361–370 of 582 posts
> Apple, meanwhile, isn’t even bothering with presence: even its Facetime integration was with an avatar in a window, leaning into the fact you are apart, whereas Meta wants you to feel like you are together. [was with an avatar in a window] And how Meta is fixing that exactly?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple seems to have two modes they do quite well, create tomorrow, refine today (as it pertains to technology/personal computing). Some % of the company seems to be focused on extremely polished loooonngg term second market mover advantage of bleeding edge tech, and some % of the company seems to be focused on continuous improvement of what exists today. Apple does a great job of working on cutting edge technology th…
> Apple seems to have two modes they do quite well, create tomorrow, refine today. Isn't this a bit hyperbolic for a company that makes personal computers, smartphones, and tablets?
Now I am a lowly programmer + VR enthusiast, so my opinion does not count. But, how do big companies allow Apple to get away with such easy wins !?? Apple said : "We are going to throw infinite money at a pilot product that's basically a tech demo, and convince the market that this tech is for-real-for-real." Meanwhile, Facebook refused to create a balls-to-the-wall VR headset for years and still ended up with a cons…
> Carmack had been pushing for an all-out device but got sidelined by Zuck's push towards cheap and scale Is that true? From this article[1], it sounds like he had been pushing for cheap headsets, not expensive ones: > There he talked about his internal efforts to push for the development of a "super cheap, super lightweight" Meta VR headset that could come in at "$250 and 250 grams." Instead, Meta has put its recent…
With Carmack’s guidance, Facebook made an eminently buildable VR headset, a perfect device for the constraints that limited VR at the time. I bet they could have satisfied a ton of demand if they’d shown anything that got people excited enough to actually have demand.
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. The real usecase is porn, but they're too tactful to say it.
(iPhone 15 or 16 will include the ability to "...take spectacular 3D photos that are incredible when viewed with a Vision Pro!!!" -- sorry, that quote is me imagining an Apple presenter at a future iPhone event.)
"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…
Because this pattern is has been done again and again it’s fairly obvious. The first is the high bar for releasing at all and the willingness to let it die before launching something less than 220% better than industry standard despite tons of investment (apple car?). The second is the progressive improvement over the first several iterations that advances the product in the remaining gaps as their technology improves.
To me, this feels fairly objective and rational and not particularly cultish. It’s the benefit of an earned reputation and a clear and adhered to product development strategy.
So... what's the killer app for this thing? Best I can tell it's a status symbol for a particular type of computer nerd. But blather about the Apple "Vision" has replaced blather about GPT based chatbots on HN, so I am thankful for that. But I am not being facetious when I say that I don't see any application for the technology that justifies the $3500 price tag. But I'm more than willing to be educated. Is BMW going…
I won't be getting one for $3500, but if I was single or a higher earner I probably would. I'm sure they'll sell as many as they can make.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This makes me realize that the gestures it is being demonstrated with are going to be hilarious if they are misidentified. I'm /assuming/ that the thing will not pick up gestures between you and someone else. Such that if I pick up a paper with a similar hand shape as their "pinch and move things" gesture, it will realize it wasn't the same. Or will this be akin to how siri does a shit job understanding anything that…
Hopefully the troubles with Siri are understood enough in Apple that they won’t make that mistake, because Siri is truly awful on my HomePods for thinking I’m talking to Siri when I’m not. Thankfully many of the people in the demo videos were people of colour, so I’m fairly confident Apple has gotten that bit right and hopefully their gesture detecting cameras have IR or dot-pattern emitters to work in the dark as we…
IR dot-patterns will be its own problem. And I hope you never want to curl up on that couch to watch a movie with a blanket. :D
That said, I am certainly not trying to say they definitely got it wrong. I share high hopes that this will work. Not enough that I will be an early adopter, though.
I'm viewing this release from Apple as, essentially, a public DevKit for more slick versions of the same kit in the future.
Something with the described functionality, but the form factor of something closer to Google Glass would 100% be game-changing
ie. You develop your AR apps on this, and then come out with something much more user-friendly in a couple of versions time.
I'm just not convinced that most people want to walk around with this thing on their face for any extended period of time, regardless of how amazing the tech is (and it is amazing!)
Time will tell, I guess.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> you just look at the key you want on the on-screen keyboard and then click it by touching your thumb and index finger. This has been used on many other devices and is miserable, it's like using the joystick to type on a game console
Watch Marques Brownlee's video on it. It's vastly better than anything before it in both hand- and eye-tracking.
Now I am a lowly programmer + VR enthusiast, so my opinion does not count. But, how do big companies allow Apple to get away with such easy wins !?? Apple said : "We are going to throw infinite money at a pilot product that's basically a tech demo, and convince the market that this tech is for-real-for-real." Meanwhile, Facebook refused to create a balls-to-the-wall VR headset for years and still ended up with a cons…
I'm not sure it's fair to say that Facebook had a 7-8 yr head start because Apple has been developing every single component that goes into the VR headset for well over 10 yrs. They design their own cameras, displays, micro processors, lenses, speakers, sensors, etc. Apple has hundreds of engineers working on each of these components for various devices they sell. They've shipped a billion+ of their own custom proces…