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

#751

Post by tpmoney » Sat, Mar 16, 2024, 8:52 PM UTC

hattmall wrote: post #709

toddmatthews wrote: post #668

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Yeah if the first version doesn't take off that's generally not a good sign. 1st Iphone did extremely well.

The iPod, iPad and Apple Watch are all products from Apple where the first version didn't take off. I'd say they did just fine and the iPhone is largely an outlier in Apple's history of new products. Even the initial iMac suffered relative to its later revisions.

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

#752

Post by parentheses » Sat, Mar 16, 2024, 8:52 PM UTC

chaostheory wrote: post #507

jdprgm wrote: post #486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

What’s more insulting after the announcement of the vaporware known as “infinite office” is meta’s total lack of attention on their PC software. The work related features of Quest are near non-existent if it weren’t for 3rd parties

I totally agree. While Apple has a north star with this device (or looks like it does), Meta's endeavors always seemed like diversification. Meta seems to be looking for the north star. Apple just pointed it out, so now everyone is going to head that way.

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

#753

Post by tpmoney » Sat, Mar 16, 2024, 8:55 PM UTC

Invictus0 wrote: post #649

kilroy123 wrote: post #648

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…

>and it didn't suck relative to what was on the market at the time.

That's going to depend on what things you cared about. The original iPhone was heavily criticized for no copy/paste, no 3g service, no MMS, no physical keyboard, its absurd at the time $700+ price tag, carrier exclusivity, lack of subsidized pricing model and number of other things. Plenty of commentators thought Apple had widely missed the mark and had just launched a multi-million dollar folly that was sure to sink them any day now.

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

#754

Post by wlesieutre » Sat, Mar 16, 2024, 8:57 PM UTC

lynndotpy wrote: post #672

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…

For me personally, it's definitely the platform. Requiring a Meta / Facebook account for already-purchased Oculuses, retroactively bricking devices and deleting software which was bought before that requirement, has put Oculus firmly in the "hardware I will never consider in my life" camp. 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…

I’ve had a Quest 1 for years, it always required an Oculus account, and since rebranding as Meta it now requires a Meta account, which my Oculus account was converted into.

It’s not bricked and hasn’t deleted my software, I’m curious what exactly you’re referring to with that.

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

#755

Post by tpmoney » Sat, Mar 16, 2024, 9:00 PM UTC

sumedh wrote: post #529

ForHackernews wrote: post #498

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He talks about how "Gaze & pinch is an incredible UI superpower and major industry ah-ha moment" but... if that's really the case, then it's quite an indictment of the VR industry: > The hardware needed to track eyes and hands in VR has been around for over a decade, and it’s Apple unique ability to bring everything together in a magical way that makes this UI superpower the most important achievement of the entire V…

> So they had all the pieces, but only Apple put it together Its very difficult to change a mindset or culture in big companies. Existing VR companies were too invested in using a controller. Similarly back in the early smartphone days all the big companies thought that smartphones must have physical keyboard.

Sometimes you really have to decide to take the risk and ship without a standard controller before you can see if the new model will work. The iPhone was famously derided for a lack of stylus. Video game consoles for years have tried to incorporate motion controls in some form or another and realistically only the Wii succeeded in any measure because they ditched the classic controller instead of trying to shoehorn it in. Many times it doesn't work, but if you give developers and users an "easy escape hatch" to go back to what they're already comfortable with, so many of them will default to that no matter how much better your new option might be.

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

#756

Post by yterdy » Sat, Mar 16, 2024, 9:04 PM UTC

brutus1213 wrote: post #535

jdprgm wrote: post #486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 leadershi…

Layman's take: All of them are afraid of making the system that fulfills the promise nominally, but that lacks some key component or is on hardware that doesn't get adopted, only to have a competitor swoop in, clone that system with the necessary fixes, and essentially do what Apple did with MP3 players and smartphones. They're all trying to establish market dominance BEFORE giving us a reason to use the devices (bass ackwards) - and are even happy to see the market collapse, if it meant that, simply, no one cracked that particular nut.

Apple, Meta, Microsoft like how things are right now. These pushes are much-hyped, but they're made less out of real passion for the promise and more desperation to avoid being left behind.

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

#757

Post by wolverine876 » Sat, Mar 16, 2024, 9:12 PM UTC

jncfhnb wrote: post #664

wolverine876 wrote: post #610

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? 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?

I don't understand your question. That's how people express emotion, mostly. I'll trust you are not being argumentative:

Facial expression - eyes (the muscles around them), mouth (smile, blank, frown, etc) - posture, legs, arms, etc etc etc. You can look disinterested, you can look like it's the best thing ever, or any other human emotion.

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

#758

Post by wolverine876 » Sat, Mar 16, 2024, 9:15 PM UTC

dang wrote: post #576

wolverine876 wrote: post #2

The author is former head of Oculus at Meta, Hugo Barra The full title, which of course wouldn't fit: Vision Pro is an over-engineered “devkit” // Hardware bleeds genius & audacity but software story is disheartening // What we got wrong at Oculus that Apple got right // Why Meta could finally have its Android moment I think my edit is the best summary.

Yes you did a great job with that, which probably helped it get attention, too—a good thing, since it's an interesting article. Thanks!

I saw you reposted it (or whatever that mechanism is) so thank you.

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

#759

Post by timschmidt » Sat, Mar 16, 2024, 10:08 PM UTC

tw04 wrote: post #747

ericmcer wrote: post #716

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That isn’t really what the parent is talking about at all… If your issue is with the device requiring connection with an external account, Vision Pro requires an AppleID which will tie it to way more of your digital things than a Facebook login.

Apple’s business model isn’t selling your personal information. In fact they go out of their way to protect your personal info. Requiring an AppleID is significantly less concerning than requiring a Facebook account.

https://digiday.com/media-buying/apples-expanding-ad-ambitio...

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

#760

Post by timschmidt » Sat, Mar 16, 2024, 10:13 PM UTC

cade wrote: post #684

lynndotpy wrote: post #672

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me personally, it's definitely the platform. Requiring a Meta / Facebook account for already-purchased Oculuses, retroactively bricking devices and deleting software which was bought before that requirement, has put Oculus firmly in the "hardware I will never consider in my life" camp. 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…

100% this. I paid the increasingly common "privacy and control premium" for a Valve Index (which I'm very happy with) to avoid the entanglements of borrowing a headset from Meta for a large, up front, non-refundable fee.

Valve makes great unlocked hardware. I don't see the same argument working with Apple, however. Can't even upgrade an SSD in a recent mac not to mention individually cryptographically signed components like cameras and touch pads which can't be replaced without a visit to an Apple-certified repair person. Renting hardware indeed.