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

Vision Pro: What we got wrong at Oculus that Apple got right

hugo.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

691–700 of 863 posts

Re: Vision Pro: What we got wrong at Oculus that Apple got right

#691

Post by pipeline_peak »

Eric_WVGG wrote: post #683
zmmmmm wrote: post #481

Coming from a senior Oculus lead, the most interesting thing about this write up for me, is what it lacks: it says almost nothing about the software stack / operating system. Still 100% talking about hardware at the bottom and end user applications at the other end. But there is no discussion of the platform which to me is actually the highest value proposition Apple is bringing here. In short: Apple has made a fully…

I was saying the same thing back during the first five years of the iPhone. There were so many ostensibly serious people who thought that BlackBerry or Nokia would have an “iPhone killer” just around the corner, and it’s like… do you chumps have any idea how difficult it is to build an operating system?

Well BlackBerry eventually did acquire QNX. But this was in 2010 which was far too late…

Re: Vision Pro: What we got wrong at Oculus that Apple got right

#692

Post by chaostheory »

HDThoreaun wrote: post #389
nox101 wrote: post #369

I'd add to the list (1) Quest is a game console Quest is clearly a gaming device. It boot straight into the store. The re-opens the store at every opportunity. This means, trying to use it for non-gaming means you're constantly reminded your on a VR game console. It'd be like trying to use a PS5 for work. I kind of get why they did it but I hate it. I'm happy my iPhone does not boot into the store and does not go bac…

Quests screen isnt good enough for reading so productivity is out. Its a gaming device because it cant really be anything else.

Quest 3 is good enough albeit barely.

Re: Vision Pro: What we got wrong at Oculus that Apple got right

#693

Post by mark_l_watson »

lynndotpy wrote: post #672
zmmmmm wrote: post #481

Coming from a senior Oculus lead, the most interesting thing about this write up for me, is what it lacks: it says almost nothing about the software stack / operating system. Still 100% talking about hardware at the bottom and end user applications at the other end. But there is no discussion of the platform which to me is actually the highest value proposition Apple is bringing here. In short: Apple has made a fully…

For me personally, it's definitely the platform. Requiring a Meta / Facebook account for already-purchased Oculuses, retroactively bricking devices and deleting software which was bought before that requirement, has put Oculus firmly in the "hardware I will never consider in my life" camp. It's an incredible amount of goodwill to burn from a company with so little to spare, and I'm surprised it hasn't come up yet in…

Thanks for your comment. I love just a few things on my Quest 2, and several times a week I take ten minute breaks for ping pong, something meditative, tai chi, etc.

You reminded me of the negative aspects of the Meta/Facebook corporate mass, and they should clean up their act in privacy, etc. for VR in the same way they have basically purchased good will in the AI community for releasing LLM model weights.

Apologies for going off topic, but Apple similarly really needs to trade a little profit for buying themselves a better “look” because they are looking a little tarnished also.

Re: Vision Pro: What we got wrong at Oculus that Apple got right

#694

Post by CatWChainsaw »

smitty1e wrote: post #98

I can only see getting into VR for very specific, limited duration tasks. Call me a Luddite, but I am increasingly disdainful of all the New Shiny stuff, and see society trending toward lower-tech, traditional pursuits.

I think it's natural. With the end of the Free Money Era, every New Shiny Thing in your life is going to require a subscription, permission to harvest data on everything about you that can be measured, as many advertisements as users will tolerate, and gambling-tier microtransactions. It's tiring, demoralizing, and stupid. Walking away is liberating.

Re: Vision Pro: What we got wrong at Oculus that Apple got right

#695

Post by Loggias »

lynndotpy wrote: post #672
zmmmmm wrote: post #481

Coming from a senior Oculus lead, the most interesting thing about this write up for me, is what it lacks: it says almost nothing about the software stack / operating system. Still 100% talking about hardware at the bottom and end user applications at the other end. But there is no discussion of the platform which to me is actually the highest value proposition Apple is bringing here. In short: Apple has made a fully…

For me personally, it's definitely the platform. Requiring a Meta / Facebook account for already-purchased Oculuses, retroactively bricking devices and deleting software which was bought before that requirement, has put Oculus firmly in the "hardware I will never consider in my life" camp. It's an incredible amount of goodwill to burn from a company with so little to spare, and I'm surprised it hasn't come up yet in…

[dead]

Re: Vision Pro: What we got wrong at Oculus that Apple got right

#696

Post by ChildOfChaos »

I mean the Vision Pro seems like an over engineered dev kit to me, like the article describes.

The vision pro seems to miss the mark in some many areas and seems like it's ahead of it's time, which is odd for Apple and the Quest 3 seems to beat it in a lot of areas.

In some ways I am surprised Apple released it and didn't keep working on it in the lab, but in others, I think they wanted to get it out in users hands and see how they use it and what devs start to build with it, they also wanted to normalise the idea of such devices, so when something more functional is out there, people will be happier to use it.

Re: Vision Pro: What we got wrong at Oculus that Apple got right

#697

Post by ChildOfChaos »

zmmmmm wrote: post #481

Coming from a senior Oculus lead, the most interesting thing about this write up for me, is what it lacks: it says almost nothing about the software stack / operating system. Still 100% talking about hardware at the bottom and end user applications at the other end. But there is no discussion of the platform which to me is actually the highest value proposition Apple is bringing here. In short: Apple has made a fully…

I get what you are saying, but that is why the Vision Pro is still an over engineered dev kit for a half baked OS.

At least the Meta Quest for example has a lot of content and VR games. The Vision Pro doesn't seem to have much use apart from it curiosity, because such system hasn't been fully built out. It seems like a device that isn't really ready for prime time for a couple of years yet.

Re: Vision Pro: What we got wrong at Oculus that Apple got right

#698

Post by bleepblop »

ChildOfChaos wrote: post #697
zmmmmm wrote: post #481

Coming from a senior Oculus lead, the most interesting thing about this write up for me, is what it lacks: it says almost nothing about the software stack / operating system. Still 100% talking about hardware at the bottom and end user applications at the other end. But there is no discussion of the platform which to me is actually the highest value proposition Apple is bringing here. In short: Apple has made a fully…

I get what you are saying, but that is why the Vision Pro is still an over engineered dev kit for a half baked OS. At least the Meta Quest for example has a lot of content and VR games. The Vision Pro doesn't seem to have much use apart from it curiosity, because such system hasn't been fully built out. It seems like a device that isn't really ready for prime time for a couple of years yet.

Thinking about it. If apple had dropped their vision pro with something like you can play Half Life Alyx on it like they did with Death Stranding with the M2chip/M3? they might have had a larger buyer pool.

Re: Vision Pro: What we got wrong at Oculus that Apple got right

#699

Post by [deleted] »

GeekyBear wrote: post #645
jjfoooo4 wrote: post #635

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me the interesting bit is that an even a VR executive a decade plus into working in the field doesn’t find this device compelling enough to own it. I get that the thesis is that this version is the devkit etc, but viable consumer product status (read: enough adoption for the device to be profitable) seems very far away

> viable consumer product status (read: enough adoption for the device to be profitable) seems very far away He mentions a few short term use cases for the current hardware. For example: Productivity on the go (A laptop with the headset for multiple virtual displays) and Live Sports. > Apple Immersive on Vision Pro is a transformative experience in terms of video quality and its ability to deliver a real sense of pre…

[deleted]

Re: Vision Pro: What we got wrong at Oculus that Apple got right

#700

Post by jwcooper »

bleepblop wrote: post #698
ChildOfChaos wrote: post #697

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get what you are saying, but that is why the Vision Pro is still an over engineered dev kit for a half baked OS. At least the Meta Quest for example has a lot of content and VR games. The Vision Pro doesn't seem to have much use apart from it curiosity, because such system hasn't been fully built out. It seems like a device that isn't really ready for prime time for a couple of years yet.

Thinking about it. If apple had dropped their vision pro with something like you can play Half Life Alyx on it like they did with Death Stranding with the M2chip/M3? they might have had a larger buyer pool.

They would have needed controllers and actually cared enough to support steam on it.

There is zero chance Valve would release HL:Alyx without full steam support on the device.

That being said, I get what you're saying - that a killer game could have helped the value proposition. They clearly didn't design it for that though, even based on how much lower their refresh rate is for hand tracking.

It feels like a consumption device like the iPad, with some productivity mixed in.

Post reply on HN