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

Meta cancels high-end mixed reality headset after Apple Vision Pro struggles

macrumors.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 543 posts

Re: Meta cancels high-end mixed reality headset after Apple Vision Pro struggles

#481

Post by BatFastard »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #374
bratwurst3000 wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how didnt porn run this over? honestly porn did advances the internet because it, and gaming, was THE usecase for most people. youtube etc wasnt there at the time it was porn and games. And porn and games should be the reason why VR shall sell

when porn advanced the internet did it cost 2000 dollars to get entry to the porn? I don't remember that. I think when this advancing happened it was pretty cheap, in some ways cheaper than buying a bunch of magazines. Porn advanced the internet because it was a cheaper delivery mechanism for a cheap commodity, games expanded the internet because it was a technologically innovative platform for high end products.

Evercrack, I knew a number of people who bought 3000 dollar computers in the mid nineties to play Everquest.

Re: Meta cancels high-end mixed reality headset after Apple Vision Pro struggles

#482

Post by xyst »

Zuckerberg really is grasping at straws now. Failed projects:

- metaverse

- VR

- digital currency

- failed to reel in on misinformation campaigns on social networks

- meta/facebook killed “crowdtangle” (misinformation tracking tool)

The only thing keeping them afloat is advertising money (which has been dwindling due to people fleeing their shit platform).

Re: Meta cancels high-end mixed reality headset after Apple Vision Pro struggles

#483

Post by moab9 »

Jeff_Brown wrote: post #378
Earw0rm wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless perhaps you're severely disabled, holidays are so much more than just your eyes and ears. Not just all of your five senses, and your ability to interact, but the social and human side as well, and your ability to interact physically with it all. People said the same kind of things about TV - and while, on the one hand, they perhaps underestimated the profound effects of TV on society, nobody would confuse it w…

Exactly. The sun on your skin, the breeze in your hair, sand in your toes, clean saltwater air ... good luck.

sounds like we might enjoy a wind machine and a heat lamp

Re: Meta cancels high-end mixed reality headset after Apple Vision Pro struggles

#484

Post by moab9 »

bonoboTP wrote: post #371
nottorp wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe the OP was more thinking of all those corporate flights for a one hour talk. But you don't need VR for that. They could hold them over sms if they could read and write.

Real deals aren't made over a zoom call. They just aren't. That's why they still fly there even though they are well aware of how to use zoom.

they fly there and do the deal over email from the hotel.

Re: Meta cancels high-end mixed reality headset after Apple Vision Pro struggles

#485

Post by adastra22 »

sethammons wrote: post #407
adastra22 wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no desire to strap a computer on my face, no matter how lightweight an unobtrusive it gets. There is a fundamental disconnect in motivation here.

Maybe the equivalence was lost: in 1990s, a computer in your pocket would bring about visions of a tower PC and maybe a backpack strap, and then you could only walk as far as the power cord. When VR/AR makes it, it won't be strapping what I imagine you are thinking to your face. I imagine glasses or maybe people will even entertain a visor or shield

No, it’s not an issue of form factor. It’s the disconnection from reality and the constant literally-in-your-face attention grabbing that would come from wearing AR glasses, no matter how slim and lightweight they become.

I have an Apple Watch. Why? Because it lets me use my phone less. It is a purposefully less capable and less attention-seeking device which I can use to check the nature of a notification in a socially acceptable way and then go back to living life without pulling out my phone.

AR/VR is fundamentally having a phone strapped to your eyeballs. You’re saying “but it can be made lightweight and comfortable!” I’m saying you’re missing the whole point: I don’t want a phone strapped to my eyeballs, even if it weighed 0 g and was soft and velvety. It’s a step backwards.

I would love for that technology to exist, because I have AR applications in mind that I think could be industrially useful. But I would despise that becoming the normal mode of interface to the world, the same way I despise people having their heads in their phones all day long.

Re: Meta cancels high-end mixed reality headset after Apple Vision Pro struggles

#486

Post by khazhoux »

aprilthird2021 wrote: post #474
khazhoux wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people would not see any problem in spending 8 hours over two days enjoying an activity by oneself. I can guarantee that if you watched 5 minutes of Dune or Gravity on your $20 (or $2000) TV and then on an AVP, you would say: “Oh, I see.” I’ve randomly paused in those movies (and Kill Bill, and others) just to marvel at the artistry of the cinematographer. The device provides a unique and, frankly, stunning visu…

I'll try it then. I know my family will find it weird. Glad yours don't!

My wife laughs when she walks into the room and I’m sitting there with my space goggles

Re: Meta cancels high-end mixed reality headset after Apple Vision Pro struggles

#487

Post by rty32 »

adamors wrote: post #315
FileSorter wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is HackerNews, we all know who Carmack is. >Apple Vision Pro was an unexpected dud ??? Just about everyone (even diehard Apple fanboys) knew this would flop.

I agree with you, I don't know of anybody who looked at the price combined with the form factor and concluded it will be a hit.

You might want to go back to that thread (or rather the few threads) when Vision Pro was released, and reread the responses from the fanboys.

Re: Meta cancels high-end mixed reality headset after Apple Vision Pro struggles

#488

Post by rty32 »

sherburt3 wrote: post #461
deisteve wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

its incredible how different the West is to Japan the lack of judeo-christian moral nannyism hardly means a dangerous society but a peaceful one just look at all the accusations on X and calling Japan weird and worse

I don't think Japan is a good example of sexual liberation. The fact they have women-only train cars immediately comes to mind.

I'd argue the mere fact that digital mosaic still exists in... well you know what I mean.

Re: Meta cancels high-end mixed reality headset after Apple Vision Pro struggles

#489

Post by rty32 »

Manuel_D wrote: post #130
numpad0 wrote: post #62

Isn't it simple why AVP isn't moving? They don't treat anime-loli-porn content, chiefly VRChat, as first class citizens, if they support those at all. Tons of people have bought and are buying Quest 2 and 3 as well as its competitors with sole intent of using it with VRChat. Don't you guys all remember that iPhoneOS had YouTube since version 1.0, before it even had App Store? Where would you think iOS would have been…

Meta isn't treating NSFW stuff as a first class citizen either. Most VR porn apps have a roundabout way of accessing them. E.g. you have DeoVR which is absolutely, 100%, intended for normal content consumption and it's just a coincidence that its video protocol is compatible with SLR.

Well, the fact that sideloading a porn app is no more difficult than sideloading a patched version of BeatSaber, which is unimaginable on any "mobile" Apple device, says plenty.

Re: Meta cancels high-end mixed reality headset after Apple Vision Pro struggles

#490

Post by conductr »

Terretta wrote: post #433
conductr wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want to believe you but until the price range becomes below $1000 or so there’s virtually no market. It’s a toy. People don’t need a teleportation device. It’s fun to play with, like a toy. It doesn’t really solve enough of a “real” problem to justify the current cost. It’s also too expensive to be given as a holiday or birthday gift by most family members. I believe the “just give it a few years thing” but only if…

> Until the price range becomes below $1000 or so there’s virtually no market. It’s a toy. People don’t need a teleportation device. It’s fun to play with, like a toy. It doesn’t really solve enough of a “real” problem to justify the current cost. This argument seems valid to anyone that hasn't browsed "The Sharper Image" catalog in the back of an airline seat, or even the "high end" showroom at a Best Buy. There's b…

I think tv usage is a hard comparison as it’s so well integrated into our lives and social fabric. These people are likely either just outfitting their house so it is more like furniture than a toy and they likely know exactly what value it adds for them (movie nights, sports gatherings, etc). Things people place great value on. And, I don’t think they’d see a vr experience as a substitute. Maybe in time they will. Once they get enough exposure to it, most likely by owning it, but that isn’t likely to happen if prices remain high. And there’s still something that’s missing, nobody is coming to your Super Bowl party just because you have an Apple Vision Pro. So it’s only useful if everyone that you’d invite also has a similar technology to have a shared virtual experience. So that further requires the prices to be lower. Beyond that is the question, does anyone actually want those types of experiences to be virtual? Would people just simply prefer that event to be IRL? I think the answer is going to be Yes for a very long time for a majority of folks. It will slowly penetrate the meatspace but will hit a fairly low ceiling at some point.
Post reply on HN