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

Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine

jorgeherskovic.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 213 posts

Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine

#191

Post by ProfessorLayton »

ecf wrote: post #78
KMnO4 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I genuinely think Apple wanted this to be relatively unpalatable to the typical consumer. They want to build something to prove their tech is the future, but don’t actually want anyone to buy this iteration. Why? Because they need developers to make worthwhile apps. Yes, the original iPhone shipped without an App Store, but it could also do regular phone stuff (calls, sms, etc). What’s the “regular” stuff you’d expec…

> I genuinely think Apple wanted this to be relatively unpalatable to the typical consumer. You’re starting to hit on Apple’s strategy. Build something expensive and impressive, get all the media hype out of it with influencers making content and consumers watching it cause it’s the expensive thing. Then it comes down in price over 10 years and soon everybody has one, because everyone wants to try to Apple thing they…

The iPad was far from expensive at launch, considering it was a brand new category, and it was rumored to launch at ~1k. It was a huge surprise when the price was revealed at $500. Apple even acknowledges it in the keynote!

Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine

#192

Post by elicash »

chx wrote: post #103

This is your regular reminder to read https://disconnect.blog/apples-vision-pro-headset-deserves/ > Tech companies want us isolated and constantly staring at screens because it drives profit > the tech industry has been incentivized to push our society in the direction of isolation because it serves their business models. Even The Verge admitted the Vision Pro is isolating this is why you shouldn't buy one or if you…

> Even The Verge admitted...

The Verge gave weak ratings to the first AirPods and the first Apple Watch. Despite their issues (first version of watch was kinda slow, buggy on 3rd party apps), they were overall great devices. Maybe you agree with me here, maybe you don't, but the point is that the Verge is not somewhere that blindly says whatever new thing Apple creates is amazing.

I am NOT AT ALL arguing this is a good device. I am, however, arguing that talking about the Verge like that isn't warranted.

Also, to add in agreement to your overall point about it being isolating, MKBHD's latest video hits on the same point. So I agree with you, but just think the subtle swipe at the Verge was wrong. It's a great publication, even in the specific instances where I've disagreed with it. (And for AVP, I think they had the best review... which was somewhat negative.)

Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine

#193

Post by ProfessorLayton »

samatman wrote: post #171
thiago_fm wrote: post #10

"It’s a V1 Apple product. It’s a new category, for them, and by far the most ambitious headset on the consumer market." Well, all other V1 Apple products weren't half-assed, or at least when they were, they offered something more than the competitors. Meta Quest 3 is better on everything, despite eye tracking(for a reason, it sucks for many things, I'm sure Meta can have just as good, if they wanted to, but they like…

> Well, all other V1 Apple products weren't half-assed Can't think of an Apple product line in which the first edition wasn't half-assed in some important way. This is something the company is known for, it's a truism. Even the first iPod made significant compromises.

Pretty much every product Apple launched before the Vision had a specific use case at launch:

- iPod: 1,000 songs in your pocket

- iPhone: Phone + Internet Communicator + iPod

- iPad: Media consumption device

- Vision: ???

Of course all these products had shortcomings when they first launched, but there was a specific purpose in mind for them in their very first iteration. What the initial devices could do was limited, but what they did, they did better than anything else.

The Vision is missing that initial use case, and it's what makes it feel half-assed.

Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine

#194

Post by symlinkk »

password54321 wrote: post #156
symlinkk wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh why haven’t Apple Watch apps taken off then? Or what about the macOS App Store, why is that dead?

sigh , you seem to be lacking basic knowledge in this area. I can buy/download an app for my iPhone and have it available on Watch/iPad/iPhone/Mac. There was 90 billion dollars spent on the app store last year alone and it is only increasing.

Break down that 90 billion by iPhone vs Watch / iPad / Mac. I guarantee 99% is coming from iPhone. Their other stores haven’t taken off.

Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine

#195

Post by hbn »

runjake wrote: post #152
thiago_fm wrote: post #10

"It’s a V1 Apple product. It’s a new category, for them, and by far the most ambitious headset on the consumer market." Well, all other V1 Apple products weren't half-assed, or at least when they were, they offered something more than the competitors. Meta Quest 3 is better on everything, despite eye tracking(for a reason, it sucks for many things, I'm sure Meta can have just as good, if they wanted to, but they like…

> Apple needs a new CEO ASAP, Tim is John Sculley, at first sales go up, profits are up, but then after a few years you are stuck and other companies are eating your lunch. I predicted this many years ago, but the evidence I've seen convinces me I was wrong. I really disagreed with their past emphasis on the iPad as a computer at the expense of the Mac, but I feel they've course-corrected since. Of course, on a long…

I can't imagine how anyone could think Apple needs a new CEO considering how incredibly they've performed the past few years. And I don't just mean stocks - Google has made stock prices go up for a long time but I think they've tarnished so much of their goodwill at this point that they need to get rid of Sundar.

But Apple? Even putting aside company value, in the past decade they've created the best selling watch on the planet, and arguably still make the only actually good smartwatch (thanks to Google floundering for years - even before Apple got to the market). They kickstarted the true wireless headphones industry with a product line that on its own could be considered an insanely valuable company with how many they sell -- because people love them. They moved all their laptops to custom silicon with incredible performance and battery life that for majority of peoples' computing use-cases completely destroys any reason to buy any other laptop. And young people are becoming more exclusively stuck to the iPhone by the day, almost 90% of American teens use an iPhone now.

I don't know why anyone would want to get rid of Tim Cook.

Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine

#196

Post by OJFord »

ewzimm wrote: post #189
OJFord wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But I suspect Generative AI is the path to one- fully immersive, hyper-realistic, real-time generated worlds will be killer, and something only VR can really immerse you in. We are nowhere close to that being feasible for anything like as cheap as $5k, the compute requirement would be insane. VR gaming is already intensive, add the inference of 'fully immersive, hyper-realistic, real-time generated worlds'...

The worlds themselves don't need to be generated on-device, just rendered there (even as a video stream.) The AIs that will build virtual worlds will live in datacenters and stream to headsets. Local AI will likely focus on predicting movement, upscaling, adding frames, and reducing latency from the source in a similar way that RTX cards do now. I would be very surprised if we don't see online AI-generated virtual wo…

Ok, so why 'real-time generated' at all? Now we're just doing VR MMORPG with an expensive implementation detail that doesn't make an end-user difference?

Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine

#197

Post by fsh »

archagon wrote: post #168
fsh wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just don't get this obsession with taking on debt. "Financing" doesn't make a product any cheaper. If you can't pay $5000 now, you probably shouldn't buy the product.

You can invest the money in the meantime, leading to anywhere from guaranteed 5% to likely 10-30% returns.

I still don't understand why an effective 5% "discount" (not counting the effort to actually invest the money) makes the $5000 pill any easier to swallow. The money is still gone.

Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine

#198

Post by OJFord »

nozzlegear wrote: post #175
OJFord wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the UK (and EU maybe?) that's not 'very generous', that's just 'distance selling regulation'. (Though as the name implies it wouldn't be mandatory for in-store purchases.) Besides, you could buy your Apple products from Amazon instead and get ..I think it's 30?

I should clarify, it’s generous for the US. =P I’m not sure about the Amazon return policy in the US either, I don’t buy from them very much. I dont think they let US customers return purchases with no questions asked, there has to be a reason such as the product being damaged? I could be wrong though, like I said, I don’t purchase from Amazon much.

I'm fairly sure Amazon is 30 days globally, you have to give a reason yeah, but I've never had that result in anything other than instant generation of return label - I think it's for their accounting/OEM feedback purposes, not adjudicating return legitimacy. Much like you're saying about Apple, they get a lot of my business (even when I know they're not the absolute cheapest or quickest/easiest) because they make returns easy in the event I need it. eBay or AliExpress for example would have to be significantly cheaper to sway me.

Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine

#199

Post by ewzimm »

OJFord wrote: post #196
ewzimm wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The worlds themselves don't need to be generated on-device, just rendered there (even as a video stream.) The AIs that will build virtual worlds will live in datacenters and stream to headsets. Local AI will likely focus on predicting movement, upscaling, adding frames, and reducing latency from the source in a similar way that RTX cards do now. I would be very surprised if we don't see online AI-generated virtual wo…

Ok, so why 'real-time generated' at all? Now we're just doing VR MMORPG with an expensive implementation detail that doesn't make an end-user difference?

Real-time generated because it will respond to the players to feel more alive. Worlds right now are mostly static. Imagine Star Citizen but you don't have to wait for decades for it to be developed because the galaxy creates itself as you explore it. No more invisible walls.

Re: Apple Vision Nope: Why I returned mine

#200

Post by iteratethis »

faefox wrote: post #121

This product will go the way of the Touch Bar in a couple of years. The original iPhone launched at roughly $742 adjusted for inflation. Apple Vision Pro starts at nearly five times that amount and from what I understand that's not factoring in much if any margin. If that is indeed the case Apple has a long, long road ahead before they can price this thing anywhere near a level where it makes sense for the average co…

The same is true for developers.

Creating engaging high quality spatial content/experiences is insanely difficult and expensive. It's something Disney can do, but not 99% of current iOS developers.

Post reply on HN