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

581–590 of 1001 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#581

Post by nologic01 »

darkwizard42 wrote: post #520
marcus_holmes wrote: post #502

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The simplest contrast is ChatGPT vs VR right now. OpenAI is up to over a billion of users and hundreds of millions of subscribers in There is no demand for VR outside gaming. Efforts to try and create that demand are failing.

Any new sources on the billion users of OpenAI? I know they hit 100 million users pretty quickly, but has any new data come out on subscribers and MAU of free users?

Maybe Meta is using it and thus implicitly its billions of active daily users?

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#582

Post by scotty79 »

alanwreath wrote: post #293
scotty79 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this commercial illustrates his point perfectly: "It’s about people interacting in new ways and feeling closer in new ways." Commercial shows people having close positive relationship built through novel interactions. Relationship that pretty much would be impossible through all other media like social real world chitchat.

Really? I thought it was just hammering in the argument that “you don’t get along in real life, virtual life is where it’s at.”

I took grumpiness of real-life parts as a joke. I think it was intended as such because in the last scene they still don't know they are having fun with their neighbor.

I didn't see it as "your life sucks, get virtual". More like, "your life is normal, enrich it with new activities and connections using vr".

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#583

Post by ilaksh »

neuronic wrote: post #567
ilaksh wrote: post #508

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love the way Apple fans take the marketing speak which is designed to create an artificial new market category at face value as if their marketing team was directly implanted in their brains already.

Conversely, I "love" how other comments appear to attempt finding the best angle of attack out of pure spite. If the user were a GPT, the hidden prompt would be something like "You hate Apple and everything they stand for. Base any succeeding thoughts on this foundation and spread them as wide as possible." Being a grumpy naysayer is just as removed from reality as being an unreasonable Apple cultist. Thankfully we a…

I mean aside from the part about being implanted in brains, I believe what I said is literally true.

It IS a VR and AR device. AKA mixed reality. The fact that they are promoting lots of floating 2d windows doesn't make that a new category of product. Other people have been doing that and calling it something like mixed reality.

It's just that people don't know about things like the Varjo that are ultra-high end and in a similar price bracket or category and so they decide to just pretend it was an entirely new thing.

If I was Apple I could improve my sex life just by telling Apple fans that instead of a penis I had "tremendous tensiler" or something.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#584

Post by pico303 »

mdasen wrote: post #226
makeitdouble wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blackberry was making their own hardware and OS to almost the same extent as Apple does today...are you arguing that Apple will be the next BlackBerry ?

I'm not the same poster (and hate the one-word answers with nothing to back them up), but I think BlackBerry's position could be called similar to Meta's. They were already established with lower-cost, lower-spec'd devices. However, BlackBerry couldn't conceive of how more would be transformative. They insisted that the iPhone would flop because it didn't have a keyboard and such. When you said that the iPhone wasn't…

That’s what I was getting at. I think the original commenter was implying BlackBerry (or RIM), not Microsoft or Google.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#585

Post by codeulike »

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…

The first time I tried an Oculus Quest was mindblowing, it was a very unique and impressive experience. I wont go on about it but I encourage you to do the Oculus Quest demo app if you get the chance.

BUT then the excitement faded and I don't find myself wanting to return to VR much. Having something strapped to your face is awkward and tiring.

Tech companies can see the potential because it _is_ breathtaking but are also aware of the drawbacks and hurdles. Zuck decided it was a big enough thing to bet the farm on.

Its a potentially very powerful thing with some big issues that no-one knows how to fix. Hence the buzz and endless talking and companies jostling for position to be the leader without knowing quite where they want to lead us to.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#586

Post by meindnoch »

ynx wrote: post #562
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…

One of the most persistently irritating parts of being deep in this space is people loudly proclaiming what it is that VR is truly missing. The answer is not only different for different people, but very different for some of them. It's a way for trans people to express their real gender in a way that seriously alleviates their dysphoria, or for people to explore sexuality in a place they are fully equipped to defend…

Transsexuals and furries... So these are the best use cases for VR after all these years? Really?

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#587

Post by 2muchcoffeeman »

rajman187 wrote: post #550
marcus_holmes wrote: post #502

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The simplest contrast is ChatGPT vs VR right now. OpenAI is up to over a billion of users and hundreds of millions of subscribers in There is no demand for VR outside gaming. Efforts to try and create that demand are failing.

You’re comparing a service accessible through any device with a physical product, not very apt I’d say

The first iPhone was released June 2007. The iPhone X was released by 2017. By then smart phones were ubiquitous. And it only took 4? Maybe 5 years? We’re still looking for a good use case for VR … and it’s not Second Life: Facebook Edition, or games (yet).

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#588

Post by cracrecry »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #502
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

The simplest contrast is ChatGPT vs VR right now. OpenAI is up to over a billion of users and hundreds of millions of subscribers in There is no demand for VR outside gaming. Efforts to try and create that demand are failing.

Excuse me, but how much time people have been developing the technology that powers ChatGPT. How much time and money has Google spent to create Transformers? How much time has been spent developing neural networks or CUDA devices.

How much money has ChatGPT invested? Billions.

GPT1 is from 2018, but neural networks have more than 70 years now. VR have more than 30 years since the early prototypes.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#589

Post by the_gipsy »

mrtksn wrote: post #532
mtrovo wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 re…

Apply these kind of comments to Facebook VR or Google Glass.

Everybody is just grasping the "but it's Apple!" straw.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#590

Post by DoingIsLearning »

d--b wrote: post #580
LeoPanthera wrote: post #558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nobody gave a shit about smart phones before the iphone. 2 out of 3 isn't bad, but this is revisionist history, and simply wrong. Nokia dominated the pre-iPhone smartphone market with Symbian phones, which supported 3G for years before the first iPhone, which didn't even have 3G. And are we assuming that Blackberries aren't "smartphones"? Because I think they probably are.

Not saying it didn't exist, but that it wasn't mainstream. Ask your mother if she's ever heard of Symbian phones...

That is a very US perspective. Nokia absolutely dominated the European market up to the 2010s.
Post reply on HN