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

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

hugo.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 863 posts

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

#111

Post by SeanAnderson »

throwaway74432 wrote: post #101

If people wanted to wear a phone screen taped over their eyes out in public, the technical limitations wouldn't barely make a dent in that desire. But the vast majority of people want to have real in-person human interactions when they're out in the world. That's what the makers of these devices fail to see. But they can't see that because they're self-described VR enthusiasts. If they talk to non VR enthusiasts (whi…

I think the key to your last bit is "indoors." People don't consider it rude when talking to each other outdoors because it's mutually understood that wearing the device is beneficial.

All it takes is to get to that point with AR. So it's more a critique of the state of AR's present usefulness rather than an innate, immovable reflection on society.

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

#113

Post by tsunamifury »

throwaway74432 wrote: post #101

If people wanted to wear a phone screen taped over their eyes out in public, the technical limitations wouldn't barely make a dent in that desire. But the vast majority of people want to have real in-person human interactions when they're out in the world. That's what the makers of these devices fail to see. But they can't see that because they're self-described VR enthusiasts. If they talk to non VR enthusiasts (whi…

This is the trap of when a company needs a user to buy a product more than the user needs the product.

This was something jobs was adept at navigating around along with Jonny Ive.

Tim Cook is a product idiot. Or maybe more to the point he is adept at making factories and has run out of products for them to manufacture. So what’s more important to him his giving the factory more to do vs designing the right product.

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

#114

Post by joenot443 »

fouronnes3 wrote: post #67
noneeeed wrote: post #30

I think the description of the VisionPro as a dev kit is spot on. It's also a beta product in many way. Apple know full well that this is not a mass market product, they have made no attempt to make it even remotely affordable to most people. But they also know that every aspect of the hardware will improve over the next decade, and as it does they will have ironed out many of the problems with how we use AR/VR and w…

Hopefully you're right, but the cynic in me thinks we've been saying the same thing about every VR headset that has come out in the last ten years.

There were a lot of tablets before the iPad but it wasn’t until the iPad that tablets really took off as a serious market segment. Ditto with AirPods and Bluetooth earbuds.

In the past, once Apple started pouring R&D money into a specific product type, the entire industry around it tends to advance very quickly. I’m optimistic about the Vision Pro, and I actually think the n+2 Meta release will be much better off for it.

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

#115

Post by MR4D »

throwaway74432 wrote: post #101

If people wanted to wear a phone screen taped over their eyes out in public, the technical limitations wouldn't barely make a dent in that desire. But the vast majority of people want to have real in-person human interactions when they're out in the world. That's what the makers of these devices fail to see. But they can't see that because they're self-described VR enthusiasts. If they talk to non VR enthusiasts (whi…

> But the vast majority of people want to have real in-person human interactions when they're out in the world.

I think this statement is too strong. I see too many people every day in elevators, in lines, all sorts of different places that are on their phone and specifically avoiding eye contact with other human beings. That suggests that the term “vast majority” is probably too strong.

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

#116

Post by ryandrake »

throwaway74432 wrote: post #101

If people wanted to wear a phone screen taped over their eyes out in public, the technical limitations wouldn't barely make a dent in that desire. But the vast majority of people want to have real in-person human interactions when they're out in the world. That's what the makers of these devices fail to see. But they can't see that because they're self-described VR enthusiasts. If they talk to non VR enthusiasts (whi…

I don’t buy this. So many people walking around absolutely glued to their smartphones. Neck crooked down, ignoring the world, even inside businesses, social situations, at home, at work, and the taboo is very quickly softening! I often notice couples sitting in a restaurant, basically ignoring each other in favor of their phones for an entire meal. No human connection going on here!

People want human connections less and less, especially with strangers, service providers, “NPCs” as some would lovingly call them. I think good AR will accelerate this, not fail due to a shrinking taboo.

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

#117

Post by spacedcowboy »

throwaway74432 wrote: post #101

If people wanted to wear a phone screen taped over their eyes out in public, the technical limitations wouldn't barely make a dent in that desire. But the vast majority of people want to have real in-person human interactions when they're out in the world. That's what the makers of these devices fail to see. But they can't see that because they're self-described VR enthusiasts. If they talk to non VR enthusiasts (whi…

shrug I don't spend my entire life in company. Reading a book is hardly a group event....

Also, when shared experience hits the next version (or the one after that, or..) and I can watch Liverpool beat Man Utd with my brother on a different continent (with whatever lag being compensated for) I'll get more of a shared experience than I could have today.

This is a version-1 product. It's only going to get better - I have one of the original iPhones, and compared to the '15 Pro I have now, it's pitiful. Apple are generally a long-term game company, and they're not going to let this just drop.

So sure, in company down at the pub, I won't be wearing goggles like this. Funnily enough I don't think that's the target market, making your argument a bit of a strawman one. Apple (I expect) will focus is attention on where it can make a difference. And (again, I expect) it will.

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

#118

Post by tartuffe78 »

epanchin wrote: post #35

Interesting article. Does the average person distrust meta as much as I do? I wouldn’t consider anything made by meta in my house - I imagine this is a common position it’s a shame it didn’t get a mention.

I doubt it's very common at all, most people just Facebook without putting much thought into it I imagine.

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

#119

Post by blunderchief »

skc wrote: post #96

I recently saw Dune 2 on IMAX. If the Vision Pro can soon replicate that experience they will print (even more) money and could lock the big film studios down forever pretty much. That is the killer use case. Everything else seems like fluff.

There's an immersive viewing setting on the Vision Pro called Cinema that's very close. It puts you inside a theater-like room without seats and gives you a pretty convincing feeling of looking at a movie screen — way better than any of the stupid immersive viewing rooms in Disney Plus or whatever.

Also, there's an IMAX app that actually simulates being in an IMAX theater. It's silly, but having the seats and railing and being able to look to the side and see the dim IMAX sign glowing on the wall goes a very, very long way. But for now there's not much you can do inside of it. I really,

The only thing that's really missing is the sound. The built-in speakers sound fantastic, but lack that low-end, guttural rumble that you can only get in a theater or with a very fancy home theater setup (which I don't have because I have a family, with a partner who's very noise-sensitive, and a house that's just not big enough to watch movies in without waking up my kid — I'd just never get to use it).

I haven't actually tried watching it hooked up to my homepods, which I'd guess would help. But yeah, the visual experience is remarkable. They can get there if they keep putting effort into it.

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

#120

Post by ojbyrne »

throwaway74432 wrote: post #101

If people wanted to wear a phone screen taped over their eyes out in public, the technical limitations wouldn't barely make a dent in that desire. But the vast majority of people want to have real in-person human interactions when they're out in the world. That's what the makers of these devices fail to see. But they can't see that because they're self-described VR enthusiasts. If they talk to non VR enthusiasts (whi…

The second paragraph seems silly. Nobody thinks its rude to talk with normal glasses on, and that's the same form factor. Meta's AR glasses are already available as both sunglasses and normal glasses (though obviously lacking in actual AR).
Post reply on HN