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

Thoughts on Vision Pro

andrewhart.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 185 posts

Re: Thoughts on Vision Pro

#81

Post by archagon »

tcmart14 wrote: post #78
archagon wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also feel like the lack of precise/physical controls is going to make gaming a non-starter. Which is really the main reason I’m excited about VR in the first place.

I would assume someone could easily integrate a controller for their app using the Game Controller framework [1]. So its not impossible. The only complaint I could see is there not being a standardize visionOS physical controller. But I assume that you could assume the PlayStation DualSense or SteelSeries Nimbus+[2] is probably what you should target controls for. [1] https://developer.apple.com/documentation/gamecon…

Unfortunately, a gamepad is just not sufficient for immersive VR gaming: you need something like the Meta Quest controller. And the lack of a first-party controller means that games will be forced to build sub-par gesture based controls as the default, with physical controls as an afterthought. (We already saw this play out with the Apple TV.)

As a result, I highly doubt we'll get anything as advanced as Half-Life: Alyx on the platform.

Re: Thoughts on Vision Pro

#82

Post by taeric »

Eugr wrote: post #66
taeric wrote: post #45

I'm still very curious exactly what people had in mind for this. Like, from all reports, it is a very good VR headset. But... what do people think they will use a VR headset for? Heck, the PS5 VR headset seems to be having trouble selling, and it is very good at what it is designed for. Anyone buying the PSVR2 knows they are getting it to play games. Solo games, at that. Yes, you can do a party mode for Beat Saber an…

It's a very good XR headset. My primary use is to use it as a portable display, so I'm not chained to my desk all day. Also great for travel. Great to watch movies too. Since it runs most iPad apps, it can be used for some light productivity workflows even without a Mac. You can use Bluetooth keyboard if you need to type a lot, but the virtual keyboard is surprisingly decent for quick replies.

I'd be interested in seeing stats on how often people actually "get away from their desk" in a way that needs a computer. Specifically ways that aren't already covered by a phone.

Re: Thoughts on Vision Pro

#83

Post by taeric »

toddmorey wrote: post #55
taeric wrote: post #45

I'm still very curious exactly what people had in mind for this. Like, from all reports, it is a very good VR headset. But... what do people think they will use a VR headset for? Heck, the PS5 VR headset seems to be having trouble selling, and it is very good at what it is designed for. Anyone buying the PSVR2 knows they are getting it to play games. Solo games, at that. Yes, you can do a party mode for Beat Saber an…

I'm most interested in the virtual screens (no more large monitors) and the opportunity for AI assisted instructions / guidance as I do tasks like home repair.

This sounds neat, but I confess I'm already not clear that my large monitors count as a massive productivity increase over my laptop monitor. Certainly helps in some ways, but once I know what it is I need to do, the laptop is never a blocking item.

The home repair ideas is certainly a neat one. Guessing it will be a while before the content is readily available in large quantities?

Re: Thoughts on Vision Pro

#84

Post by taeric »

mrguyorama wrote: post #73
taeric wrote: post #45

I'm still very curious exactly what people had in mind for this. Like, from all reports, it is a very good VR headset. But... what do people think they will use a VR headset for? Heck, the PS5 VR headset seems to be having trouble selling, and it is very good at what it is designed for. Anyone buying the PSVR2 knows they are getting it to play games. Solo games, at that. Yes, you can do a party mode for Beat Saber an…

>So, what did the non-gamer community hope for from this? What is there to feed those hopes? There are still so many people who have never touched VR who are somehow hyped up and convinced this is somehow more magical or more special than everyone elses headset. Basically it's just the normal reality distortion effect. Sooooooo many comments of "the original iPhone wasn't perfect either". So?

What is weird, is I suspect it is flat out a good headset. At the price, almost certainly better than the alternatives.

VR has come a LONG way and it works surprisingly well for anything where you aren't expecting to walk. Gran Turismo could legit work as a teaching tool for driving. Yes, you lose some force feedback from the likes of braking; but a good steering wheel goes a long long way to the rest of the experience. (Heck, reality is the wheel alone is probably good for an immersive experience.)

I still don't get why folks would be so pumped over the rest of the ideas. Especially with how cheap large decently high resolution monitors have become.

Re: Thoughts on Vision Pro

#85

Post by bookofjoe »

I bought Vision Pro and used it as is for three weeks, then put it away for a couple weeks because of degree of difficulty for me, definitely NOT a techie.

On a whim I went to the optometrist, got examined and a prescription for glasses (I use over-the-counter 1.25x readers from CVS), then uploaded the Rx to Zeiss using their iPhone app, and ponied up $149 for their optical inserts.

Since the inserts arrived and I put them in, my experience overall with VP has been better: still way too difficult and confusing, but movies and TV shows, which were the only redeeming factors in my initial three weeks of use, seem really, really crisp and vivid, more so than initially.

Take these observations with a grain of salt, after all, it's a series of one 75-year-old retired neurosurgical anesthesiologist's experiences.

But if you've already dropped 4k, well, that's a lot of sunk cost to write off without trying everything possible to make it work.

At least that was my thinking.

Re: Thoughts on Vision Pro

#86

Post by kfarr »

PaulHoule wrote: post #61
kfarr wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that Meta has tried but their solution is really completely different than a more traditional OS UI. Meta provides low level convenience functions SDK for the various native app development frameworks (mostly Unity and Unreal) to access the hardware and facilitate common movements, but the actual UI implementation is up to the app author resulting in a helter skelter hodge podge of varying UI from app to app.…

With a total of 10 buttons on the controller it's a (usually) minor annoyance that one app chooses to use one button to choose an action and another chooses a different button. Sometimes it can be really frustrating to try a bunch of buttons and see what works. I've put quite a few people through the AR demo that shipped with the Quest 3 and noticed that VR-naive people vary a lot in how quickly they figure out the i…

100% agree. Sounds minor but one of the biggest usability issues for new user since the launch of the standalone quest is the confusion of users on whether to use trigger or X / A button as primary action.

And I'd say it's more than a minor annoyance, it's wild that the issue has existed for nearly a decade and their UX team thinks it's ok.

Re: Thoughts on Vision Pro

#87

Post by LordDragonfang »

gamblor956 wrote: post #79
LordDragonfang wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Passthrough is massively oversold, even if it's technically impressive. They set expectations way too high. As a Vision Pro owner, kinda, but kinda not? I have a really low-power glasses prescription (-1/-1.5) and I've come to the conclusion that everyone saying this has the priviledge of being born with perfect (irl) vision. It's intentionally a little bit out of focus to obscure the screen door effect, which I und…

The passthrough camera has fairly low resolution compared to the inner displays, so if it looks "lifelike" to you, it's probably time to consider getting your glass prescription updated. Comparing the VP to the Quest 3, it's a significant upgrade (and should be, for the 7x price), but neither of them is anywhere close to "lifelike."

So, to gather anecdata, a question to you: do you wear corrective lenses or contacts in your day-to-day life?

I never said I couldn't tell the difference between my corrected vision and the vision pro. But it's probably close to as clear as my uncorrected vision, which is how I experience life the majority of time. In a very real way, it is lifelike. My reaction to the cover coming off is "oh, I don't have my glasses on" not "oh, I'm looking at a screen". In no world would I have the same reaction to the passthrough on any other VR headset I own.

The latency, lack of screen door, minimization of warping artifacts, and yes, even the resolution, are at a place where someone who doesn't have the privilege of 24/7 perfect vision could easily mistake it at first glance. There's lots of places to improve (mostly the blur when moving your head), but we're at the point where "not literally indistinguishable" is the point of contention.

Also, keep in mind "lifelike" has never even meant "literally undisguisable" in the first place. People have been using it to describe graphics since the PS1, so I think it's fair to use to describe something that looks more like life than the majority of even present-day "realistic" 3D games.

Re: Thoughts on Vision Pro

#88

Post by ramesh31 »

wilsonnb3 wrote: post #53
ramesh31 wrote: post #6

>But using without the Light Seal is a massive improvement. You’re closer to the screen, so it reduces the tunnel vision and expands the effective field-of-view. And rather than a black edge, you have a frame, with outside visibility. Same thoughts for Quest 3. I use mine exclusively without the light seal now. It is a huge improvement in the ability to just casually use the thing among friends and not seem like a we…

> Sticking with hand/finger based gesture tracking and rejecting controllers was the absolute best decision Apple made for Vision Pro. Designing the UI around hand/eye tracking was smart but not supporting VR controllers at all is stupid. Reminds me of how stubborn they were about bringing mouse support to iPads.

>Designing the UI around hand/eye tracking was smart but not supporting VR controllers at all is stupid.

It was a strategic decision. It says "This is not a game console, it's a general purpose computer", and paves the way for opening more people up to the idea. Controllers are a crutch that no one actually wants. We want to be able to just naturally do things in VR/AR the same as we would in reality. And vision based hand/finger tracking has gotten to a point where controllers really are nothing more than an input device now. There's no need for them at all to have 6DOF control, the way there was in the Lighthouse/Constellation days.

Re: Thoughts on Vision Pro

#89

Post by threeseed »

tanseydavid wrote: post #75
threeseed wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s cute that you think that companies can demand things from film studios. But in the real world that doesn’t happen and Apple needs their support to get this content on the platform in the first place.

>> It’s cute that you think that companies can demand things from film studios. The snark does not really add anything to the discussion. Apple is the second largest company in the world by market cap. I think they have some leverage.

And yet the decades of on the ground evidence from iOS, macOS, AppleTV and now Vision Pro is that (a) market cap means nothing, (b) Apple has about as much leverage as everyone i.e. none and (c) film studios dictate the rules.

Re: Thoughts on Vision Pro

#90

Post by amelius »

threeseed wrote: post #89
tanseydavid wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> It’s cute that you think that companies can demand things from film studios. The snark does not really add anything to the discussion. Apple is the second largest company in the world by market cap. I think they have some leverage.

And yet the decades of on the ground evidence from iOS, macOS, AppleTV and now Vision Pro is that (a) market cap means nothing, (b) Apple has about as much leverage as everyone i.e. none and (c) film studios dictate the rules.

Glad that soon generative AI will dictate the rules.
Post reply on HN