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

#781

Post by Rapzid » Sun, Mar 17, 2024, 1:51 AM UTC

jayd16 wrote: post #734

brookst wrote: post #721

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not so much difficulty as system architecture. Oculus just doesn’t have an OS layer, at least not in the sense of a platform that helps applications share resources and interact with each other. The Oclulus platform is more like a classic video game console; there are system APIs, but they are designed to be used by single-tasking applications. And for the user, the Oculus system UI is really an app launcher /ta…

Huh? I'm very confused as to what you mean. It's a customized version of Android. All the Android multi-tasking and app pause and resume life-cycle stuff should still be in there. Most of their ecosystem is heavy duty games that use all the device's resources (kicking out other apps from the working set), but it's definitely a multi-tasking OS. I really do not think 3D widgets would require an entirely new OS. The ma…

Too me it sounds like what's being described is just a 3d desktop. But, in the walled garden world we live in most people just call the os/desktop combo the "OS" when it comes to android/ios.

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

#782

Post by twic » Sun, Mar 17, 2024, 1:56 AM UTC

mulderc wrote: post #665

iamtheworstdev wrote: post #657

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.

> boat

Brunswick Corporation has a market cap of about 6 billion.

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

#783

Post by victor106 » Sun, Mar 17, 2024, 2:08 AM 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.

this.

One of Apple’s biggest selling points is privacy.

Been using the AVP every day for about 3 hours and its truly stunning for a version 1 device. I can’t imagine what version 5 will be like.

I’ve also used the oculus but returned it.

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

#784

Post by sneak » Sun, Mar 17, 2024, 2:11 AM UTC

victor106 wrote: post #783

tw04 wrote: post #747

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

this. One of Apple’s biggest selling points is privacy. Been using the AVP every day for about 3 hours and its truly stunning for a version 1 device. I can’t imagine what version 5 will be like. I’ve also used the oculus but returned it.

Selling points, not actual privacy. The fact that you have to identify yourself (and link that identity to your hardware serial number) to install apps on your own device is the opposite of privacy.

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

#785

Post by kelnos » Sun, Mar 17, 2024, 2:27 AM 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.

I'd personally just like to see things even more separate. I wouldn't want what I do on my VR headset tied to anything else.

Sorta like how I might have a Nintendo account (or whatever they have now) for games on a Switch. It's just about my gaming activity on that one platform, and that's it.

Tying a headset to a Meta/Facebook account is just too much: I don't want my Oculus activity tied to my social media.

I agree that the Apple situation is better, but I wouldn't want my Vision Pro activity tied to iPhone, Mac, Apple TV, etc. activity.

And I get it from the "building an integrated ecosystem" perspective, and don't really begrudge them their desire to make something like that, but I'm just generally tired of being a part of some company's ecosystem.

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

#786

Post by xeromal » Sun, Mar 17, 2024, 3:00 AM UTC

twic wrote: post #778

GeekyBear wrote: post #732

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not sure I buy it. "legitimately better than a regular 4K TV broadcast by enabling hardcore fans to feel much closer to the action" sounds like it offers something new. People who are sports enthusiasts have a proven willingness to drop thousands of dollars on large screen televisions, streaming services like NFL Red Zone, or thousand dollar Superbowl tickets, so the potential for sales is there.

I think the question is, how many people watch sports to be close to the action, and how many watch sports to be close to their friends?

Yup, there are hardcore fans but sports are largely a social event.

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

#787

Post by jsjohnst » Sun, Mar 17, 2024, 3:32 AM UTC

joyeuse6701 wrote: post #743

jsjohnst wrote: post #729

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> watch a movie in private, with much better immersion than any alternative, on a plane. As someone who’s worn mine to watch movies on multiple flights, the problem is two fold. 1. The device is ridiculously hard to get into “travel mode” on a plane. Especially if the device was powered off previously and you have to enter a passcode. Each time the “tracking was lost” notification is shown it forces you to start over…

I’m one of the rare people who doesn’t have an issue with wearing vr headsets for great lengths, but I suspect that’s because I strengthen my neck for jiujitsu and that bleeds over into endurance with headsets. Too much to ask for the average user, but the problem can be mitigated by the individual.

It’s not my neck that is the issue, it’s as much or more the pressure against my face.

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

#788

Post by jsjohnst » Sun, Mar 17, 2024, 3:33 AM UTC

crooked-v wrote: post #740

jsjohnst wrote: post #729

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> watch a movie in private, with much better immersion than any alternative, on a plane. As someone who’s worn mine to watch movies on multiple flights, the problem is two fold. 1. The device is ridiculously hard to get into “travel mode” on a plane. Especially if the device was powered off previously and you have to enter a passcode. Each time the “tracking was lost” notification is shown it forces you to start over…

I recently gave it a try and it immediately prompted me to turn on travel mode after putting in the passcode (though, yes, that part was difficult).

Weird, definitely didn’t for me. Wonder what’s different between us?

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

#789

Post by ekanes » Sun, Mar 17, 2024, 3:41 AM UTC

timschmidt wrote: post #763

tw04 wrote: post #762

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>In the meantime, Apple continues to work with ad tech vendors it trusts — or rather, those with stated policies it approves of — particularly when it comes to a cornerstone of the iPhone maker’s brand: user privacy. >However, a key question remains: how will Apple ensure user privacy as its ad ambitions expose the iOS ecosystem to a sector of the media landscape with a chequered record when it comes to a cornerstone…

> Apple has a vested interest in Shareholder profit. > and talks about it constantly. Must be true then. Definitely not marketing. > Facebook has an interest in selling every piece of information they have about you to the highest bidder Nothing you've said suggests any different of Apple.

You're both right. Apple believes (as do many) that one way to achieve great shareholder profit is to differentiate yourself and perhaps get some pricing power is by truly prioritizing consumer privacy. They're both true.

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

#790

Post by imoverclocked » Sun, Mar 17, 2024, 4:01 AM UTC

novok wrote: post #780

tw04 wrote: post #762

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>In the meantime, Apple continues to work with ad tech vendors it trusts — or rather, those with stated policies it approves of — particularly when it comes to a cornerstone of the iPhone maker’s brand: user privacy. >However, a key question remains: how will Apple ensure user privacy as its ad ambitions expose the iOS ecosystem to a sector of the media landscape with a chequered record when it comes to a cornerstone…

Apple's "privacy" is really privacy from people that are not Apple. Apple has access to location logs via maps and location services, the contents of your photos, iMessage contents, the history of every app usage, etc as the default settings set for most things via iCloud backup, which the vast majority of users leave on. They were almost going to deploy on device scanning that you couldn't opt out of with the few ph…

> Apple's "privacy" is really privacy from people that are not Apple.

Sort of, but misleading…

> Apple has access to location logs via maps and location services

There are published policies about how this data gets aggregated+anonymized and then used. Care is taken to ensure data is not linked to individuals.

> The contents of your photos, iMessage contents, the history of every app usage, etc as the default settings set for most things via iCloud backup

Most people want these things backed up. Apple doesn’t just dive through data. Anything that even approaches the description of dealing with user data is carefully vetted. A big difference between Apple and other large tech companies is the internal boundaries for access to any data. It’s strict and limited by design. Apple has fought back against law enforcement for access to personal data or technology to allow governments to carte blanche access devices.

> They were almost going to deploy on device scanning that you couldn't opt out of with the few photos that don't end up on iCloud.

You are referencing the CSAM scanning for known child pornography based on international databases that was tuned for highly unlikely false-positive rates with a small group of reviewers to further reduce any chance of false-positives? Yeah, total travesty… wouldn’t want to do anything about THAT problem. (/s)