Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine

jorgeherskovic.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 213 posts

Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine

#101

Post by kipchak »

bowsamic wrote: post #3

First generation Apple products are always pathfinding devices and they always suck in many ways. The first gen Apple Watch was borderline unusable. I understand people will be pessimistic about this but Apple does have a track record of greatly improving upon the initial experience, so we'll see what happens.

I think t he difference may be how good the "bones" of the product are to build out on. The original iPhone for example didn't have 3rd party apps (outside Safari pages) or GPS/Navigation, Push Email or 3G that are now core smartphone features, but the experience of scrolling around and opening apps always worked well.

But if it was the reverse and iPhone was unpleasant to use and carry around for long periods of time due to it's physical properties like the vision arguably is, (at least as a "AR" device) I don't know if adding those features later would have saved it.

Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine

#102

Post by wombat-man »

phh wrote: post #84
thiago_fm wrote: post #10

"It’s a V1 Apple product. It’s a new category, for them, and by far the most ambitious headset on the consumer market." Well, all other V1 Apple products weren't half-assed, or at least when they were, they offered something more than the competitors. Meta Quest 3 is better on everything, despite eye tracking(for a reason, it sucks for many things, I'm sure Meta can have just as good, if they wanted to, but they like…

> Well, all other V1 Apple products weren't half-assed, or at least when they were, they offered something more than the competitors. The first iPhone/iOS didn't? It had no apps, no MMS, no 3G > Meta Quest 3 is better on everything, despite eye tracking Apple is using eye tracking as an UX, so that "despite" is very big. That being said, I don't understand eye tracking UX, it seems to go against human nature to me. (…

iPhone had a way better web browser AND it was a music player. At the time you basically had to have a dedicated mp3 player. So those two things alone were Big at the time.

Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine

#103

Post by chx »

This is your regular reminder to read https://disconnect.blog/apples-vision-pro-headset-deserves/

> Tech companies want us isolated and constantly staring at screens because it drives profit

> the tech industry has been incentivized to push our society in the direction of isolation because it serves their business models.

Even The Verge admitted the Vision Pro is isolating

this is why you shouldn't buy one or if you did, you should return it.

Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine

#104

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

thiago_fm wrote: post #10

"It’s a V1 Apple product. It’s a new category, for them, and by far the most ambitious headset on the consumer market." Well, all other V1 Apple products weren't half-assed, or at least when they were, they offered something more than the competitors. Meta Quest 3 is better on everything, despite eye tracking(for a reason, it sucks for many things, I'm sure Meta can have just as good, if they wanted to, but they like…

> Well, all other V1 Apple products weren't half-assed, or at least when they were, they offered something more than the competitors.

That is an extremely strange view of history. While I don't think other Apple v1 products were "half-assed", they were clearly unfinished, but showed a ton of potential. I think the exact same thing applies to the Vision Pro.

The original iPhone received a lot of complaints about not supporting 3G, not supporting custom native apps, not supporting copy-paste, etc. But the original iPhone was still revolutionary, and I loved my original phone.

Nearly all of the in-depth reviews I've seen of the Vision Pro say essentially the exact same thing: it is a technological marvel, but has a bunch of rough edges, most of which were simply necessary because you can't just, for example, pray super-light batteries into existence.

To emphasize, I think the Vision Pro (and, honestly, many other VR headsets) is largely a solution looking for a problem, and I don't intend to get one, but I think calling it "half assed" compared to other v1 Apple products is a strong misremembering of history.

Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine

#105

Post by zamadatix »

AlexandrB wrote: post #50
elchief wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, it's less than the original macintosh (which would be 7k today)

That's fine if you're selling a niche product: > Sales were strong at its initial release on January 24, 1984, at $2,495 (equivalent to $7,000 in 2022), and reached 70,000 units on May 3, 1984. I think Apple wants to sell more than 70,000 of these things though. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macintosh_128K

The Vision Pro had more than double that number in the first 10 days of preordering. Estimates are Apple expects to produce ~500k units, I don't know if they'll really sell that many though, the popularity is waning quite quickly.

Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine

#106

Post by causal »

nmstoker wrote: post #48

Why on Earth can people return these for non-fault reasons?! It's the other customers who bear the cost to cover this - like indecisive ditzy clothes shoppers who order huge numbers of items knowing they'll return 90% of them.

I mean, sometimes people need to try on clothes before they can be sure it will fit? Who exactly are you picturing here when you say "ditzy"?

You act like this is taking money out of others' wallet- imagine how much money shoppers would lose if they had no recourse when a product didn't perform as expected. It doesn't need to be broken to be disappointing, and returns are one of the few tools consumers have to protect themselves from companies that oversell and under-deliver.

Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine

#107

Post by neom »

thiago_fm wrote: post #10

"It’s a V1 Apple product. It’s a new category, for them, and by far the most ambitious headset on the consumer market." Well, all other V1 Apple products weren't half-assed, or at least when they were, they offered something more than the competitors. Meta Quest 3 is better on everything, despite eye tracking(for a reason, it sucks for many things, I'm sure Meta can have just as good, if they wanted to, but they like…

Steve died 11 years ago and Tim said he tried the first MVP of Vision Pro 10 years ago. Don't think it was his idea, he just brought it to market. I read something recently, I wish I could remember where, but it was an account of why Tim was picked, the product roadmap for many years was basically baked, and Tim just needs to bring it to market, something he is word class at.

Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine

#108

Post by chankstein38 »

nmstoker wrote: post #48

Why on Earth can people return these for non-fault reasons?! It's the other customers who bear the cost to cover this - like indecisive ditzy clothes shoppers who order huge numbers of items knowing they'll return 90% of them.

For one, Amazon actually encourages that behavior because people are used to trying things on in a store and not buying the things they don't like.

Second, because it's a $5000 thing that was not clearly advertised and was over-marketed to the point where people are disappointed because it's not the magic they were sold. I feel like they'd have sold 0 of them if they didn't offer easy fast refunds.

Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine

#109

Post by indymike »

thiago_fm wrote: post #10

"It’s a V1 Apple product. It’s a new category, for them, and by far the most ambitious headset on the consumer market." Well, all other V1 Apple products weren't half-assed, or at least when they were, they offered something more than the competitors. Meta Quest 3 is better on everything, despite eye tracking(for a reason, it sucks for many things, I'm sure Meta can have just as good, if they wanted to, but they like…

> "It’s a V1 Apple product. It’s a new category, for them, and by far the most ambitious headset on the consumer market."

And it is priced out of the consumer market by a factor of 10. Also, the developer program is not interesting.

Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine

#110

Post by shrubble »

elchief wrote: post #34
pryelluw wrote: post #4

Five grand is insane.

I mean, it's less than the original macintosh (which would be 7k today)

Not really a fair comparison in that the original Macintosh was competing against systems that were in the same ballpark of pricing. There weren't equivalently specced machines that were 1/7th the price.
Post reply on HN