151–160 of 582 posts
I'm definitely not going to be keeping my hands in the air to type on a virtual keyboard. I can tell you right now that won't work and your arms will get too tired. Must be only for minor tasks. But I can't afford the thing anyways so doesn't matter.
It supports the Magic Keyboard and I presume other wireless boards.
> It really is one of the best product names in Apple history: Vision is a description of a product, it is an aspiration for a use case, and it is a critique on the sort of society we are building, behind Apple’s leadership more than anyone else. I agree that “Vision” is a good product name, but “Vision Pro” just feels intensely pedestrian. Why is it called “Pro?” Is there a non-Pro version?
"Pro", in AppleSpeak, means "the expensive one". They've actually done this before; the MacBook Pro (first Intel Mac) launched some time before the MacBook (first consumer-oriented Intel Mac). This feels like fairly clear signalling that there'll be a cheaper more consumer-oriented one along later.
edit: the fanatics are really out with the downvotes today
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Newton, Power Mac Cube, iMac G4 "Sunflower", and solid gold first-gen Apple Watch come to mind as Apple hardware products that failed to live up to the hype. On the software side there are more misses, but also the stakes are lower. It's a great track record for thirty years, of course. All the other big tech companies have graveyards full of half-assed product launches.
In what sense did the iMac G4 fail to live up to the hype? That was my first Mac, I still have it. Thought it was an incredible computer for the time--the iMac + OS X 10.1 Puma was absolutely magical coming from Windows 98 on a beige Dell. The design still looks incredible too, 20+ years later. I will grant that the Newton failed. In the Apple hardware category, I'd also add the iPod Hi-Fi, the butterfly keyboard, an…
It was too expensive to manufacture and Apple wasn't sure they could sell it, so they just didn't make any. Hard to believe that could happen to a Mac model today.
It is that human nature that makes me believe that any device like this that doesn't have real-time interactions baked-in, no matter how cool they are, will always default to media consumption because media consumption is the main use case where you don't necessarily want to have a shared experience.
This device seems absolutely amazing and likely much more in the same vertical as home theater than personal computing. FWIW, I also don't buy into the work aspect of this, either. Partially because most people aren't in the Apple ecosystem for productivity apps, but mostly because as another person stated, nobody is going to use a digital avatar in a work setting. A static image or even just being on camera wearing the headset would feel much more normal. Sure, I could see it being great for certain applications like email but not enough of a catch-all to be the only device you use in a work setting.
All these "relive your memory" videos are incredibly awkward, because of how downright sad it is to strap this on your head during your kid's birthday just to relive it on repeat like Tom Cruise in Minority Report. The real usecase is porn, but they're too tactful to say it.
Yeah, if this thing catches on, I think this will be my "old man gets left behind by technology" moment. Everything I see from the marketing of this just looks like a soulless dystopia. I hate it. If the future is strapping a phone to your face and never leaving the house, I'm ready to be left in the past.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s obvious how a 10 second clip scales to 10 minutes or 10 hours or 10 days. You don’t need that much imagination or even a leap of faith. A court side seat to an NBA game is north of $1000. If this creates 20% of the experience it will easily pay for itself in 1 season.
Why would NBA allow for this as they would lose an extreme amount of money if people can get the same experience at home? That would be economic suicide for them. They need to keep the seats being a special experience.
Live sports and being at the event is always going to be a special thing that people want to pay for- you can't heckle the opposing team through a headset. If people want to pay even more to get a coach-eye view of the game, I can't imagine ticket sales would be impacted one iota. As it is, watching a game on TV is a better viewing experience than being their live for most sports. American Football, for example- the field is large, your seat is static so it can't follow the action. Its often played in cold, rainy conditions- I go to a game or two a year just for the excitement of it all, but come a dreary rainy late November day, I am happy to sit on the couch and enjoy the surround sound. All major US sports make most of their money off TV broadcast rights. This will be no different.
All these "relive your memory" videos are incredibly awkward, because of how downright sad it is to strap this on your head during your kid's birthday just to relive it on repeat like Tom Cruise in Minority Report. The real usecase is porn, but they're too tactful to say it.
Or, here's a wild thought, the whole device will get smaller....And standalone cameras will exist. So it wont be awkward, as it will just appear to be glasses on your head that we've not found awkward in the last several hundred years.
That’s what Google Glass tried and it flopped anyway. People also found a camera on glasses (like the Google Glass version) to be highly creepy. Apple emphasized that the front of these glasses will clearly indicate when someone’s taking a photo or video (to the subjects who’re seeing it).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Newton, Power Mac Cube, iMac G4 "Sunflower", and solid gold first-gen Apple Watch come to mind as Apple hardware products that failed to live up to the hype. On the software side there are more misses, but also the stakes are lower. It's a great track record for thirty years, of course. All the other big tech companies have graveyards full of half-assed product launches.
Except for the Apple Watch I had all these products. They were some of the best of their time and even hold up today in terms of design and usability. Your definition of success seems extraordinarily high, if these products were failures. Maybe measured by items sold. But then each of them stands in nearly every single design museum like MoMA, history books, and were clear stepping stones to the Mac mini (cube, sunfl…
It's already clear the Vision Pro is a milestone for VR and Apple. I'm not sure if that can translate to market success for several years at least.
All these "relive your memory" videos are incredibly awkward, because of how downright sad it is to strap this on your head during your kid's birthday just to relive it on repeat like Tom Cruise in Minority Report. The real usecase is porn, but they're too tactful to say it.
I mean, quite obviously the recording tech will be a standalone device (and maybe even an iPhone which are ubiquitous at these events already) someday. The Vision headset has all the hardware already so why not let it capture videos? Just set it on the counter or something...
This has become one of those meme-y dismissals that I see in all the discussions but it's so transitory I can't imagine it possibly mattering.
If you read the article, you'll see him mention this as well, and also call out that it uses some "Apple Immersive Video Format" (which is something I didn't hear in the keynote), so this is the clear intention.
All these "relive your memory" videos are incredibly awkward, because of how downright sad it is to strap this on your head during your kid's birthday just to relive it on repeat like Tom Cruise in Minority Report. The real usecase is porn, but they're too tactful to say it.