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

First impressions: Yes, Apple Vision Pro works and yes, it’s good

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 562 posts

Re: First impressions: Yes, Apple Vision Pro works and yes, it’s good

#541

Post by andrewstuart »

chx wrote: post #84
MacsHeadroom wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At USD$3500, who is it for? Everyone. It's a laptop replacement. Realistically this "Pro" version is for early adopters. There will surely be a regular/SE/Lite version in a couple of years for the price of a MacBook Air. > And who will develop software for something with such a small user base? Everyone will, if they're smart. Being first to market on a new platform is huge, even if it will take a few years to have…

> Angry Birds became a multi-billion dollar franchise for being one of the first iPhone games. It's sobering to think this has now been so long ago but still: this is absolutely not true. Angry Birds came out end of 2009 and games were available for more than a year by then. See top 2008 here https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2008/12/apple-reveals-most-do... and top 2009 here https://www.ign.com/articles/2009/12/09/the-…

You ruined that with facts.

Re: First impressions: Yes, Apple Vision Pro works and yes, it’s good

#542

Post by p_l »

bsder wrote: post #515
p_l wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find $2495 of original Macintosh to be pretty cheap compared to $16k or more of other graphical workstations at the time.

That may be true, but my family only had my father working as a teacher. He got paid absolute crap for a very long time. Even a $400 computer was a huge stretch for them. It was possibly the absolute best purchase they ever made for me as it sent me down the tech path, but they thought VERY long and hard about it.

Yes. Computers in general went way down in price. Which is why Vision Pro's $3500 price tag is considered big today.

Re: First impressions: Yes, Apple Vision Pro works and yes, it’s good

#543

Post by p_l »

King-Aaron wrote: post #521
p_l wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Laptops had killer apps in word processing and spreadsheets and various early email systems, bringing them clients other than field engineering and military.

These applications already existed for desktops, this was not something unique to the laptop form factor.

But laptop made it possible for the executive, reporter, etc. to work on the go much better than with previous (luggables) or not at all, and the ensuing combination was the killer app.

Re: First impressions: Yes, Apple Vision Pro works and yes, it’s good

#544

Post by tsojer »

dmarcos wrote: post #438
tsojer wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like this is the original Apple MO that has worked for them for all their most innovative products. Looking at iMac, iPods, iPhone, Apple watch - it was never a perfectly polished product they were pushing, it was a paradigm shift. When they launched the firs iMac, the paradigm shift was personal computers are for everyone, and belong to every home and should fit into your surroundings. There were a lot of thi…

Difference is that Apple enters categories that have already product-market fit (PCs, MP3 players, laptops, smartphones, fitness trackers). Only exception probably being the iPad. VR doesn’t have product-market fit except for some games genres (driving / flight simulators, rythme / dancing)

I somewhat agree, somewhat disagree. There was also some product-market fit, but they never entered a formed market - their specialty is creating a need for a product through marketing and product strategy.

When they released the iMac, they sold 800.000 computers by the end of the year, and that was 32% of those buys were people who have never owned a computer previously. So they were going for the Windows users, but also for people who have previously never seen the need for a computer. By creating an easy to use product aimed at the masses, they created a product-market fit in an untapped market segment where there was none.

When you think about it, smart phones did not exactly have a product market fit - there were mostly mobile phone users, and kind of smallish dying market of handheld computers, some Blackberry/other users that were I guess what you'd call a smartphone users. First iPhone did a lot for unifying those users into a smartphone market.

So I see some of that here as well. By introducing Vision Pro in a demo that showcases all the most popular uses of desktop/mobile computing, they are pushing the XR into the space of mobile/desktop users who were not interested in XR previously. It's the opposite of the killer app approach, but I think it can work for them and is a tried tactic. And it pushes bring XR closer to general use than gaming.

But definitely a larger leap of fate, as you point out.

Re: First impressions: Yes, Apple Vision Pro works and yes, it’s good

#545

Post by CyberDildonics »

ztrww wrote: post #535
CyberDildonics wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They weren't anywhere close to being the same. You had no multi-touch, no pinch zoom and no fluid panning and scrolling.

Exactly, you’d use the to do the same thing more or less but the iPhone had way better UX. The idea of browsing the web on your phone wasn’t something new or revolutionary, it was all about the implementation.

No, it wasn't the same. Before people would only be able to use special mobile pages and scroll through a few options at a time. Looking at a general site like reddit was basically impossible. Reading a news article on a normal site was basically impossible. It was a total game changer and most people went from never using the mobile internet to using it frequently.

Re: First impressions: Yes, Apple Vision Pro works and yes, it’s good

#546

Post by causi »

mrguyorama wrote: post #458
causi wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah if only 3D scanning went through the same revolution digital photography did.

3D scanning only gets you a mesh, it doesn't get you interactivity or functionality. If you just want to manhandle a bunch of meshes, modding H3 VR is easy, and there's a 3D modelling program for SteamVR that opens and edits meshes just fine. Hell, you can even interactively edit things in the Unreal IDE. But it's still a serious task.

Sure, but it's a very useful first step. When you want to do something like, say, 3D printing a case for your bluetooth earbuds, there is no approach that isn't tedious.

Re: First impressions: Yes, Apple Vision Pro works and yes, it’s good

#547

Post by notaustinpowers »

Turskarama wrote: post #524
notaustinpowers wrote: post #489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This device looks to be a monumental improvement over any current consumer AR/VR headset. From the user reviews that've come out so far, they've talked about the very forgiving hand-tracking, the high-fidelity screens, the nearly imperceptible delay from the cameras, how comfortable it is to wear, etc. For your point about the no virtual objects, what would you want Apple to do? Create an entirely new OS requiring de…

For sure this thing is much better than something like the Meta Quest 3, but is it _seven times_ as good? Let's look at the actual improvements here over the quest, roughly in order from what I consider best to worst: 1) higher resolution screens. This requires more powerful onboard processing and more expensive screens and is an obvious win. 2) better pass through. Again requires better onboard processing and camera…

1) Agree with you on the higher resolution screens. Yeah it's gonna be a resource hog but from what I've heard it looks downright gorgeous. 2) I'm okay with the better passthrough, from what the initial impressions have said, it really does help alleviate the headaches or nausea from the delay in lower-end systems. I get serious motion sickness and nausea in the PSVR2 headset, if this can solve that problem I'm all for it. 3) I know they highlighted PS5 and XBox controller support for games, so I'm holding out hope for third party motion controller support for when you need finer control. 4) I hate the eyes on the front feature, I agree it looks gimmicky, added too much to the cost, and I don't see it lasting long in future releases.

It's definitely not for me, but I feel like I'm getting their vision for the future of this product line and I'm gonna go conspiracy theorist for a minute here.

1) The clips of people wearing them in from of their kids or doing laundry, etc just screams that we want to get people used to having a screen in front of them, and cameras on their face. Make this the "norm" or at least some form of socially acceptable to do what Google Glass tried and failed to do in 2013. 2) The heavy focus on hand-tracking, eye-tracking, voice controls, and built-in speakers makes me think they want this to be used without needing to carry anything additional with you, obviously. No AirPods, no iPhone, no Mac needed.

I find this product to be an introduction to tackle these societal issues so that when they release a pair of regular-looking glasses that have this type of tech, people aren't going to be afraid of cameras looking at them all the time, or feel disconnected from the person wearing them. And be able to control it all with just their hands.

To me, this product was released way before it should have (frankly I believe it needs 5 more years), but as a lot of companies are pushing AR/VR and it's kinda floundering around right now, Apple had to release something that could keep interest in the product group alive long enough that they can release their proper vision.

Re: First impressions: Yes, Apple Vision Pro works and yes, it’s good

#548

Post by dingaling »

CyberDildonics wrote: post #545
ztrww wrote: post #535

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, you’d use the to do the same thing more or less but the iPhone had way better UX. The idea of browsing the web on your phone wasn’t something new or revolutionary, it was all about the implementation.

No, it wasn't the same. Before people would only be able to use special mobile pages and scroll through a few options at a time. Looking at a general site like reddit was basically impossible. Reading a news article on a normal site was basically impossible. It was a total game changer and most people went from never using the mobile internet to using it frequently.

Symbian devices had Opera Mobile and their own Webkit-based browser from at least 2005. Both of which rendered normal websites, not WAP.

Re: First impressions: Yes, Apple Vision Pro works and yes, it’s good

#549

Post by CyberDildonics »

dingaling wrote: post #548
CyberDildonics wrote: post #545

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it wasn't the same. Before people would only be able to use special mobile pages and scroll through a few options at a time. Looking at a general site like reddit was basically impossible. Reading a news article on a normal site was basically impossible. It was a total game changer and most people went from never using the mobile internet to using it frequently.

Symbian devices had Opera Mobile and their own Webkit-based browser from at least 2005. Both of which rendered normal websites, not WAP.

And how did you navigate them? With a scroll ball? Even some phones that were single touch with pressure were slightly better but most people wanted nothing to do with that until the iphone.

Re: First impressions: Yes, Apple Vision Pro works and yes, it’s good

#550

Post by dmarcos »

tsojer wrote: post #544
dmarcos wrote: post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Difference is that Apple enters categories that have already product-market fit (PCs, MP3 players, laptops, smartphones, fitness trackers). Only exception probably being the iPad. VR doesn’t have product-market fit except for some games genres (driving / flight simulators, rythme / dancing)

I somewhat agree, somewhat disagree. There was also some product-market fit, but they never entered a formed market - their specialty is creating a need for a product through marketing and product strategy. When they released the iMac, they sold 800.000 computers by the end of the year, and that was 32% of those buys were people who have never owned a computer previously. So they were going for the Windows users, but…

PCs and smartphones were both proven markets regardless of market size in a way VR is not today.

People owned smartphones (blackberries and palm) and PCs, use them a lot and had established (not speculative) use cases. Clear market signal while VR only has significant traction for a handful of games.

Post reply on HN