufferfish »

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.

This is like comparing an oscilloscope to the iPhone 15 because they both have a screen.

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

#663

Post by Nevermark »

onethought wrote: post #426
cyberpunk wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Genuine question, what are you doing for 10 hours a day in there? Can you comfortable code all day in that? If you don't mind my asking, is it purely novelty or is it genuinely better than coding on a 5k monitor?

It’s genuinely better than a 5k monitor. In the recent update it now lets you mouse off your Mac and onto vision apps just like iPad hands over. It made me switch my desk setup to have the desk attached to my chair so I can have 360 range of screens. The resolution is stupidly high. I’ve attempted a coding workflow in all of the quests and it just wasn’t possible. It’s awesome in vision

Wow - I am going to try that.

It takes time to absorb all the possibilities

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

#664

Post by jncfhnb »

wolverine876 wrote: post #610
jncfhnb wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If someone is showing you a tv show it seems extremely rude to me to not look at the show as a way of passively showing disinterest vs just saying it’s not for you; no?

> If someone is showing you a tv show it seems extremely rude to me to not look at the show as a way of passively showing disinterest vs just saying it’s not for you; no? Those aren't your only two options. There are almost infinite ways to communicate.

Like what? What’s a polite, non verbal way to show disinterest that is not available to you when in VR?

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

#665

Post by mulderc »

iamtheworstdev wrote: post #657
kossTKR wrote: post #652

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. Macrumors reports 200.000 sold vision pro's a few month's ago. So maybe 300.000 today? It's a type of gadget that hasn't become widely adopted yet and the usecases and killer features are almost non existent compared to the iPhones phonecalls + web browsing, music, videos, notes and many others. Really hard to gauge what success means here, but if we say that in a year it will sell 500.000 units, that's…

there is no killer feature where it sees mass adoption.. 99.9% of the population cant afford to drop $3,500 on a computer screen for their computer.

Idk, people spend absurd amounts of money on various hobbies and other pursuits that I bet a much larger % of the population can afford a Vision Pro than you might think. We don't really question when someone buys an ATV or boat that they use only a few times a year and easily costs as much as a Vision Pro.

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

#666

Post by amelius »

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…

Well, my desktop OS still treats my GPU as a second class citizen. In fact I'm not even sure if my OS has the concept of a GPU built in.

So OS is probably not as important as you think.

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

#667

Post by parasubvert »

jonny_eh wrote: post #611
chmod775 wrote: post #602

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are we gonna ignore the fact that VR pornography exists? Also I'm pretty sure those VR games that are ran on a computer connected to a headset could display on any headset, Apple or Oculus. Cursory search reveals people have already been getting SteamVR to work on the VisionPro. Running stuff directly on the headsets is neat, but there's no headset on the market with enough power to match what you can have when plugg…

> Are we gonna ignore the fact that VR pornography exists? On the Apple Vision Pro?

Through Safari, or forthcoming VR video player apps (Apple doesn't censor generic utilities).

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

#668

Post by toddmatthews »

kilroy123 wrote: post #648
jjfoooo4 wrote: post #635

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

It's the crappy version 1. Just like iphone and ipad v1. They sucked. It's very obviously better to wait a little longer for a future version.

Not sure I agree. When I first saw the 1st gen iPhone I was so impressed with it, I went out and got one a few days later. This is before the App Store. Yes compared to today it might “suck” compared to the latest version, but the first iPhone was super compelling by itself at the time and started selling very well

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

#669

Post by ses1984 »

amelius wrote: post #666
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…

Well, my desktop OS still treats my GPU as a second class citizen. In fact I'm not even sure if my OS has the concept of a GPU built in. So OS is probably not as important as you think.

I think they mean OS in the broader sense than just the kernel.
Post reply on HN