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

First impressions: Yes, Apple Vision Pro works and yes, it’s good

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 562 posts

Re: First impressions: Yes, Apple Vision Pro works and yes, it’s good

#281

Post by jojobas »

kaba0 wrote: post #167
jojobas wrote: post #75

They claim 4k resolution over some 120x70 degrees FoV. This makes for some ~800x600 resolution for a focus area such a page of text in the middle of the field. How can it be sharp enough? Does it use some sort of uneven pixel distribution?

I believe they can use practically uneven pixel distribution by lenses. So if they render the “middle” over a larger area and later correct for that with lenses than in effect that part will be of higher pixel density.

I highly doubt it. The average pixel density is 33 pixels per degree (compared 60+ ppd of a no-frills monitor at a typical desk distance). Concentrating pixels in the centre to make a reasonable display would leave something like 10ppd for the periphery, which is like 1/5 of eye's resolution.

Re: First impressions: Yes, Apple Vision Pro works and yes, it’s good

#282

Post by JohnAaronNelson »

PostOnce wrote: post #72

I don't understand why there is no AR or VR killer app for this thing. Their sales pitch was "it makes it amazing to read articles in safari"? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYkq9Rgoj8E&t=5410s $3500 to... look at a floating web browser? Surely they can come up with something. Give me UV/IR vision, let me see the pipes under the ground, show me how to assemble the furniture I'm looking at, give me a template to pain…

The killer app will be porn and/or virtually undressing the people around you.

Re: First impressions: Yes, Apple Vision Pro works and yes, it’s good

#283

Post by manuelabeledo »

omeze wrote: post #242
ttul wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first iPhone was pretty crappy. No apps. 2G only. Poor battery life. Limited global distribution - not even Canada could get it. But it captivated people who didn’t own it yet, and it proved out some essential ideas like multitouch. And when the iPhone 3G came out, improving on some of the original device’s shortcomings, it was wildly popular. The rest is history. There is no doubt that AR will eventually get goo…

The first iphone let you have a real web browser anywhere you had cell coverage. This lets you have a web browser floating at home. Its not the same (and I love VR)

There were also hundreds of phones doing that already. And phones with touchscreens.

I guess we’ll need to wait to see what happens with this. Apple has a good track with proving tech literate people wrong.

Re: First impressions: Yes, Apple Vision Pro works and yes, it’s good

#284

Post by username3 »

lhl wrote: post #106
frant-hartm wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They advertise the "4K per eye" as some kind of an advantage. They need to do this to have 3D vision, but it doesn't improve the resolution, it's still just 4K. And the 4K is across your whole FOV, I would like to see a comparison with some standard monitors (4K at 27" and 32") at particular distances from your eyes. I suppose because they didn't publish anything it is still significantly worse than hi-res monitors (…

At 90-100 degrees, a 4K/eye display will likely end up being around 35-40 PPD (pixels per degree). This is about equivalent to what a FHD display would like like (27" monitor at 60cm: https://qasimk.io/screen-ppd/ ). There are a lot of other factors like fill factor (screen door effect) and there are definitely some optical designs that can increase PPD as well. Apple bought Limbak recently, btw, it's possible they u…

Apple’s keynote showed an image similar to the 3-lens optical train at the bottom of https://simulavr.com/blog/ppd-optics/ and they have a screenshot of HN.

Re: First impressions: Yes, Apple Vision Pro works and yes, it’s good

#285

Post by saiya-jin »

sebzim4500 wrote: post #231
willis936 wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>They're targeting all use cases Except for the one use case where there has actually been demand for VR: gaming. Apple's plan is to eat Meta's lunch. Meta's lunch consists of two peas and a leaf of wilted lettuce.

What makes you think they aren't targeting gaming? They just didn't have anything to show yet, since none of the studios have one of these and Apple don't make games. I would imagine gaming with this will be great, you get all the benefits of VR without having to use one of those stupid motion controllers.

Did you miss the tiny little part of having no controllers? If you want to play some trivial games via tapping with fingers around for sure, but nothing sophisticated can be done. Whole UI is done for browsing and mimicking big screen and reading text.

Unless you mean holding mouse and keyboard, while sitting behind desk. For 1/5th of the price you can just buy big gaming curved screen which has many many technologies that help gaming experience, and Apple will have 0 (ie gsync/freesync, antiflickering etc.).

Re: First impressions: Yes, Apple Vision Pro works and yes, it’s good

#286

Post by sensanaty »

Thank you, Generic Advertisement Camouflaged as an Article for Shiny New Thing from MegaCorp Inc!

Those conspiracy theories about chemicals in American tapwater must be onto something if people are genuinely (aka not obvious shills) excited about this clownery.

Re: First impressions: Yes, Apple Vision Pro works and yes, it’s good

#287

Post by spaceman_2020 »

op00to wrote: post #237
spaceman_2020 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here in India, they've been handing out discounts. Got a new iPhone 14 after exchange for $600. The competition is almost the same price. The Macbooks look expensive too until you compare them to similar Windows laptops with equivalent screens, trackpads, and battery life.

“After exchange”. What’s the total price before the value of the trade in phone? Jeez.

Before any discounts, exchanges or offers, the Galaxy S23 is $925. The iPhone 14 is $986.

Re: First impressions: Yes, Apple Vision Pro works and yes, it’s good

#288

Post by projektfu »

amoss wrote: post #254
lhl wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At 90-100 degrees, a 4K/eye display will likely end up being around 35-40 PPD (pixels per degree). This is about equivalent to what a FHD display would like like (27" monitor at 60cm: https://qasimk.io/screen-ppd/ ). There are a lot of other factors like fill factor (screen door effect) and there are definitely some optical designs that can increase PPD as well. Apple bought Limbak recently, btw, it's possible they u…

Could you expand on your numbers a little? Assuming 4k resolution per eye and 120 degree FoV would give 3840*2/120 = 64 ppd. Using the link that you gave a 4k screen at 60cm is 73 ppd, so it is reasonably close. Apple haven't said what the FoV is yet, so I'm guessing 120 based on the pi-max and an early impressions video from mkbd. The horizontal range isn't clear either: 23 megapixels would be about three 4k screens…

With stereoscopic displays you don't get to multiply by 2, so your calculation is 32pp°.

If you think about a monitor in front, each pixel is seen by both eyes, but the headset is giving one 4k display to each eye.

Re: First impressions: Yes, Apple Vision Pro works and yes, it’s good

#289

Post by saiya-jin »

geysersam wrote: post #193
andrewstuart wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>. am i REALLY that old? am i taking crazy pills? What you are, is snarky. The only times Apple ever did this in the past, the product flopped because it was too expensive. Maybe other companies have been leading with expensive tech waiting for the market to catch up, but Apple hasn't - not since the Lisa anyway. And yes I am on old fogey - ol enough to remember that the industry has been waiting for consumers to "c…

> Ordinary people don't want to put a VR headset on - they just don't. Why not? Because it's heavy, sweaty, smelly, expensive, uncomfortable for the eyes, or some other reason? I doubt people have real ideological aversion towards headsets. If people don't want them it's probably because of one of the practical reasons above. And honestly most of those are likely to be alleviated in the near future.

No, its because most people hate the idea of being around other people who so blatantly disconnect from everybody and look like idiots, or being actually those people. Its the exact opposite of 'cool' - its desperate, rude, pathetic.

Those are not my words, I wouldn't mind wearing it in private (for open spaces with other people including my family definitely above is valid), its from my wife who is a doctor. And she generally likes tech, has latest iphone and garmin 6 pro watches. Just because you like some gadget, you can't force it on folks who properly detest the whole idea of it.

Let's not even start the discussion on negative physical and mental health effects of watching this for longer, especially in kids.

Re: First impressions: Yes, Apple Vision Pro works and yes, it’s good

#290

Post by jryle70 »

m4rtink wrote: post #184
King-Aaron wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What killer app did laptops have that made them the success they are today? Does new technology necessarily need a killer app if the ergonomics end up being more desirable to a broad range of users? I don't necessarily know the answer here, but my gut feeling is that defining this device based on a "killer app" is like trying to define the original iPhone as needing a "killer app". It didn't necessarily have such a t…

Spreadsheets and word processors.

Not when the first laptop came out. Imagine lugging around a heavy piece of computer, with crammed keyboard and not so nice monitor. Why should one be subjected to such a subpar experience?
Post reply on HN