> Meta is focused on social
No, Meta is focused on intrusive advertising, abating the law, and recording history about people against their explicit desire.
Apple Vision
171–180 of 582 posts
Re: Apple Vision
#172All 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.
> 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. 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…
I was thinking the same thing. Aren’t iPhones getting lidar? One will just record on an iPhone. Why is a person recording using a headset more dystopian than using an iPhone or camcorder? Camcorders were way more bulky and isolating than this headset will be.
Re: Apple Vision
#173"The company was fairly mum about how it planned to make those cameras and its format more widely available, but I am completely serious when I say that I would pay the NBA thousands of dollars to get a season pass to watch games captured in this way. Yes, that’s a crazy statement to make, but courtside seats cost that much or more, and that 10-second clip was shockingly close to the real thing." The author was shown…
Thank you, I feel like I'm taking crazy pills or something. I have no idea how much of the footage in the long advertisements are actual in-headset recording vs highly editorialized made up aspirational CG. Additionally, I really don't think all the people here singing the praises of Apple's currently nonexistent headset (for actual customer use at least until 2024 or something) have ever used a headset. Headsets giv…
To add to your list, I was at a friends and used their headset for about ten minutes of gaming and the parts of my head that touched the headset were drenched in sweat, but that just may be a peculiarity of my physiology.
Re: Apple Vision
#174Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think if you start to include the cost of developing Vision OS on top of iOS, and cost of all the custom silicone Apple have in this, then you can approach that figure. They have the advantage that they had a lot of this in place for their portables. Magic did not and had to start from scratch. I suppose it's hard to judge how much of the R&D cost for Apple silicone, their cameras, LiDAR and iOS should be counted a…
If you include the development of iOS and the A/M series chips then sure I guess it gets close, but it seems obvious to me they would have been doing those things anyway. I guess it depends whether you want an all-in cost to compare to Magic Leap, in which case you could argue that most of the history of Apple has set them up for this – if you want to make a great VR headset, just make the best phone ever first – if…
Yeh, exactly, I was aiming for a more direct comparison to Magic Leap. Effectively how much would it have cost them to actually achieve this level of functionality and polish, based on the "all in" cost for Apple.
Re: Apple Vision
#175Earlier quoted context omitted.
"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.
Apple's problem is that the "pro" version is not just twice as expensive as the "consumer" version needs to be in order to be a market success, it's ten times more expensive than the consumer version needs to be. edit: the fanatics are really out with the downvotes today
I'd assume any credible consumer version will be a few years down the road, anyway.
Re: Apple Vision
#176Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
> 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 se…
We are in a much different world then when google glass showed up. People taking pictures, videos, streaming is now much more commonplace. There was near no external indicator of taking a picture on google glass.
I also dont forsee this device being used outside often at first.
Google glass also flopped for many other reasons, it being uncomfortable, awkward, and abandoned quickly being some.
Re: Apple Vision
#177"The company was fairly mum about how it planned to make those cameras and its format more widely available, but I am completely serious when I say that I would pay the NBA thousands of dollars to get a season pass to watch games captured in this way. Yes, that’s a crazy statement to make, but courtside seats cost that much or more, and that 10-second clip was shockingly close to the real thing." The author was shown…
Thank you, I feel like I'm taking crazy pills or something. I have no idea how much of the footage in the long advertisements are actual in-headset recording vs highly editorialized made up aspirational CG. Additionally, I really don't think all the people here singing the praises of Apple's currently nonexistent headset (for actual customer use at least until 2024 or something) have ever used a headset. Headsets giv…
If it’s as good as they say, then the market will show it. It’s not worth worrying about whether it will succeed or not; that’s Apple’s concern alone. We can all just enjoy the ride in the meantime.
Re: Apple Vision
#178Earlier quoted context omitted.
"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.
Apple's problem is that the "pro" version is not just twice as expensive as the "consumer" version needs to be in order to be a market success, it's ten times more expensive than the consumer version needs to be. edit: the fanatics are really out with the downvotes today
Is it really a problem if it works and people buy it?
Re: Apple Vision
#179> 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?
It seems lazy to me, do a Google search for "Vision Pro", excluding results from the past couple of days, and it seems there were already a ton of products and services with the same name. Perfect time to bring back the "i", though they already have "iSight". "iBorg"?
Do this search a year from now and I’m sure Apple would’ve done (and gotten done) enough SEO for its device to be the top or among the top results.
Re: Apple Vision
#180Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anecdotally, everyone I know with a VR headset (all of about 5 people) is quite open that porn was one reason for the purchase. The claim isn’t that porn drives technical advances the way space does, but that porn drives consumer adoption of new tech. If a new product category does X, Y, and Z, some percentage of people will buy it. If it does X, Y, Z, and porn, it’s going to sell to a bigger audience and probably ma…
> but that porn drives consumer adoption of new tech sure. where's the evidence? anything that can serve video can serve porn. where's evidence that porn in particular is somehow unique? YouTube for example as more active users than all porn sites combined, yet porn is not even available on YouTube. being able to play videos in XR I think will be a real use-case, but this idea that porn in particular is the real usec…
The most dramatic case is older — VHS literally won because of porn.
And there was video porn long before YouTube was founded. The claim is that porn drove people to get computers capable of showing video, to buy internet connections fast enough for video, etc. It is not that video sites must serve porn, but that the grassroots interest in porn created the market conditions that made YouTube possible.
It’s hard to substantiate because how would you? Other than just having lived through that time and observed (VHS was before my time, but The DVD market was similar).
Maybe that era has stopped and horny people are no longer seeking out the newest best way to consume porn, and technology is now pure. I’m just not seeing it, but maybe that’s my cultural bubble.