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

#811

Post by dmarcos » Sun, Mar 17, 2024, 4:19 PM UTC

jaxn wrote: post #807

dmarcos wrote: post #439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

iPhone 1 was limited but extremely useful at launch. People like me that bought on day 1 couldn’t get enough of it. Had an amazing unparalleled Web browser experience and email, an iPod replacement and Google Maps / Youtube in your pocket felt magical. Also got a Vision Pro on day one and used it just a handful of times. Use cases and value prop of AVP nebulous. Smartphones were a popular product category when iPhone…

I don't think VR is all that different from smartphones at the time of the iPhone launch. The Quest has sold over 20 million units. And at the time of the iPhone launch, a lot of people still had "camera phones" and "feature phones". Business users (like me) has Blackberry / Treo / or a few Windows devices. There were weird texting phones for teens that had keyboards, etc. But most people did not have a smartphone.

You are saying that sales, usage, range of use cases and types of audiences of VR headsets today is comparable to Smartphones (Blackberry Palm), Cell phones and personal music players in 2007? Those are the devices that iPhone improved upon and replaced. Most VR headsets stopped being used shortly after purchase and only a few games sub genres have signs of product-market fit

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

#812

Post by it » Sun, Mar 17, 2024, 5:01 PM UTC

thot_experiment wrote: post #547

it wrote: post #545

Isn't one of the biggest problems with these VR headsets the nearness of the display to the eye? It seems like prolonged exposure to this would result in myopia that would worsen faster than it does when exposed to screens that are farther away.

No. Your eye is generally focusing on infinity in a VR display, that's why myopic people need to wear glasses in VR.

How does that happen if the display is right up next to your eye?

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

#813

Post by Nevermark » Sun, Mar 17, 2024, 5:54 PM UTC

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #510

tomjakubowski wrote: post #489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I did the AVP demo I was impressed by how quickly my eyes would relax and drift away slightly from looking at something after initially focusing on it. It took some conscious effort at first to maintain steady eye focus on an object whilst actuating it with a gesture.

This is, coincidentally, one of my biggest issues with the Vision Pro. I never got used to it. I'd very frequently want to select one thing while also moving my eyes around to look at other things.

New addition to the wish list:

• The pinching focus remains on the control you just looked at for a fraction of a second as your eyes zoom off it.

That would be killer.

In retrospect, it would have been vintage Apple to have realized this was an important detail and resolved it already.

Also widely spreading fingers within a moment of looking at a control could act as "hovering" with a mouse pointer. Add some kind of glow to the control as an intuitive indicator that it is staying in pinch focus. So you can lock in, still look around, and pinch if you decide to - or just relax the hand to abort.

This ability to lock on last gaze, and pinch/abort, would dramatically free the eyes to continue roaming naturally.

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

#814

Post by GeekyBear » Sun, Mar 17, 2024, 6:11 PM UTC

PJDK wrote: post #808

GeekyBear wrote: post #802

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument in favor of the tech Apple is using in this essay sounds pretty compelling. > The NextVR acquisition is what led to the incredible Apple Immersive video format, which enables capture of 3D video in 180 degrees in 8K resolution at 90 frames per second, an absolute juggernaut format with 8 times the number of pixels of a regular 4K video. The best way to think of the new Apple Immersive video format is kin…

That's definitely impressive tech, and I'm sure the experience inside a headset is pretty incredible. What I'm saying is that it is not a good match for live sport. When you watch sports they have multiple cameras all over the place. Fixed cameras with long lenses, cameras that zip over the pitch, cameras on blimps, slow mo cameras and so on. These cameras are so much better for enjoying sport that they put giant scr…

> When you watch sports they have multiple cameras all over the place.

Why assume the viewer doesn't have a choice of viewpoint locations they can decide to switch between?

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

#815

Post by wordpad25 » Sun, Mar 17, 2024, 8:39 PM UTC

bookofjoe wrote: post #472

_heimdall wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google Glass was pretty slick honestly, ahead of its time. I had a friend that worked on the team for a couple years when it first started. The use case of a headsup display for directions while driving was a great experience.

I loved my Google Glass. See, for example: https://youtu.be/gAkfPhlvSn8?si=fSObULo52MAvcBoR

it's impressive that this was shot 10 years ago but now meta Raybands do that

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

#816

Post by Xeyz0r » Sun, Mar 17, 2024, 9:21 PM UTC

SergeAx wrote: post #636

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.

Oculus has expanded its applications beyond just gaming. There are also productivity applications and tools available for Oculus devices like virtual desktops

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

#817

Post by kungfupawnda » Sun, Mar 17, 2024, 9:31 PM UTC

I tried the Vision Pro today at the apple store in Manhattan by Central Park. I used to own a quest pro, but I sold it a year ago since it was catching dust. My expectations were that the passthrough would almost be life like (or much better than oculus). Reality, I couldn't tell the difference. It still looked like I was watching life through a camera.

The UI was also a bit clumsy. I noticed bugs and even the apple employee was stunned how I got a window 'stuck' in a place. It became unresponsive.

Having said that, the 3d spatial videos were spectacular. I did feel like I was almost there. The 3d movies were also amazing and had fairly good colors. Overall it wouldn't replace an OLED tv, but it was impressive.

When I took it off, I was thankful of how clear I can see with my eyes. Everything seemed like '8k'. I guess the Vision Pro is fun, but it was a bit uncomfortable and not really AR imo

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

#818

Post by wkat4242 » Sun, Mar 17, 2024, 10:02 PM UTC

GeekyBear wrote: post #802

PJDK wrote: post #795

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My argument is that the experience of seeing sport from a specific seat is inferior to watching it multi camera with huge zoom lenses. The thing that draws you to the stadium is the sense of being in a crowds. The technology to do this has been around for a while to has anyone tries. I'd certainly be curious to give it a go. I imagine there are some technical problems too, like if your team scores and you jump in the…

The argument in favor of the tech Apple is using in this essay sounds pretty compelling. > The NextVR acquisition is what led to the incredible Apple Immersive video format, which enables capture of 3D video in 180 degrees in 8K resolution at 90 frames per second, an absolute juggernaut format with 8 times the number of pixels of a regular 4K video. The best way to think of the new Apple Immersive video format is kin…

I can certainly see a usecase for that and it's not sports (though I guess you could call it that lol).

But prudish Apple will surely block that from happening. I don't really get why. It's a valid request and one where the technology really shines. I use similar content on the quest 3 and it's great but it would be so much better on something like the vision pro.

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

#819

Post by wkat4242 » Sun, Mar 17, 2024, 10:05 PM UTC

toddmatthews wrote: post #668

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.

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 I used my iPhone 1 for 4 years until I moved to the phone 4 (a year after it was released because I couldn't afford it new). It was a great device, only let down by its ridiculously slow data connection.

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

#820

Post by TheJoeMan » Sun, Mar 17, 2024, 10:09 PM UTC

doctorpangloss wrote: post #476

amelius wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think the description of the VisionPro as a dev kit is spot on. A devkit prepared for lock down. It's the old formula: let devs make the platform great, then pull a Sherlock or increase the platform fees. Count me out.

What exactly are they going to Sherlock? iOS non-game apps aren't exactly innovative. It's Gmail. It's YouTube. It's social media photo and video scrolls. It's been more than a decade, and the most innovative thing I can find on top downloads and top grossing, Duolingo, is also kind of a game, like if you remove the game part of it it's kind of not much, is it? All the innovations in Google Maps are kind of tied up i…

Agree there is less worry about Apple Sherlocking games. But you are looking at existing apps, not considering Apple is sending emails to devs like me saying “please invent new greenfield use cases for this!” But this time some devs realize Apple will copy the first app that gets popular with AVP users.

For a recent example, during the pandemic mental health journaling apps became popular, and now Apple has their own that has 10x the capability by sticking fingers in all your sensitive location, photo, health data that those 3rd party apps could never dream of.