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

Apple Vision Pro upgraded with M5 chip

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 356 posts

Re: Apple Vision Pro upgraded with M5 chip

#231

Post by kibwen »

stetrain wrote: post #143
kibwen wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Personally I find a Mac to be a better development environment than Windows This is both true and completely irrelevant, because the point of the above comment is that Apple is not in the business of catering to this use case. Look at the annual revenues: $225 billion from iPhone/iPad, $100 billion from "services" (which Apple mostly characterizes as "app store stuff"), $40 billion from accessories (watch, airpods,…

You can't build iPhone or iPad apps on iPhones or iPads yet, so a decent chunk of that revenue currently relies on the Mac as well. Even without that, calling a $30B business an "insignificant historical afterthought" is a bit of an exaggeration, no?

> You can't build iPhone or iPad apps on iPhones or iPads yet, so a decent chunk of that revenue currently relies on the Mac as well.

This is both entirely true and still manages to miss the point. Yes, Apple keeps the Mac around exclusively to accommodate the creation of iOS apps. No, they are not financially incentivized to create new categories of hardware that cater toward productivity when instead they could lock them down and milk that cow for all it's worth via the app store tax.

Re: Apple Vision Pro upgraded with M5 chip

#232

Post by boogieknite »

epolanski wrote: post #88
CaptainOfCoit wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Similar to when the iPhone first appeared, remember it was really uncommon where I live and the first time I held one was while visiting France. But it was a rare item at first as well, not sure that tells us anything about how useful it is/can be.

Just because many products didn't impress at first and did well later, doesn't matter you can ignore that the opposite is even more frequent. But yours, is especially an apples and oranges comparison. The original iPhone was a flawed internet-less take on a thriving exploding market (mobile). VR's market just questionable.

i think its fair to say vr market is less than questionable. in theory ar/vr already has enough features to be worth using. in reality people dont want to put things on their face

i have an avp and use it daily. but it turns out im weird and most people simply dont want to put screens on their face

Re: Apple Vision Pro upgraded with M5 chip

#233

Post by FumblingBear »

fennecfoxy wrote: post #115
DennisP wrote: post #23

I was super interested in the Vision Pro when it was first released. Then I found out they went with an app model and the device could only display a single MacOS window. There went my dream of surrounding myself with a bunch of vim windows and terminals. If they'd focused on maximizing the device's usefulness instead of its revenue stream, maybe things would have worked out better.

Another comment mentions how useful it is because it's integrated with Apple's ecosystem. I mean of course it is...Apple makes it. I do wonder if that person had ever tried any of the myriad of VR device available a decade before beforehand and I do wonder how popular Apple's product would be if other companies were given the opportunity to integrate with the OS on the same level that Apple can (I feel like Apple is…

I think I may be the commenter you're referring to, and yes, I have used many different VR devices over the years. I've owned at least 3 other headsets and used 5.

My point in saying the usefulness of it being tied to the ecosystem was more of a negative one than a positive one if it wasn't clear. It is personally useful for me because I have a lot of Apple products at home (though I also have PC and linux stuff too), but I wish my primary use-cases for it were more platform agnostic.

I'm also very in support of aggressive anti-trust legislation and it's probably my biggest point of contention with Apple.

Despite all that, I still like the Vision Pro and think it's an incredible piece of tech that blows every other headset I've tried out of the water for the things I like to do.

Re: Apple Vision Pro upgraded with M5 chip

#234

Post by happymellon »

random3 wrote: post #209
fennecfoxy wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another comment mentions how useful it is because it's integrated with Apple's ecosystem. I mean of course it is...Apple makes it. I do wonder if that person had ever tried any of the myriad of VR device available a decade before beforehand and I do wonder how popular Apple's product would be if other companies were given the opportunity to integrate with the OS on the same level that Apple can (I feel like Apple is…

OSX is at 16% of the market (Windows is 63%). Exactly how is this breaking anti-competitive laws?

Anti-trust does not require someone to have 100% of a market.

I also don't think think this breaks anti-trust but percentages doesn't stop market manipulation.

Re: Apple Vision Pro upgraded with M5 chip

#235

Post by efavdb »

dvdsgl wrote: post #228
DennisP wrote: post #23

I was super interested in the Vision Pro when it was first released. Then I found out they went with an app model and the device could only display a single MacOS window. There went my dream of surrounding myself with a bunch of vim windows and terminals. If they'd focused on maximizing the device's usefulness instead of its revenue stream, maybe things would have worked out better.

You can surround yourself with floating terminals using the Blink app. Here I code from the couch surrounded by nvim, Claude Code, etc.: https://x.com/dvdsgl/status/1948840477970841720/video/1

awesome. curious, what's your review for this use case?

Re: Apple Vision Pro upgraded with M5 chip

#236

Post by amelius »

random3 wrote: post #223
amelius wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This stuff has been solved ages ago on Unix.

Oh, did Linux get IO handover and I missed it? Have they been doing it for ages with their librephone announcement yesterday?

Check out:

https://xpra.org/index.html

Re: Apple Vision Pro upgraded with M5 chip

#237

Post by rs186 »

scrlk wrote: post #8

> Apple Vision Pro with the M5 chip and Dual Knit Band starts at $3,499 (U.S.), and is available in 256GB, 512GB, and 1TB storage capacities. Apple being stingy with storage (and RAM) isn’t new, but the base $3.5k spec with only 256 GB is extreme. EDIT: clarity

I am just surprised they didn't increase the price, like what they did with almost every other new product (other than base iPhone, I guess).

My conspiracy theory is that they don't want to grab attention and get any more bad rep for this product when they are already half giving up.

Re: Apple Vision Pro upgraded with M5 chip

#238

Post by oxml »

vunderba wrote: post #152
mrpippy wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It can display an entire Mac desktop https://support.apple.com/en-us/118521

That's not what we want at all. I should be able to slap a "Sync" button while wearing the Vision and every single window/app currently running on my Macbook Pro should show up as a completely independent spatially manipulable display within the virtual environment. That way I still get all the power of my dedicated Mac with the freedom of VR. Even before it came out, I naturally assumed it was going to be able to do…

It would be nice if Apple allowed people to choose how Mac virtual display windows were shown. I have a Vision Pro and I rather like the way it's implemented. From a UX perspective, I can't imagine trying to deal with hundreds of windows in AR space. The Vision Pro UI is good, but I'm nowhere near as fast as with a keyboard and mouse.

Re: Apple Vision Pro upgraded with M5 chip

#239

Post by quitit »

CaptainOfCoit wrote: post #32
ulfw wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have given up on it. This is simply a chip replacement. It's likely cheaper than keep producing M2s just for this thing.

> They have given up on it > keep producing Maybe it's just me, but if they keep producing it (regardless of what chip), doesn't that mean they haven't given up on it?

The evidence for "giving up" is pretty thin.

Ignoring the new model: which has upgraded screens, a faster refresh rate and a new headband design amongst other upgrades - which each indicate more R&D activity on the Vision Pro than say AirPods Max or the HomePod line. One would still need to content with:

- Embracing 3rd party wide field-of-view, 180°, and 360° camera makers for direct compatibility for content creation.

- Working with Black Magic Design on a spatial production workflow and a specialised camera for simplified spatial video creation.

- The development of not just more content, but more types of content, especially around live events and sports.

- A steady stream of software updates that add useful and forward-planning functionality.

The people that are saying that it's dead are simply choosing not to pay attention or confusing apple's push into widening their AR offerings as abandoning the vision pro.

It's also hard to reason with these people because they suggest (without evidence) that the sales numbers are unexpectedly low, while also stating that the factory that makes the screens is limiting production (again without evidence). This is more the type of speak of PR astroturfing than genuine discussion.

Re: Apple Vision Pro upgraded with M5 chip

#240

Post by alt227 »

throwaway7679 wrote: post #205
alt227 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean? This problem has already been solved and is just a case of miniturisation which history has shown the industry can do very quickly. 5 Years and there will not be a 'headset' on sale anymore. It will all be normal sized glasses.

There are several gaps in capability between headsets and glasses, which cannot be filled by any existing technology. For example, consider field of view, which is a critical measurement of these displays. Typical specs are 120 degrees for headsets, 40 for glasses. Headsets also perform very high performance rendering compared to glasses. The tiny Glasses can't be expected to compete with headsets, much less eliminat…

All of that will be solved by miniturisation and advancement of tech.

I think you are short sighted (haha!) to think that headsets and glasses are different categories, and that headsets are not just a preliminary research phase to things in the future like smart contact lenses etc.

Post reply on HN