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

Notes on Vision Pro

notes.andymatuschak.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 700 posts

Re: Notes on Vision Pro

#141

Post by throw74775 »

sojournerc wrote: post #101
throw74775 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see why that should be. Obviously you have a right to do whatever deals you like and not buy this product, but it seems to me that one reason Apple is investing so much in this is because they expect to recoup a huge reward over time, not just from device sales. I guess you can always buy an android based headset that allows sideloading but presumably it won't have the same level of investment.

You're proving their point. That they expect revenue (huge reward) after the initial purchase is, by definition, rent-seeking.

It would be rent seeking if they didn’t continue to make investments in the platform, but nobody believes that is their plan.

Re: Notes on Vision Pro

#142

Post by throw74775 »

zmmmmm wrote: post #92
throw74775 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see why that should be. Obviously you have a right to do whatever deals you like and not buy this product, but it seems to me that one reason Apple is investing so much in this is because they expect to recoup a huge reward over time, not just from device sales. I guess you can always buy an android based headset that allows sideloading but presumably it won't have the same level of investment.

you don't have to guess - I bought a Quest Pro which allows side loading As far as this goes ... > it won't have the same level of investment. Meta is constantly mocked for how much they have invested. You can argue about how much it paid off, but they certainly invested.

Right - and the Quest Pro isn’t well compared to what Apple is marketing here. I couldn’t accept a job working with a VR company because I couldn’t get past the nausea the Quest Pro induces in me.

I think the point is that Meta’s investment is weak compared to Apple’s full court press. It really is laughable.

Re: Notes on Vision Pro

#143

Post by gnicholas »

ahahahahah wrote: post #60
miketery wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Track record wise, apple is one of the best in terms of serving accessibility. So I’d bet greater than 50% odds that they’re thinking about lazy eye or one eye or derivatives there of.

[flagged]

FWIW, I emailed a fairly senior accessibility person at Apple yesterday with a question about the headset and got a response back today, even in the midst of WWDC. And I'm a relative nobody — just a bootstrapped solo founder who works in the accessibility field.

Re: Notes on Vision Pro

#144

Post by skydhash »

> What if programs live in places, live in physical objects in your space? For instance, you might place all kinds of computational objects in your kitchen: timers above your stove; knife work reference overlays above your cutting board; a representation of your fridge’s contents; a catalog of recipes organized by season; etc.

I'd prefer an OS that spans multiple devices. Something how computers behave in “The Expanse” where someone can flick stuff from their mobile device to another system for a better workspace. If I'm typing this on my workstation, but want to switch environment and bring something light like a tablet or just my phone, I could send the tab and it would retain its state. The closest to something like this is a server-client architecture like Logitech Media Server. A paradigm like this would be more useful than immersion.

This is also why I like Vim. Buffer is a separate concept from File, adding an extra flexibility – in terms of layout – to how I edit to complete my current task. I want a similar flexibility with applications, at least lightweight – state wise – ones.

CloudKit and Handoff are close, but very brittle. Apps like Bear, Reeder, Anybox, Things 3, make switching devices seamless. Another good example is handoff between the HomePod and the iPhone.

Re: Notes on Vision Pro

#145

Post by andymatuschak »

smugma wrote: post #139

Reading through his notes, I couldn’t help but think “I don’t know this guy, but it seems like he has spent years thinking deeply about interfaces. Also, he sounds ex-Apple.” It made me smile when I got towards the end and my suspicions were confirmed. Andy’s thoughts were infinitely deeper than anything else I’ve read about the device+interface so far. In particular, I liked his observations that so far it’s mostly…

That's very kind; thank you.

Re: Notes on Vision Pro

#146

Post by prawn »

balaji1 wrote: post #14
gnicholas wrote: post #3

> Given how ambitious the hardware package is, the software paradigm is surprisingly conservative. I actually see this as a bit less surprising. After all, if you change the hardware in a big way, and you change the software in a big way, users will have a harder time adjusting to the new platform. Instead, they're making a big leap on the hardware side, keeping legacy apps and concepts, and then will presumably iter…

In the demo, I was hoping to see some app/screen/display anchored to certain walls or being fixed in a 3D spot. That way I can walk to a place to see that "screen".

I think they'll inevitably introduce this down the track. The idea that you can set up a workspace as fixed to a particular place. Sit on the couch, and by default it has media apps and a big screen. Put it on in your office, and you can cover the walls with reference drawings and appropriate apps that are all where you left them.

Re: Notes on Vision Pro

#147

Post by dmitrygr »

throwaway4aday wrote: post #93
armchairhacker wrote: post #61

I think the big usecase of the Vision Pro is just a larger screen and immersion. That's what it looks like Apple highlights in the demos. Imagine developing with the ultimate 10x setup: several files, documentation, and debuggers open at once, with a zen nature background. Or making music, or painting, or even writing a research paper. Imagine playing a video game but the environment wraps around you. Imagine watchin…

> Imagine developing with the ultimate 10x setup: several files, documentation, and debuggers open at once, with a zen nature background. Or making music, or painting, or even writing a research paper. I used to believe this was the ideal setup, hell I even implemented it with monitors, but since I've integrated LLMs into my development process I find all I need are two side by side windows and now with CopilotX thos…

> but since I've integrated LLMs into my development process I find all I need are two side by side windows

This irrelevant for those of us not doing cookie-cutter-been-done-1000000-times-before stuff. In such cases all the LLMs in the world are useless, but many pages of docs open at once are useful. Go tell your LLM to write a ARMv6M assembly MIPS-II emulator. I'll wait. Go on.

Re: Notes on Vision Pro

#148

Post by prawn »

TheRealPomax wrote: post #59

How about we wait until someone actually has one to review?

This reminds me of people who gripe about sports rumours in forums about rumoured player signings. If you're not interested in speculation about hardware not yet freely in the hands of users, why not leave it to people who find that discussion interesting?

There are reports now from dozens of people who've had similar 30 minute sessions using some of the features. That's enough to get an idea of some facets, guess at what's not polished, what's not ready at all. But they're all easy to ignore if you want to wait until next year.

Re: Notes on Vision Pro

#149

Post by acdha »

cubefox wrote: post #112
lostmsu wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are immersive, 100%. But also nauseating and forehead heating.

A reviewer on YouTube said the Apple Vision is a bit heavy because they used a metal frame for some reason. (No comment about foreheads)

You can safely treat “reviewer on YouTube” as “stranger at a bar” in terms of accuracy. They get paid to get clicks, not to deliver accurate or expert advice, and that heavily favors “why don’t they just…?” comments glossing over challenging engineering decisions.

Re: Notes on Vision Pro

#150

Post by redundantly »

mikenew wrote: post #69
balaji1 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fitness and gaming wasn't demoed much yesterday, but are going to be insane on the Vision Pro - so I guess it was just too obvious to demo. Or is it? Also Meta could catch up if it was just software. But how big of a deal is the M2+R1? Anyway the metaverse was already being retracted, else this Vision Pro could have hammered Meta. Clearly Occulus has to evolve to match VisionPro. Controller has to be optional. It has…

> I guess it was just too obvious to demo. Or is it? Gaming can't be good, because there's no controllers. Even if the hand and eye tracking is absolutely S-tier, you're never getting something like button input from swinging your empty hands around, twitching your fingers. Just the occlusion from the back of your hand would be enough enough for that to be impossible. Fitness might be more doable, but even then I thi…

I hate VR controllers. I'd prefer to play VR games without them. I'd prefer they do hand and eye tracking to determine what I'm doing, like look at a zombie and and go pew pew pew with my finger guns.

The only VR headset I've tried that can do hand tracking (Oculus Quest) sucks at it and games there didn't pick up on it as an input at all, as far as I know.

However, just because VR controllers won't exist for the Apple Vision at release it doesn't mean they never will. Perhaps Apple will release some later, or it'll be a third party release. Heck, someone might unironically release a Nintendo Power Glove style controller that works incredibly well with Apple Vision.

Post reply on HN