Developer tools to create spatial experiences for Apple Vision Pro

Post by yohannparis » Thu, Jun 22, 2023, 10:04 AM UTC

rvz wrote: post #359

andybak wrote: post #334

I don't think there's a single comment here that's about the developer tools. It's all just people debating the merits of the Vision Pro and XR in general. Again...

This just tells us that this version of Apple's Vision product line up is for the rich tech bros here and is not expected to be used by the general consumers who won't throw $3,500 on a XR headset just like the Hololens. Clearly in the comments it just shows how out of touch they are in reality. There will be a version of the vision product line-up that will be reduced to the size and naturalism of a pair of glasses…

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jun 22, 2023, 10:09 AM UTC

t8sr wrote: post #390

dns_snek wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what I understand, OpenXR is a common interface that needs to be implemented by the headset manufacturer. If Apple doesn't do this, OpenXR apps won't work. Before OpenXR every headset had its own interface. Valve and descendants have SteamVR, Oculus has its own runtime, Microsoft and descendants have Windows Mixed Reality. Games/Apps targeting these platforms used to have to implement each one of these interface…

This is the correct answer, despite being downvoted. What’s technically preventing OpenXR apps from working? Vision Pro doesn’t implement OpenXR.

Post by geraneum » Thu, Jun 22, 2023, 10:14 AM UTC

_Tomas wrote: post #303

NovaDudely wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is all true but it can be a little bit of survivor ship bias at play. Look at all the technology conferences over the last 40 years and for the most part you will see a grave yard of tens of thousand of ideas that looks promising but ended up going nowhere - sometimes simply due to being out maneuvered business wise. Bill Gates once said that in some ways Microsoft was lucky to be as succesful as they where, tha…

>This is all true but it can be a little bit of survivor ship bias at play. Look at all the technology conferences over the last 40 years and for the most part you will see a grave yard of tens of thousand of ideas that looks promising but ended up going nowhere Survivor bias is real, but the interesting failures (in comparison to VR) are things like 3D TV. 3D TV has a very weak effect, the 3D effect is basically dis…

Post by detourdog » Thu, Jun 22, 2023, 10:18 AM UTC

losteric wrote: post #317

wil421 wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My father in law was in the construction business during this time at a company building bridge spans. A supplier gave them 5 Apple IIs as a bonus for buying so much product. The owner exclaimed, throw them out computers are a fad! To calculate the bridge spans requirements it took 3 guys a 3-5 days to do the calculations, drafting the spans, and double checking everything. My father in law opened the book on basic a…

I think the transitions from punch cards to CLIs, to GUI/mouse interfaces, then to touch interfaces, are more apt metaphors when considering the impact of VR. Touch found it's place as the interface for small-form devices. I'm pretty sure VR is the interface for gaming (with other niche applications). It will be wildly popular, probably a headset in every house within 20 years, I just suspect it will be doing what we…

Post by wakeupcall » Thu, Jun 22, 2023, 10:23 AM UTC

woeirua wrote: post #95

I think it's very important for people to get out of the HN bubble when discussing this. $3500 is just way too expensive for mass customer adoption. Meta is struggling to get customers to adopt the Oculus hardware when its an order of magnitude less expensive. I can't see why _any_ developer would sink tons of money into building custom apps on this platform when there will be less than a few hundred thousand users n…