671–680 of 863 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
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…
It's an incredible amount of goodwill to burn from a company with so little to spare, and I'm surprised it hasn't come up yet in this thread or in the blogpost. Meta has fundamental trustability issues.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
First Oculus headset versus Quest 3 right now? Quest 3 wins. There's progress. Perhaps not as fast as we'd want. There is progress though. I suspect that progress will continue.
Even Quest 1 vs Quest 3 has very visible improvements in terms of image quality, FOV, and overall comfort.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Is it just the vast amount of money? No, it is the vast amount of risk they are willing to take. Microsoft/alphabet have vast amounts of money too, but no appetite for risk. Apple is willing to dump tens of billions and years into R&D for physical products, fail, and then try again. Microsoft half asses it, and then pulls back instead of plowing through (see them shutting down Microsoft retail stores and windows ph…
Please feel free to share what these amazing risk taking products are which Apple R&D have come up with. As far as I can see its all the same thin, flat device with a screen, just different sizes.
AirPods/pro/max? They've taken major presence a space owned by Sony, Samsung and Bose.
Apple Watch Ultra?
Though it's thin and flat, The iPhone X was a huge leap in specs, contrary to the entire market analyst sentiment that people wanted cheaper phones. Apple made a big bet that people would want the opposite: more expensive phones, and they were right.
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?
All the news about it not being possible on the AVP was largely a bunch of hyperbole, misunderstandings, and misinformation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is not the same at all. Google Pay used to be called Wallet for starters. https://www.reddit.com/r/GooglePixel/comments/12979ja/google... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Wallet Apple does not have this level of product or branding confusion. So you don't like Apple, fine. But using Google as a poster child of consistent product marketing is a fool's hill to die on.
Apple does have similar level of branding confusion elsewhere. Look at Apple Music vs iTunes Store. How many people understand the difference between the two subscriptions?
More importantly: it's not confusing because no one really cares or needs to care. New folks use the Apple Music subscription, old folks that know the difference use either.
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.
AR has tremendous productivity applications if the device is small and wearable enough. Imagine being up in your attic running cables and seeing a projection of the floor plan of your house so you can see where the different rooms in your house are. Or driving a car, except all the blind spots disappear and are filled in with vehicle-mounted camera feeds, with unobtrusive overlays for navigation or to highlight potential safety hazards. Imagine assembling some IKEA furniture except instead of puzzling through the instruction book, you have an app that can recognize all the pieces using machine vision and simply show you what to do. Imagine never forgetting a name or a face, because every time you see even a distant acquaintance, your glasses can run facial recognition and make their name pop up by their face in real life. Imagine noticing a weird rash on your arm, but as soon as you look at it, your glasses immediately diagnose it as a potential MRSA infection and pop up a notification allowing you to call an urgent care clinic that’s open right this second.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
iPhone 1 was way more successful than Vision Pro, and it didn't suck relative to what was on the market at the time. At launch, Steve Jobs famously said it was 5 years ahead of the competition, and contemporary commentators generally agreed. In its first week, Apple had sold 270,000 iPhones domestically.[47] Apple sold the one millionth iPhone 74 days after the release.[48] Apple reported in January 2008 that four mi…
If anything, the Vision Pro feels to me more like the original Mac: an impressive technological leap forward, with lots of interesting ideas about computing and UI paradigms, but also prohibitively expensive, and still underpowered relative to its lofty ambitions.
Notably, the Mac didn't really end well for Apple. Eventually we got the iMac and OS X, but in between was a decade in which Apple nearly went bankrupt. And I'm not really convinced the Vision Pro is as innovative or compelling as the original Mac was to begin with.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
The main use case Apple presented, productivity, works much better with an opaque screen, not pass-through. There's a reason we don't make transparent screens, nor transparent windows on our screens: text and images are much easier to read if they are opaque.