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

Apple Vision

stratechery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 582 posts

Re: Apple Vision

#61

Post by pavlov »

intev wrote: post #41
pavlov wrote: post #35

"The company was fairly mum about how it planned to make those cameras and its format more widely available, but I am completely serious when I say that I would pay the NBA thousands of dollars to get a season pass to watch games captured in this way. Yes, that’s a crazy statement to make, but courtside seats cost that much or more, and that 10-second clip was shockingly close to the real thing." The author was shown…

> demos that failed to deliver actual user value Does Apple have a a history of doing this? I think that's why people are excited.

Newton, Power Mac Cube, iMac G4 "Sunflower", and solid gold first-gen Apple Watch come to mind as Apple hardware products that failed to live up to the hype.

On the software side there are more misses, but also the stakes are lower.

It's a great track record for thirty years, of course. All the other big tech companies have graveyards full of half-assed product launches.

Re: Apple Vision

#62

Post by keiferski »

Am I the only one that is surprised they went with the "all in the glasses" design? (Minus the exterior battery and cable.) I was expecting an extremely lightweight pair of glasses that wirelessly connects with a stationary device that provides most of the computing power for the VR/AR. That device could even be the new generation of iPhones...

The design as-is looks better than 95% of other headsets, but still strikes me as a bit clunky.

Re: Apple Vision

#63

Post by PaulHoule »

I find his gushing about the centrality of phones to be annoying.

Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile choose not to serve the valley I live in, why should I reward them by buying an expensive plan? From time to time I've had a Tracfone but after a few years I wind up with 3000+ minutes because my average mobile call lasts under 2 minutes.

Practically I use an iPad to do almost everything people use phones for, even making telephone calls with Skype. I'm just waiting for them to shush me at the public library and point out the sign that says using a phone isn't allowed and tell them I'm not using a phone, I'm using a tablet. (My typical call is so short though they don't have time)

I constantly complain about "phonishness" invading the PC and other computing platforms, like Reddit trying to push you to use their mobile crapp. I still see the phone as a step backwards in computing, not a step forwards, particularly if you are forced to use that other mobile OS that has a trashcan as its logo.

Re: Apple Vision

#64

Post by ncr100 »

blantonl wrote: post #47

I'm curious if anyone will be able to develop in it (i.e. write code with virtual desktops etc) I'm also curious about how which unexpected consequences people will experience with such devices (nausea, etc... other unknown illnesses cropping up)

It should be high res enough, and there should be no screen door effect.

See https://youtu.be/OdHbQpg4pOA for a discussion of related display panel types.

Re: Apple Vision

#65

Post by LudwigNagasena »

sanitycheck wrote: post #14
nynx wrote: post #2

> It really is one of the best product names in Apple history: Vision is a description of a product, it is an aspiration for a use case, and it is a critique on the sort of society we are building, behind Apple’s leadership more than anyone else. I agree that “Vision” is a good product name, but “Vision Pro” just feels intensely pedestrian. Why is it called “Pro?” Is there a non-Pro version?

It seems lazy to me, do a Google search for "Vision Pro", excluding results from the past couple of days, and it seems there were already a ton of products and services with the same name. Perfect time to bring back the "i", though they already have "iSight". "iBorg"?

Apple became a victim of their own success in relation to the “i”. It is now associated with Apple, but it is too pedestrian to be registered as a trademark.

Re: Apple Vision

#66

Post by danpalmer »

5350-uiop-1130 wrote: post #7

curious how typing on a keyboard will work don't recall seeing that on the presentation.. also 2hrs battery, on a flight can you carry those... inconvenient (impractical?)

> 2hrs battery, on a flight can you even carry those...

Most flights have plug sockets now don't they, you're sitting down in a confined space, it seems fine to plug it in.

Any even if you can't plug it in, I'd guarantee it'll be below the 100Wh restriction that almost all airlines use, there aren't really any consumer electronics batteries above this precisely because you can't travel with them. They would also be huge and heavy.

Re: Apple Vision

#67

Post by pavlov »

flappyeagle wrote: post #59
pavlov wrote: post #35

"The company was fairly mum about how it planned to make those cameras and its format more widely available, but I am completely serious when I say that I would pay the NBA thousands of dollars to get a season pass to watch games captured in this way. Yes, that’s a crazy statement to make, but courtside seats cost that much or more, and that 10-second clip was shockingly close to the real thing." The author was shown…

It’s obvious how a 10 second clip scales to 10 minutes or 10 hours or 10 days. You don’t need that much imagination or even a leap of faith. A court side seat to an NBA game is north of $1000. If this creates 20% of the experience it will easily pay for itself in 1 season.

You're certain you would wear a headset for 10 days based on a 10-second experience? That doesn't make any sense.

Re: Apple Vision

#68

Post by corobo »

nashashmi wrote: post #5
nynx wrote: post #2

> It really is one of the best product names in Apple history: Vision is a description of a product, it is an aspiration for a use case, and it is a critique on the sort of society we are building, behind Apple’s leadership more than anyone else. I agree that “Vision” is a good product name, but “Vision Pro” just feels intensely pedestrian. Why is it called “Pro?” Is there a non-Pro version?

iView was better and more clever. Or iScreen. Literally anything that begins with i

When was the last time they branded something with a little i?

Re: Apple Vision

#69

Post by wildpeaks »

nynx wrote: post #2

> It really is one of the best product names in Apple history: Vision is a description of a product, it is an aspiration for a use case, and it is a critique on the sort of society we are building, behind Apple’s leadership more than anyone else. I agree that “Vision” is a good product name, but “Vision Pro” just feels intensely pedestrian. Why is it called “Pro?” Is there a non-Pro version?

It implies a possible cheaper non-Pro version in the future (like iPhone Pro and Macbook Pro) without promising it might exist.

Or simply to distinguish from their existing Vision software that has nothing to do with the headset: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/vision

Re: Apple Vision

#70

Post by ncr100 »

shp0ngle wrote: post #57
blantonl wrote: post #47

I'm curious if anyone will be able to develop in it (i.e. write code with virtual desktops etc) I'm also curious about how which unexpected consequences people will experience with such devices (nausea, etc... other unknown illnesses cropping up)

They didn’t show any virtual keyboard I think.

They did, actually it's a simplified floating keyboard and so a separate hardware keyboard is suggested for non alpha numeric input. Via Bluetooth.
Post reply on HN