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

Apple Vision Pro review

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

771–780 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#771

Post by jc_dc »

kalleboo wrote: post #667
wkat4242 wrote: post #658

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead of having multiple virtual screens I would prefer a lot more if I could simply spread individual Mac windows around my virtual space. In mixed reality the whole concept of a virtual monitor makes no sense, it's just an unnecessarily limiting abstraction you could easily do without. The whole room is your "desktop". It's basically what the SimulaVR guys are aiming at, and I'm surprised Apple didn't go this way…

I don't think Apple wants you to use Mac apps. They want developers to make Vision Pro apps. That's why the Mac integration is the minimum they could get away with.

Good luck with that. Devs made the iPhone a hit and Apple demonized them over it. Can’t imagine too many are eager to make the same mistake twice.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#772

Post by mch82 »

Unexpected that it’s possible to ski while wearing a Vision Pro (demonstrated close to the end of the WSJ video review). That’s the first time I’ve seen that Vision Pro works outside. Skiing is pretty complicated, so that implies a pretty solid display.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#773

Post by throwaway71271 »

ninkendo wrote: post #458
throwaway71271 wrote: post #229

The complexity of our systems has increased a lot, and I dont think the tooling has caught up yet. Its sad that the fastest thing we have now is log.Printf("asdasdf") and grep the logs on the pod :) Debugging multithreaded application is as difficult as it was 50 years ago, maybe VR debuggers will allow us to debug complex interconnected systems or models in a more intuitive environment. Also I think having hundreds…

Apple can’t even get lldb to not crash trying to show me the values of variables in the current stack frame… the intuitiveness of the UI is far from the top of my priority list.

:) apple doesnt even let you gdb -p unless you disable the system integrity protection

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#774

Post by hexomancer »

huytersd wrote: post #700
klausa wrote: post #688

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I imagine it's mostly a CPU/battery/bandwidth concern at this point — having one wireless 4.5k/60 (or is it 90?) stream from your Mac is difficult enough; having a potentially unbound number of them (for arbitrary number of Mac windows open) is a different problem altogether. But there are 3rd party solutions that will let you do just that though: https://github.com/saagarjha/Ensemble

This is it exactly. I’m surprised the HN crowd isn’t immediately picking up the bandwidth issues with streaming unlimited 4k screens from your MacBook.

AVP knows exactly which monitor you are looking at. The mac doesn't need to render all monitors at full resolution, just the one being looked at.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#775

Post by saagarjha »

jojobas wrote: post #675
mvkel wrote: post #617

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was the surprise to me too. Lower FOV than a Quest 3? Inexcusable.

Even with that FOV and the highest resolution display they could get, it still can only emulate a 15" display comfy 70cm from your eye at a whopping resolution of 940x540. It's a gimmick priced as 2.5 monitor stands.

How did you get those numbers? They seem quite low, considering that they do 4K mirroring and all.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#776

Post by saagarjha »

zmmmmm wrote: post #634
Civitello wrote: post #567

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> field of view...Limits of the technology It really isn't though, at least not for long, as of mid 2023 there are publicly showcased compact lightweight prototypes with 240° FoV.

they are paying the price for their obsession with super high resolution. I think it's a mistake, from my perception Quest 3 at 25ppd is nearly good enough, and its panels are nearly half the resolution. They should have traded 20% resolution for 10 deg FOV either side. In fact, with appropriate optics the effective resolutions sacrifice could be even less than that.

How is it to read text on the Quest 3? How would you compare it to a high-density display (such as what is on your phone)?

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#777

Post by hexomancer »

tsimionescu wrote: post #746
ravenstine wrote: post #580

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, I remember when it was announced, to press materials gave the impression that it would be closely integrable with macOS. I was picturing using VS Code from within it. Which I guess I could do if I set up VNC... but I'm not paying thousands for that. Is an AR productivity tool really so hard? Apple owns the whole stack here. Nintendo can do Mario Kart AR in your living room with an RC car, but I can't get unlimit…

> but I can't get unlimited AR desktops for software development etc? You can't because it's computationally impossible. There is simply no computing device that can render unlimited high-res desktops at 60Hz per eye. Not to mention the need to stream all that data to the headset - since you're not going to put a high-end graphics card needed to even attempt this in anything approaching a wearable form factor. Good l…

AVP knows exactly which monitor you are looking at. The mac doesn't need to render all monitors at full resolution, just the one being looked at.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#778

Post by saagarjha »

deutschepost wrote: post #740
huytersd wrote: post #700

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is it exactly. I’m surprised the HN crowd isn’t immediately picking up the bandwidth issues with streaming unlimited 4k screens from your MacBook.

Noted that this would be a non issue if you could just connect a cable between your Mac and the Vision. You already have the huge battery pack dangling off the side. This is an apple issue, not a technical one.

I think Apple sees a device that doesn't have any cables in the near future; they just weren't able to pull it off this time.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#779

Post by freedomben »

jc_dc wrote: post #771
kalleboo wrote: post #667

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think Apple wants you to use Mac apps. They want developers to make Vision Pro apps. That's why the Mac integration is the minimum they could get away with.

Good luck with that. Devs made the iPhone a hit and Apple demonized them over it. Can’t imagine too many are eager to make the same mistake twice.

There are enough devs that love Apple and have a burning loyalty toward them, that this is not something I would worry about. Even if it started to become a problem, Apple has enough cash to make a lot of apps, and could subsidize this for an eternity if necessary to make it work. Apps will not be a problem.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#780

Post by saagarjha »

jc_dc wrote: post #771
kalleboo wrote: post #667

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think Apple wants you to use Mac apps. They want developers to make Vision Pro apps. That's why the Mac integration is the minimum they could get away with.

Good luck with that. Devs made the iPhone a hit and Apple demonized them over it. Can’t imagine too many are eager to make the same mistake twice.

Have you been paying attention to everything Apple has been doing in, say, the last week?
Post reply on HN