Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset • Hacker News Board

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#191

Post by veidr » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 4:16 AM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #170

veidr wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, although that might be where my analogy breaks down. Controllers are today the primary input device for pretty much all VR headsets out there. So, maybe the better analogy would be the Blackberry's keyboard. And we know who won that one. I think Apple is probably right to just double down on bare hands and voice as the input mechanism for spatial computing. I'm just also saying that controllers do have some adv…

I guess my point would be that Apple's approach towards inputs with the iPad and, much more importantly, the iPhone were vindicated probably as thoroughly as anything in the history of the computer industry? Jobs made the stylus wisecrack in 2010. In 2023, that statement remains dead on the money. Lots of things Jobs said didn't age that well. This one did.

Yeah, I actually agree with you completely. I probably didn't phrase things as well as I should have (maybe because I love me some stylus, haha).

What I meant was that probably someday Apple will be happy to sell us super high tech controllers for spatial computing, but for launch they are taking the same stance as they did with the iPhone, and going all-in on designing the whole experience to just use your hands.

(And, yes, this is probably the correct decision here, just as it was then.)

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#192

Post by sm_1024 » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 4:19 AM UTC

zmmmmm wrote: post #159

smoldesu wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The hard part is the low end - and Meta has 20 million devices sold there. If the hardware is an obstacle to reaching market fit, I'm pretty confident Meta could get there. It's mostly a matter of scaling up what they already have.

The sticking point is the silicon which they don't control. After watching Android flail for 10 years unable to match Apple's ARM processors in phones, I'm unfortunately not super optimistic that Meta can influence Qualcomm to suddenly make the necessary leap in performance needed. Of course, if they concede having an external power brick perhaps they can just stack multiple XR2's in there and get into the range ...…

Modern Android processors are pretty competitive with iPhone's silicon:

S23, 1.4k (Single core), 4.8k (Multi core), 79.3 (3d mark/GPU)

14 pro max, 1.8k (Single core), 5.3k (Multi core), 74 (3d mark/GPU)

Looks like gen2 is already on-par in multi-core and GPU perf. Single core still is 28% faster in iphone.

---

https://www.tomsguide.com/news/galaxy-s23-ultra-vs-iphone-14...

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#193

Post by zmmmmm » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 4:19 AM UTC

tjpnz wrote: post #157

>could be the vision of the future of computing, but like, it’s not the one that I want. We'll have to wait and see with Vision Pro, but it's already pretty clear that Zuckerberg's vision is not one that anyone wants.

20M people bought Quests. More than x-box in the same period. I find this writing off of their sales achievements as really superficial. Whatever else you want to say, they shifted units and the people buying them wanted something he was selling.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#194

Post by seanmcdirmid » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 4:21 AM UTC

tjpnz wrote: post #157

>could be the vision of the future of computing, but like, it’s not the one that I want. We'll have to wait and see with Vision Pro, but it's already pretty clear that Zuckerberg's vision is not one that anyone wants.

I’m much more interested in the Quest 3 than the Vision Pro. At least Zuck’s vision includes BeatSaber.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#195

Post by jsnell » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 4:22 AM UTC

Foxhuls wrote: post #175

Laremere wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't seen anything about controllers that work with the Vision Pro. Lacking those is a nonstarter for a lot of VR gaming.

As others have mentioned, I’m sure that this will support controllers such as a PlayStation controller like the other iOS devices. I also just personally view this as more of a computer worn on your head than a VR headset. I personally purchased the first Vive that released and sold it shortly after. I’ve also tried a few other headsets afterwards. I have yet to experience a time that VR headsets have seemed to be mo…

You're not going to play VR games with a vanilla console controller. And if you're thinking of emulating non-VR PC games on the headset, that seems like it would not be all that compelling. What's the draw?

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#196

Post by tjpnz » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 4:22 AM UTC

zmmmmm wrote: post #193

tjpnz wrote: post #157

>could be the vision of the future of computing, but like, it’s not the one that I want. We'll have to wait and see with Vision Pro, but it's already pretty clear that Zuckerberg's vision is not one that anyone wants.

20M people bought Quests. More than x-box in the same period. I find this writing off of their sales achievements as really superficial. Whatever else you want to say, they shifted units and the people buying them wanted something he was selling.

They're using it for games, but not Horizon Worlds which is arguably the vision.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#197

Post by stocknoob » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 4:22 AM UTC

makeitdouble wrote: post #66

ctvo wrote: post #25

This sounded weak to me. Apple is making an integrated headset: their own lenses, processor, ..., down to the operating system. The Quest uses an Android based operating system and a lot of off the shelf components. We've seen this story before and it hasn't ended well for the folks in Mark's position. A personal device like these headsets needs to be delightful . It has to be responsive. It has to have the little to…

> We've seen this story before and it hasn't ended well for the folks in Mark's position. Is Microsoft today in a fundamentally problematic position ? Apple has the spotlight and a higher evaluation, but I'm not sure Google or Microsoft "haven't ended well". > A personal device like these headsets needs to be delightful. The number of people willing to pay for "delightful" is pretty small though. Even as today, the i…

WinCE? Windows phone? TabletPC? Their non-vertical integrated devices sucked.

Microsoft lost an entire platform, and yes, that was a problem (they’ve since recovered with other bets).

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#198

Post by dingle_thunk » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 4:22 AM UTC

zmmmmm wrote: post #185

For me the million dollar question is whether he chooses to try to compete directly with it (as in, Quest Pro 2 with increased specs) or if he tries to comfortably settle into the low end and leave the high end to Apple. I really do hope he chooses to compete. A quick turnaround on a Quest Pro 2 with only the updates they are already shipping in the Quest 3 would put them an vastly better position and still 1/3 the p…

They don't actually need a quick turnaround on the Quest Pro 2, as the Apple headset is launching next year. Apple has given them plenty of warning, they have runway to comprehensively respond. Such a premature announcement is reminiscent of the Osborne effect. I think it'll negatively impact sales, and it'll make the ultimate value proposition of their first product difficult. Apple are really cashing in that brand value here...

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#199

Post by seanmcdirmid » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 4:23 AM UTC

ravst3s wrote: post #176

veidr wrote: post #101

I use the Quest Pro right now, because my interest in spatial computing (I like Apple's new term so trying to use it, haha) is greater than my misgivings about Meta (even though those are significant). I will buy the Apple thing, too. There are a lot of interesting differences between them (obviously, the biggest one being the price, and deriving from that) but the one I find interesting is Apple's decision not to ha…

Although these devices will be compared to each other ceaselessly, I think they're targeting two distinct markets. Apple believes that Vision Pro is the future of personal computing. Meta keeps marketing the Quest as social-connected VR gaming device. The former market is far larger and anything that displaces the PC will be transcendental. Although Meta will sell more units in the short-term due to Apple's pricing,…

> Zuck mentioned that activity and "doing things" are Meta advantages, but people don't want to exercise while gaming or consuming entertainment.

A lot of people actually do. There is a whole community built around it.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#200

Post by prawn » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 4:23 AM UTC

smoldesu wrote: post #146

juve1996 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea 20 million cheap VR headsets that haven't taken off into the expected market at all. Any hardware company could do that tomorrow. It's easy. Just source the parts. Apple is practically completely vertically integrated. They design their own chips. They have decades of experience in consumer hardware. To make AR/VR into what Zuck wants, his hardware is NOWHERE near what it needs to be. And they don't have the chop…

> It's easy. Just source the parts. Why is that not a relevant strategy for competing with Apple? Nvidia and arguably AMD could both out-engineer Apple if you're just talking about chips here.

Aren't they talking about the "ease" of competing with a lower-end, non-vertically-integrated device?

Same tactic won't work against Apple because they make the key chips, make the hardware, the software, etc. They can have you look at your MacBook, and the headset brings up your laptop's workspace ready to go.