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

Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 1001 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#401

Post by brandall10 »

ffgjgf1 wrote: post #400
brandall10 wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But they're different classes of devices in a way. It's a new (primarily) standalone computing platform vs. just a peripheral. As far as vision, Meta's ultimate goal is to be the modern version of Linden Lab while Apple is providing the next step in personal computing. Meta's product is the metaverse. Apple's product is this device bolstered by their ecosystem. Give it a couple iterations and you'll have something th…

> $2k many will purchase in lieue of another Macbook That’s a strong statement. Same thing could’ve been said about the iPad and IMHO that would be a more reasonable claim. There isn’t any evidence still that you can do any work comfortably l in this thing regardless of the price point

My take is the iPad is a simplified platform as a replacement for those w/ simplified needs - it does work for some in this capacity, but not as much as Apple original sold it as. For most it's a supplementary device for content consumption. This is expansive, a 'next step', designed to replace everything. Time will tell and I'm similarly cautious.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#402

Post by kart23 »

Apple really isn't introducing any fundamentally new concepts here. It's all just 2D windows floating around in 3D space. And the new things like 3D photos seem to be universally panned by people who've tried the headset. VR is such a new powerful format, for apple to present a bunch of 2D windows running the same old apps being 'spatial computing' is kind of a joke.

The hardware is really impressive, the functionality is extremely underwhelming.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#403

Post by mynameisvlad »

Takennickname wrote: post #362
mynameisvlad wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ew. Fat shaming is not a good look. You don’t know them. You don’t know the reasons for their weight. They very well could be using the device daily to exercise for all you know and it could be an issue with his metabolism. Or another medical condition. Or a side effect of drugs. Or literally hundreds of other reasons.

[flagged]

[flagged]

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#404

Post by seanhunter »

5350-uiop-1130 wrote: post #382
MrJagil wrote: post #356

For the third time, I’d like to reiterate my point on Metas recent trailer for their new Quest headset: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36201835 It turns out, it wasnt marketing that did wrong when Meta designed their trailer to be hip and energetic and happening. And it wasn’t Apple marketing that just “got it right” with their trailer when they focused on immersion. In reality, it has nothing to do with market…

The Vison trailer felt like it was directed by Cronenberg or David Lynch. Something very off about it, the over-polished, plastic execs, talking out of smiles wider than the grand canyon and the weird almost dreamlike people and scenarios.

Compared to the closest comparable which was the Zuckerberg Meta reveal video[1] which was so weird the country of Iceland produced a parody of it. [2]

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjNI9K1D_xo&pp=ygURaWNlbGFuZ...

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enMwwQy_noI&pp=ygURaWNlbGFuZ...

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#405

Post by pfannkuchen »

nologic01 wrote: post #393

There is something quite remarkable and puzzling about the VR/AR and now SC (spatial computing) space. All major (ad)tech companies are convinced that this is a major market that will materialize and be profitable if the right combination of hardware and software is developed. Their VR "visions" differ but only at the margin. No matter how you execute it, we are talking about people (homo sapiens) putting a major som…

Abstractly, we have different devices that stimulate our sensory inputs by mimicking, in an imperfect way, what they receive naturally in the environment.

We can make devices that are fixed in space, where you need to orient your sensory inputs around the device. Or, we can make devices that instead are themselves oriented around your sensory inputs. The latter tends to be better for ergonomics and convenience (at least), since the device is accommodating your senses instead of your senses accommodating the device.

In other words, AR/VR/etc devices are headphones for the eyes. I can see why it seems like an obvious next step to some (if they can get it right).

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#406

Post by microtonal »

askafriend wrote: post #208
atleastoptimal wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"spatial computing" is such a silly marketing phrase. All we saw was 2D windows placed in a fake 3D world. It's all just an aesthetic upgrade, a minor QOL improvement that has its own downsides, nothing more.

That's a skeumorphic anchor to get people comfortable with a new technology. If you're going to introduce technology to the masses, you have to do it in stages. There's a lot more going on here than is apparent on the surface. You could have said all of things about the original iPhone. It did similar things to a lot of existing smartphones at the time (send email, play music, browse web, make call).

That's a skeumorphic anchor to get people comfortable with a new technology.

Not just that. It also makes the Vision not just an ill-defined VR product, but also a 'MacBook Air or iPad for on the go with far more screen real estate'. This pitch resonates with pro users who are not necessarily interested in VR. The initial reaction of Apple-using friends/family is: I'd probably buy this as a replacement for a MacBook + external screen. It also makes the pricing more acceptable - it's about the same prices as a non-mediocre spec'ed MacBook Air + Studio Display.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#407

Post by Rebelgecko »

irishloop wrote: post #184
Rebelgecko wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I got prescription lenses for my Quest and it was a game changer, if you ever yours it again I'd highly recommend dropping the $80 to get a set.

What does that mean? They actually produce specific Quest glasses?

On the budget side, there's 3D printable inserts that accept lenses from a cheap pair of Zennioptical glasses.

I got mine from VROptician whose were a bit pricier (maybe $80?). There were some cool options for magnetic ones, but I don't change the lenses enough for it to be worth the extra cost. It'll be interesting to see what Apple charges for theirs.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#408

Post by Schroedingers2c »

nologic01 wrote: post #393

There is something quite remarkable and puzzling about the VR/AR and now SC (spatial computing) space. All major (ad)tech companies are convinced that this is a major market that will materialize and be profitable if the right combination of hardware and software is developed. Their VR "visions" differ but only at the margin. No matter how you execute it, we are talking about people (homo sapiens) putting a major som…

I see use cases for business. Using HoloLens / Vision Pro / AR instead of sending your engineers to Tokyo.

But for consumers? I mostly agree. It has a few nice gimmick features, but seems rather isolating and disrupting natural human interaction.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#409

Post by vjjsejj »

mynameisvlad wrote: post #245
throwaway2990 wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Ew. Fat shaming is not a good look. You don’t know them. You don’t know the reasons for their weight. They very well could be using the device daily to exercise for all you know and it could be an issue with his metabolism. Or another medical condition. Or a side effect of drugs. Or literally hundreds of other reasons.

[flagged]

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#410

Post by alkonaut »

nologic01 wrote: post #393

There is something quite remarkable and puzzling about the VR/AR and now SC (spatial computing) space. All major (ad)tech companies are convinced that this is a major market that will materialize and be profitable if the right combination of hardware and software is developed. Their VR "visions" differ but only at the margin. No matter how you execute it, we are talking about people (homo sapiens) putting a major som…

Agree. Indeed it's still looking for the breakthrough. The question is whether it's just around the corner like a surprising threshold to usefulness (E.g. like GPT models) or if it's still decades out.

I think there aren't enough people who will want to wear it for games or social media. Not because it's a bad experience, but because it's an expensive and cumbersome experience and it's just not THAT much better than just staring at a small screen. The user base can't motivate spending billions on creating the experiences that would grow the user base significantly.

What I think could be the breakthrough thing is the combination of AI and VR. Interactive agents and possibly also something to cheaply create that holodeck experience for rendering (NeRFs with foveal rendering, whatever - I'm an amateur skimmer of papers and extrapolating research is difficult even for experts). But imagine the difference in development costs between a VR experience where some interior space is modeled by hand in minute detail in Unreal engine, and NPCs are scripted, versus one where a space is merely captured in RFs and the NPCs are GPT bots with some plot instructions. Both of those technologies (NeRFs and GPT NPCs) would have sounded like science fiction even to the creators of the Quest2, yet here we are. I would have said "no one would ever buy/wear this" 5 years ago, but with the idea of a mind blowing photorealistic interactive murder mystery developed on a shoestring budget (Not to mention: porn - never underestimate it) I'm not so sure any more.

Post reply on HN