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

531–540 of 1001 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#531

Post by qwertox »

the_gipsy wrote: post #390
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…

Facebook is not in panic, they're relieved that they're not the only fools betting on VR anymore. None of this will be relevant soon to consumers, except maybe games, and then it will be console makers who will push it and cash in. For Facebook and Apple it's just shareholder porn.

But it doesn't look like Apple is betting on a Metaverse where you have your little virtual houses and objects, but rather putting monitors right in front of your eyes with an entire ecosystem where work and entertainment is the main focus, with the ability to include communicating with others.

Apple just skipped the 3D world-thing which is what Meta is focusing on and being pathetic at it.

To me this reads as if Mark is scared of what his employees are thinking of him, where what they have been working on is this toy, while Apple now presents a real device with some sensible use cases.

Also Apple's is see-through AR to blocking VR, while Meta's is blocking VR. His statement about the couch doesn't make sense at all.

He seems to be ashamed that they are not the leader in this space by a long shot, since this is what his company is supposed to be about.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#532

Post by mrtksn »

mtrovo wrote: post #491
mrtksn wrote: post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple’s implementation appears years ahead of anyone else. Just the way iPhone was when introduced. Back in the day Nokia, Siemens, Blackberry, Palm and Ericsson had smartphones that you could do everything that iPhone could do or even more. These were devices that only those who have to use it or those who are techno nerds used it. When Apple introduced their implementation of smartphone, those who were using the de…

Is it really the same though? I can see how this is proposing a different approach on how to present VR but apart from tech folks nobody seems to care. Where on iPhone case from day 1 one could tell it was actually really really useful. And you also have to consider the price tag as well, I can think about many things that I would spend money on first even if I had those 3500 dollars. Maybe I'll change my mind when I…

>apart from tech folks nobody seems to care

On the contrary, this is the first time that non techies are actually interested in it and debating its implications on the society.

And about the price tag, a quick search tells me that %18 of the American individuals and %34 of the households are making over 100K and there are over 5 million millionaires and 770 billionaires in the USA.

Even if pricey, it is within the reach of so many people's income levels which means if it is good enough and people will buy it.

The price anchoring effects are strong but Apple is capable of creating its own anchors. Consider the iPhone, the iPhone 14 pro costs less than %25 of the monthly pay check of an average American and you say it's expensive. In the other extreme - Turkey, the iPhone 14 Pro costs about 5x the average salary(iPhone 14 pro is 2350$ today and the average salary is less than 500usd) and people still buy it. It was never THIS bad, but even in the good times an iPhone would cost more than the average salary and everyone bought one and the Apple's market share is over %20.

Moral of the story, if you make something that people want badly they will find a way to get it.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#533

Post by pjmlp »

Al-Khwarizmi wrote: post #515
_glass wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

They didn't really live up to the hype, though. It was said that they would replace laptops. While they have their space in the market, sales are in a declining trend, and considerably behind laptops. (I was like you and still am, by the way... I don't find tablets comfortable. I only bought one once, and I think the number of times I actually used it can be counted with both hands).

They surely replaced laptops for artists, digital note taking, journalists, travelling and mobile terminals.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#534

Post by MikusR »

brandall10 wrote: post #331
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.

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…

Quest is also standalone computing platform

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#535

Post by Ireallyapart »

baby wrote: post #250
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…

Why should they be in panic? They already iterated on 3 headsets, they definitely have the advantage (weren't people complaining that they spent too much $$ in VR? Now they should be terrified?)

of course they are terrified. Not being terrified is delusional. It's apple.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#536

Post by detourdog »

saurik wrote: post #526
roomey wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, but buying things on the internet wasn't laughed at, if anything people were worried about it cause of their credit card numbers. It was that basis of the dot com boom of the late 90s. Everyone saw the potential and lashed money into it. It didn't deliver at the time, but that dynamic is totally different to vr headsets. Think smart phones, they weren't pushed, people wanted them in a serious way

I mean, smartphones existed for a long time before anyone cared, and it was only due to Blackberry (for business) and then Apple (for consumers) that that happened: until then the entire space was seen as nerdy and pointless (and was thereby something my friends and I were excited by... despite not having any real use for any of it yet). And like... are you sure about being able to buy stuff online? I remember when b…

not on your list is the Palm Treo.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#537

Post by solumunus »

wiz21c wrote: post #432
jen729w wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> 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

Ok, but you're certainly atypical in this respect.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#538

Post by pzo »

mynameisvlad wrote: post #261
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was supported on PlayStation before Meta bought them, and they promised to continue supporting it on PlayStation. But that promise probably doesn’t include new platforms from other players.

The question asked was whether it’s a meta exclusive. The answer is unequivocally no. Will it be released on Apple Vision? Maybe. But that was not the question asked and incorrectly answered by multiple people, yourself included. FWIW, I don’t think it will be, but not because of exclusivity. Haptics is indeed a big part of what makes it fun and Apple has made it clear that there won’t be controllers, at least at lau…

There is controllers support it's they are not included out of the box - iOS/iPadOS support pretty much most features of dualshock, dualsense and joy-cons including vibration and motion sensors.

They even sell PS Dualsense in the Apple Store.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#539

Post by mrtksn »

Lewton wrote: post #488
mrtksn wrote: post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple’s implementation appears years ahead of anyone else. Just the way iPhone was when introduced. Back in the day Nokia, Siemens, Blackberry, Palm and Ericsson had smartphones that you could do everything that iPhone could do or even more. These were devices that only those who have to use it or those who are techno nerds used it. When Apple introduced their implementation of smartphone, those who were using the de…

except, you know, there's a massive market for non-iphone smartphones now. Facebook would not weep if it was android to the iphone

I don't think that Zuckerberg would be excited for making money from VR some time in far future, he is already very rich.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#540

Post by ChrisRR »

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'm currently seeing it like the introduction of the ipad. At first I was snarky about "what is this even for? It's way too expensive. Why would anyone use one? It's just a big phone" And they were mainly bought by people with disposable income.

Where as nowadays tablets have become a staple and it's very common to own one, and often not own a computer. I ate my words.

So at the moment there's a few players in the VR/AR landscape, maybe something big will come of it, maybe it won't. But I think it's too early to tell

Post reply on HN