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

431–440 of 1001 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#431

Post by nologic01 »

Hasu wrote: post #417
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…

> 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. Does Google have a VR play? They explored this with Glass 10 years ago, but that's dead and they don't seem interested in developing a successor.

Never got glasses but I still have some cardboards :-).

The data point for the discussion is that at some point they did think that this might be an interesting direction.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#432

Post by wiz21c »

jen729w wrote: post #422
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…

This feels like a technology that will be ‘ready’ in ten (twenty?) years, but to dismiss it now a) feels unimaginative and b) precludes that from ever happening. Do I want to wear big goggles? No. Do I, one day, want a device that can magically project anything I want on to my field of vision, and for it to be as realistic as my actual vision? Hell yeah I do! And we can’t get there unless we go through the ski goggle…

I alreday feel exhausted when I walk my town because there's so many information to process: front of shops, advertising, road signs, people, cars, bikes, nice buildings,... If I had to add yet antoher layer of information on top of that, it would be exhausting.

Now, if I was someone who works in construction, I'd be happy to have glasses that add the position of eletrical wire in the wall where I'm going to drill a hole :-)

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#433

Post by pzo »

websap wrote: post #341
juunpp wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The $3500 price tag and closed ecosystem is self-sabotaging, so MZ doesn't need to be worried at all. Carmack's vision was a cheap device that could hit mass market, and that's where the real game still is. Also, games.

$3500 is pretty cheap for the HW it provides. An iPhone 14 Pro Max starts at $1100 and has nowhere near the HW that this device has, let alone the economics of scale.

lots of technologies in those vision Pro are similar components as in those iphones and ipads. If you take 2 iphone 14 pro (total cost 2x$1000=$2000) you get:

- 2x OLED screens

- 2x lidar camera

- 2x truedepth camera module

- 2x4=8 RGB cameras with very high spec

- 2x A15 chip

- 2x accelerometer, gyroscope, magnetometer, barometer, proxmity, ambient sensors

- 2x gps, wifi, bluetooth, nfc, uwb, 3g/4g/5g

- 2x flash led

- 2x batteries

- 2x stereo speakers

- 2x3=6 microphones

They already have crazy profit margin on iphones. I think if they would price it at $2500 this would make more sense.

If they would allow to run full MacOS on this thing and I could use it just as Mac Mini replacement and attach physical external display via hdmi out then I could easier stomach $3500 price.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#434

Post by AmericanChopper »

NBJack wrote: post #327
kumarvvr wrote: post #244

" By contrast, every demo that they showed was a person sitting on a couch by themself." Wait, I thought an Oculus does the same thing too. Its a blindfold on your face, and it doesnt matter if they are alone or in a crowd. Mark has got to be terrified. The power of Apple is the tight and efficient integration of hardware and software. Regarding battery power, I woukd not rule out versions that stream the video and o…

Pretty sure Mark was actually counting on it. It doesn't make it a good idea, but Apple tends to set the bar for status symbols. Smartphones existed before the iPhone. PC laptops existed before MacBooks. Portable digital music players existed before iPods. While not always successful, they actually add legitimacy to many of the markets they get into. Time will tell if it happens here; I'm not holding my breath.

I don’t think smartphone adoption was held back by the lack of a sufficient status symbol. Apple didn’t bring a revolutionary status symbol to market to make smartphone adoption explode. It brought a really good product that was valued because of how useful it was. Apple’s headset will take off if it proves to be actually useful, otherwise it won’t.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#435

Post by trotro »

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…

Porn. What you're missing is porn.

Or generally, anything that's much better experienced directly than through a screen. Think about virtually hiking Mt Everest, diving the Mariana Trench, walking on Mars, etc. The technology certainly isn't there yet, but I can imagine a future where for a majority of the population, especially those with lower income, VR provides the only affordable* escape from reality.

* In a few years obviously, $3500 is far from affordable.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#436

Post by nologic01 »

trotro wrote: post #435
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…

Porn. What you're missing is porn. Or generally, anything that's much better experienced directly than through a screen. Think about virtually hiking Mt Everest, diving the Mariana Trench, walking on Mars, etc. The technology certainly isn't there yet, but I can imagine a future where for a majority of the population, especially those with lower income, VR provides the only affordable* escape from reality. * In a few…

> Porn. What you're missing is porn.

I suppose this means that Apple is aiming for the high end of that market while Meta for the coin-operated booths? :-)

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#437

Post by prawn »

nonethewiser wrote: post #297
askafriend wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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).

They made a VR headset and used their own marketing name for it. A term which no one else uses.

"A term which no one else uses."

Yet. They've set it rolling and so far own a perspective separate to AR/VR. Leaves the competition brawling over headsets for a still-to-be-defined VR concept while they pitch customers on their thing. Computing. Ties in to work. Easier to justify spending $x000.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#438

Post by scrum-treats »

trotro wrote: post #435
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…

Porn. What you're missing is porn. Or generally, anything that's much better experienced directly than through a screen. Think about virtually hiking Mt Everest, diving the Mariana Trench, walking on Mars, etc. The technology certainly isn't there yet, but I can imagine a future where for a majority of the population, especially those with lower income, VR provides the only affordable* escape from reality. * In a few…

> Porn. What you're missing is porn.

This is correct. With the ability to mimic touch, the VR NSFW avenues are set to explode.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#439

Post by johnchristopher »

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…

> So far at least, this is a tech that is being pushed onto people rather than being pulled. I don't think this was the case with any of the major steps in the development of digital computing but would be quite interested if people can think of historical precedent.

Not computing but 3D TV and 3D movies ?

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#440

Post by _glass »

darawk wrote: post #428
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…

> So far at least, this is a tech that is being pushed onto people rather than being pulled. I think it's very hard to tell the difference between these things ex ante. Everything that succeeds looks like it was pulled. But many things were pushed before they were pulled. Buying things on the internet, for instance. This was laughed at for quite a while, while a few people and companies were committed to the idea tha…

I remember the argument against tablets, I was one of them, I thought because of the weird hand/arm position, this can never be a serious format. It was pushed through several iterations, and now it is accepted.
Post reply on HN