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

Apple Vision

stratechery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 582 posts

Re: Apple Vision

#431

Post by CharlesW »

eep_social wrote: post #396
jmbwell wrote: post #111

This article is dead on, all the way to the end. Takes a few minutes to read, but its observations on the market position of the device, all the way to the individual/social ramifications and the relevance vis a vis Meta, are as sharp as anything I’ve read about this yet. If it seems like he’s gushing, he is. He’s speaking as someone who has seen lots of these devices and, in his view, this hardware and software outc…

> If it seems like he’s gushing, he is. This is how he writes. If you ever read him on a topic where you are an actual expert, you’ll probably never bother reading him again.

> This is how he writes.

Maybe, but Marques Brownlee gushed about it as well (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFvXuyITwBI), and he's not a person that pulls punches.

This is an extremely ambitious, qualitatively different device than anything that's come before.

Re: Apple Vision

#432

Post by ZacharyPitts »

silvestrov wrote: post #104
flappyeagle wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s obvious how a 10 second clip scales to 10 minutes or 10 hours or 10 days. You don’t need that much imagination or even a leap of faith. A court side seat to an NBA game is north of $1000. If this creates 20% of the experience it will easily pay for itself in 1 season.

Why would NBA allow for this as they would lose an extreme amount of money if people can get the same experience at home? That would be economic suicide for them. They need to keep the seats being a special experience.

The worst will be blackouts for NBA games for this.

I had NBA TV for one season, but because I live in the Portland area, I can not watch Portland trailblazers games. It was ridiculous, so I did not subscribe this year.

Re: Apple Vision

#433

Post by asim »

pixl97 wrote: post #415
asim wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not healthy. It's not healthy because as devices and software improves people who are in isolation use it as a further form of isolation. It's easier to escape into technology than it is to go out and interact with real humans. Life is messy, it's hard but it's entirely rewarding and what we need. But everything we've now come to know in the past three decades has taken us in a different direction. The technolog…

>Getting back to true reality I agree and disagree with this at the same time. Does true reality mean tossing ourselves out in the plains of Africa with a stick fighting off wild animals? I mean ever since that point human intelligence has been on a divergent path from animal intelligence. We create fields and towns and societies that subject us to new realities. Why is one particularly different from another? At the…

I think there's a distinction between the physical and the digital. One might say it's electrons at the end of the day but if you think about how we came into this world and how we've operated for a millennia, putting a veil over our eyes to deny the real world is not part of that. It came much later.

Look I'm an engineer like everyone else here. I've grown up on the internet, I've played games consoles since I was a child. I've lost myself to endless hours watching TV, movies, roaming the internet and building software till the odd hours. I'm also closing in on 40 so what I value now is not the same as what I thought was important 20 years ago. Living in some sort of matrix was really appealing back then but as my mortality becomes more apparent I reflect more on our existence and reason for being. In my opinion it's not to defer all of our faculties to a screen strapped to our faces. We are so far from the truth is crazy. But hey we'll keep going in that direction and like all technology there will be the pendulum of extremes and moderation. I will likely not use one of these devices for a long time and only when there's a compelling reason to do so and for limited periods of time. I think that's how all technology should be used, in limited capacity for the betterment of our lives. I do not want to stare at a screen for hours on end anymore and spatial computing is basically taking us further in that direction.

Re: Apple Vision

#434

Post by RandallBrown »

blantonl wrote: post #47

I'm curious if anyone will be able to develop in it (i.e. write code with virtual desktops etc) I'm also curious about how which unexpected consequences people will experience with such devices (nausea, etc... other unknown illnesses cropping up)

In the Platform State of the Union talk yesterday they actually showed how developing Vision Apps will work and it can be done through the device just by looking at your Mac. It will spawn your Mac screen and the Vision app you're working on in the air. It looked pretty slick.

Re: Apple Vision

#435

Post by RandallBrown »

tikkun wrote: post #72

When do people anticipate the Vision Pro will be available in an Apple Store to be tried? And is there another way to try one sooner.

They're going to have developer previews available in certain cities around the world. You'll be able to take your app and run it on the hardware to see how it works outside of a simulator.

Re: Apple Vision

#436

Post by mynameisvlad »

password54321 wrote: post #416
mynameisvlad wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When you say something IS going to fail Who, exactly in this comment thread your comment is part of, said that? Press parent up to the top, at most it's skepticism based on past experience.

One of these... Yes let me scroll down and copy and paste a comment just for you. If you are actually interested, you put in the effort yourself, otherwise we both move on.

I did already. I even said that they are at most skepticism.

I asked you to do it for your own benefit, because it doesn't exist and you clearly don't know that.

Re: Apple Vision

#437

Post by nashashmi »

matt-attack wrote: post #327
nashashmi wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

iView was better and more clever. Or iScreen. Literally anything that begins with i

The “i” stuff feels really outdated now. The Apple Watch was not the iWatch. There are too many competitors who use it to mean too many cheap things.

I can agree with this sentiment. But god, this goes around the eyes. Calling anything with an I- is absurd, but this is so darn on point.

Re: Apple Vision

#439

Post by killerstorm »

masklinn wrote: post #40
kumarvvr wrote: post #32

Apple has managed to combine AR and VR, by simply re-creating the AR inside the VR. The idea is simple but profound. However, for a company that prides itself on "shared" experiences, the VR is for "lonesome" experiences (watching a movie, watching vacation photos, etc) in some cases, but bang on for others (especially at work) This will spurn the industry, just like the iPhone did, and hopefully, we will have a lot…

> Apple has managed to combine AR and VR, by simply re-creating the AR inside the VR. The idea is simple but profound. The Quest Pro does that, just badly.

Also Varjo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23RS3RAg16k

Re: Apple Vision

#440

Post by nashashmi »

esskay wrote: post #400
matt-attack wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The “i” stuff feels really outdated now. The Apple Watch was not the iWatch. There are too many competitors who use it to mean too many cheap things.

Agreed. If you pop into any dollar/pound type store the shelves are filled with cheap cables and car phone holders that use the 'i' name. It's become synonymous with cheap junk now.

And anything imperfect like iPedal.
Post reply on HN