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

911–920 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#911

Post by whywhywhywhy »

Auracle wrote: post #759
tsimionescu wrote: post #746

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

True, but apart from video/games/possibly a browser they absolutely don’t need to refresh at 60hz. I’m surprised they couldn’t somehow work in a “one nice screen, the rest refresh when needed” solution - though maybe that’s just too clunky for Apple.

Rest of the VR industry already systems that only really put the rendering hardware to use where you're looking it's called Foveated rendering, because essentially your eyes can't even see the detail in the edges of vision even if it were rendered there. Handles this all very fast and seamlessly.

Not a stretch the same thing could be applied to a virtual desktop environment especially when you have eye tracking.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#912

Post by whywhywhywhy »

theshrike79 wrote: post #741
hackernewds wrote: post #721

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple made the first mainstream acceptable smartwatch by smoothing over a lot of the complaints about their competitors, Really? Why do Apple fanboys make these kinda claims.. same as wireless Bluetooth pods, or fingerprint readers, or faceID. There are ample examples of these done well on the hardware side prior. The main advantage Apple has is its seamless integration with software, which of course it pairs well…

"Done well" was the Nokia motto. They did solid phones with a ton of features. Look what happened to them? Their problem was that none of the features was _usable_. It was like they released the first MVP the engineering team got done and forgot that people needed to use it too. But it gave them a bonus and another line on spec sheet, so all was good. For example Nokia had Copy & Paste years before Apple. But it was…

> For example Nokia had Copy & Paste years before Apple. But it was shit

To be fair iOS copy and paste is still shit today, selecting and copying/pasting is really one of the worst experiences on iOS.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#913

Post by whywhywhywhy »

saagarjha wrote: post #784
Takennickname wrote: post #693

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except when the iPhone came out all the reviewers were like "holy shit, this is mind blowing" while with this one everyone is like "it's a shittier oculus quest with some apple polish"

Almost every outlet is calling it a better Oculus Quest but one that is fantastically expensive.

Definitely looks better for productivity, but for gaming and social?

Nothing on Vision Pro is comparable to things like Beatsaber, VR Chat, Pavlov.

Hard to tell if the hand tracking could handle those sort of experiences currently.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#914

Post by nojvek »

I’ve heard Meta is going full throttle to make their Ray Ban form factor glasses have an AR display.

Very much like the XReal glasses but with resolution of Quest line.

I loved my XReals. The biggest issue with them was it had no head/position tracking to keep the screens in one place.

The technology I’d throw my money is glasses that:

- look like fashionable glasses. Not that glasshole crap from Google. Or VisionPro goggles weighing a kilo. XReal are fashionable enough that most people didn’t notice it when I was using it in public.

- Add an unobtrusive display only visible to you, not to bystanders. Text display ought to be crisp and readable.

- Built in speakers audible only to you, not to bystanders.

- track head position so windows can stay floated in space instead of moving with head. The immersion of virtual object.

- some form of finger tracking to select and tap on things. Again private, shouldn’t need to put them infront of my face.

- pretty darn good contextual AI that has understanding of world around me. Show me gps directions. When I meet someone, recall their notes so I can have a meaningful conversations. Fact check my conversations on the fly. Be the bicyle of my mind.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#915

Post by NineStarPoint »

aenis wrote: post #764
chaostheory wrote: post #591

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As far as viewing with other people, this doesn’t seem like an insurmountable challenge. This can also be achieved with 3rd party apps. On Quest, this is already a reality with Big Screen.

I wonder who would actually do that. The only reason I watch tv is to socialize with my family. I think if we were just sitting on the couch all wearing VR googles it would ruin the entire use case for watching stuff together. Surely, some geeks, once or twice.

The use case is watching something with people who are half a world away I think, not with people who are physically present with you.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#916

Post by bastawhiz »

chaostheory wrote: post #601
bastawhiz wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think OP meant you can't include other people _in the same room_. If I want to watch Netflix (well, Apple TV, since Netflix doesn't have an app yet), my partner is completely out of luck if I do it on an Apple Vision. Unless he too has the money for one and we FaceTime each other to sync up our watching experience.

1. This problem has already been solved on the Meta Quest by a 3rd party app called Big Screen. I would imagine that they or someone else will attempt to do the same for VisionOS. Otherwise, I can see Apple fixing this later. 2. 52% of media viewing in the US is done alone.

1. The problem isn't solved, because nobody has the patience or money to set up and sync multiple headsets when you already have a perfectly good TV.

I know zero people who have eliminated their TVs for a headset. Apple isn't going to change that.

2. And so the vision pro isn't even viable for 48% of watching. That's a huge percentage, and shows that nobody is getting rid of their TVs for this.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#917

Post by bastawhiz »

bigiain wrote: post #488
bastawhiz wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think OP meant you can't include other people _in the same room_. If I want to watch Netflix (well, Apple TV, since Netflix doesn't have an app yet), my partner is completely out of luck if I do it on an Apple Vision. Unless he too has the money for one and we FaceTime each other to sync up our watching experience.

That seems to be an odd requirement/desire to have a head mounted display do?

That's the point. Watching TV with other people is a thing that most folks do. At least in my house, it's nice to walk into the room to see what someone else is watching and join. Unless they become comfortable and universally ubiquitous, watching media isn't something Apple Vision is going to be particularly good for.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#918

Post by masfoobar »

Gazoche wrote: post #828
masfoobar wrote: post #815

The technology of what we see with Meta/Vive/etc VR headsets, as well as what with see with Apple Vision, will be nothing more than a pair of glasses so light you will hardly notice it This is what it will be like in 10 years. The current generation (teens and adulets) wondering around the streets with their head sinked to their phones, will be replaced wearing "specs" 24/7. In the next 20-25, I would not be surprise…

> In the next 20-25, I would not be surprised if it becomes no more than contact lenses. I can see the current XR headsets shrinking down to the size of a pair of glasses within a couple decades, but contact lenses would require a giant leap forward in technology. You'd need displays, electronics, sensors and batteries that can all fit together inside a paper-thin plane, and also, somehow, be invisible. Not saying it…

If I went back in time (say... 1991) and told people my predictions of the future, I will likely be laughed at for being sci-fi tech. For example, let suggest I predict that by 2011 most people in developed Countries will have a PDA allowing you to make calls or connect with people all over the world. Sure many will laugh at me.

I continue to say that these PDA's will be a 5" touchscreen, allowing you to play games. Games far more powerful than the Mega Drive and can play with your friends from anywhere in the world. The PDA has a far superior, higher resolution screen beyond 640x480 and can render much faster 3D images than the supercomputers of today (ie SGI workstations)

All of these claims.. alongside explaining what a PDA is, which you can fit in your pocket that wont need charging for 5+ hours, etc...

Even people who do see the possibility will likely spend most of their efforts explaining that their RC Cars don't last 30 mins without recharding the batteries, so this wont work, either!

Of course by PDA (Personal Data Assistant) - I refer to what we call Smartphones today.

Point is - I try to be realistic about future tech even in the next 20-25 years.. but I leave some areas open to being more "advanced" than we anticipate.

Yes.. contact lenses is a stretch for "next 20-25 years" but lets not ignore the suggestion. Young kids in 2040 will laugh at how we managed to wear these "heavy" VR headsets. Who knows how this type of tech will evolve and mix with other tech.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#919

Post by ChadNauseam »

Jcowell wrote: post #316
refulgentis wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They shipped iPad Stage Manager half-baked, to get iPad developers ready for double-buffered windows, so they could eventually ship the visionOS macOS integration half-baked? Doesn't sound right at all to my ears, even though I'm stoked for my order! EDIT: -5* doesn't make sense, this is the most polite way you can point out that getting macOS apps windowed on visionOS has ~0 to do with double-buffered windows on iPa…

On another operative, I use Stage Manager everyday of Mac & iPad and it’s pretty neat. I actually forgot I was until you mentioned it

Same here, I actually really like stage manager on my Mac.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#920

Post by [deleted] »

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.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN