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

641–650 of 1001 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#641

Post by drewmol »

sebzim4500 wrote: post #627
drewmol wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Explode?!? Do you think people who don’t already pay for porn/sexual IOT devices/digital sexual pleasure content will start to enter this emerging market? Do you think the same customer base will drastically increase spending? - I’m genuinely curious and surprised by the confidence.

I'm sure there are millions of people who visit pornhub that would never have visited a pornographic cinema (or whatever they were called).

Agreed. But there are much fewer people who pay for pornhub. Fewer who would buy a $3500 device just for a more immersive pornhub experience. I highly doubt these people are in apple’s target market.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#642

Post by unsupp0rted »

darawk wrote: post #428
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…

> So far at least, this is a tech that is being pushed onto people rather than being pulled. I think it's very hard to tell the difference between these things ex ante. Everything that succeeds looks like it was pulled. But many things were pushed before they were pulled. Buying things on the internet, for instance. This was laughed at for quite a while, while a few people and companies were committed to the idea tha…

Is ChatGPT being pushed or pulled?

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#643

Post by imiric »

grncdr wrote: post #591
imiric wrote: post #555

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But they were widely used by business people, and I’m assuming that was an important aspect of permeating into the other demographics. Similarly to how VR headsets are used by gamers and tech enthusiasts today. Just like VR for gaming, not everyone was willing to pay exhorbitant prices to lug around a briefcase of a phone, and use it only for poor quality phone calls. > AR/VR devices are attempting this the other w…

> Sure, but the actual current use case doesn't matter. Once the capabilities, price and user experience improve, it will become more appealing to a mass audience. I'm not the poster you're replying to, but I think you've missed their point here. Market penetration of mobile phones was (initially) driven by the advantages they provided as a work tool. This growing market that was willing to pay helped drive the cost…

I get that, but my point is that it doesn't matter what the initial use case that drives adoption is. Whether the ROI is financial/business, or enjoyment from entertainment, there are early adopters willing to pay high prices and tolerate the poor UX for the tech to improve.

This is clearly Apple's angle with this product. They understand that this is not a mass market product, but are betting on their brand appeal for it to sell well enough to finance later generations.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#644

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#645

Post by arethuza »

roomey wrote: post #482
darawk wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So far at least, this is a tech that is being pushed onto people rather than being pulled. I think it's very hard to tell the difference between these things ex ante. Everything that succeeds looks like it was pulled. But many things were pushed before they were pulled. Buying things on the internet, for instance. This was laughed at for quite a while, while a few people and companies were committed to the idea tha…

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

"but buying things on the internet wasn't laughed at"

It was definitely laughed at by people like travel agents - remember them? I can remember discussing it with people in the travel industry around '94 and '95 and they literally laughed at the idea of people arranging travel online.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#646

Post by nologic01 »

fearface wrote: post #636
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…

TIL some people believe desktop computing is more natural than spatial computing

Believing (and preaching) is easy. Some tangible evidence is harder.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#648

Post by danwee »

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…

> 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 something on their heads that dramatically takes over their visual field for the pursuit of... what exactly? That is the puzzle.

I definitely think VR/AR is the next big think, but not via headsets, but via holograms or whatever it takes to get rid of physical screens and mouses (peripherals in general). You tell me I can have a huge 4K "hologram screen" projecting whatever is on my phone by just clicking a button? I'm sold. I mean, why would I read HN on my tiny phone if I can read it in a 13inch hologram display being projected from my wrist while I'm on the bus? Or a 30inch display when I'm on my couch? Same for whatever you do on the internet.

What Apple has showned us in the demo is the future... but not with headsets (if I go to the supermarket to buy milk, I'm not taking my headset, if I go to the bathroom I'm not taking my headset, if I'm taking the public transportation I'm not taking my headset).

You may think "high definition holograms" are just too sci-fi, but I don't think so. In any case, headsets are just too clumsy. Perhaps Apple's v2 for their headsets becomes just some glasses ala Google glass? In that case I don't know, maybe that gets traction if implemented correctly.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#649

Post by sebzim4500 »

zeknife wrote: post #570
ravst3s wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, some people do, but the majority of people are not looking to exercise while gaming. It's a niche use case. The Wii lost its novelty pretty quickly. If you're gaming for 3-4 hours, watching a movie, or using the device for productivity you're going to be seated or standing still. Also, Vision Pro can be a mobile device, albeit for <2 hrs. Imo, Gaming will not be the primary use case for these devices.

Having used VR, I actually think I would rather move around for 3 hours than stand still for 3 hours

That's certainly true but sitting for three hours is better than either.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg on Apple’s Vision Pro headset

#650

Post by sebzim4500 »

tsimionescu wrote: post #516
microtonal wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a skeumorphic anchor to get people comfortable with a new technology. Not just that. It also makes the Vision not just an ill-defined VR product, but also a 'MacBook Air or iPad for on the go with far more screen real estate'. This pitch resonates with pro users who are not necessarily interested in VR. The initial reaction of Apple-using friends/family is: I'd probably buy this as a replacement for a MacBook…

> The initial reaction of Apple-using friends/family is: I'd probably buy this as a replacement for a MacBook + external screen Then I believe they misunderstood the presentation, since this device is not a replacement for a MacBook, since it just can't run the same software. And even if it could, it would be much, much slower at it, since it has to spend huge compute resources on constant refresh of two 4k+ screens…

For the significant portion of users that spend $2k on a macbook and then use it as a webbrowser 99% of the time I think this could work great.
Post reply on HN