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

971–980 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#971

Post by yencabulator »

deanishe wrote: post #883
zmmmmm wrote: post #634

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

They only need hi-res where the user is looking, don't they? We can't see what's in our peripheral vision clearly, so they should be able to get away with most of the FoV being blocky af, shouldn't they?

The goggle FoV is fixed right in front of you, but your eyes turn.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#972

Post by Sateeshm »

zecg wrote: post #867
naravara wrote: post #509

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Want it for productivity? it can't run MacOS applications and if you want to use your actual Mac it can't do multiple monitors. I don’t know why, but while I feel multiple monitors helps my productivity a lot in Windows and Linux I find myself not caring as much in MacOS as long as the screen is big enough. I think it has to do with my habits around how I use the windowing in each. I tend to teasselate and arrange…

Unpopular opinion: multiple monitors are a meme for most uses and almost everyone is better off having a single screen and using their fingers to move the viewport accross virtual desktop spaces.

Yes. I'd rather press a button than turn my neck.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#973

Post by yencabulator »

fouc wrote: post #840
mcny wrote: post #808

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This has been know for at least 30 years in the eye tracking business and it even has a name - The Midas Touch problem. I wanted to see how it is possible but sure enough, I found a paper from 1995 that cited even older research about this. https://www.cs.tufts.edu/~jacob/papers/barfield.pdf

from the paper, the definition of The Midas Touch problem is: > They expect to be able to look at an item without having the look cause an action to occur. So this doesn't seem to be a problem that Vision Pro has?

Vision Pro pinch-touch is essentially the same as this paper's

> some form of ‘‘clutch’’ to engage and disengage the monitoring

The paper does talk about other challenges with look-to-select, even if it is biased by the thinking of back in the day:

> Unlike a mouse, it is relatively difficult to control eye position consciously and precisely at all times.

You have to remember that the historical setting for much of this research was to help paralyzed people to communicate, and pushing a button or the modern pinch-touch was not really always an option.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#974

Post by nottorp »

AlexandrB wrote: post #166
patapong wrote: post #26

I think we are now at a stage where VR hardware has surpassed software. Between this and the Quest 3, we have powerful, polished and consumer friendly devices, but beyond a few niches (fitness, simulation, gaming to some extent), there is nothing to convince users to put the headsets on. I am hoping we will see a lot of experimentation in the coming years, and I am excited for what the Apple ecosystem will bring to t…

Underlying a lot of these discussions is the assumption that there is a future where this is an actually useful, mass-market device. I'm still not convinced this is true. For example, "killer apps/content" never arrived for 3D TVs and they have largely disappeared from the market. Same with various "waggling" input technologies like the Wiimote and Kinect. There were some compelling uses, like Wii Sports, but these w…

> For example, "killer apps/content" never arrived for 3D TVs and they have largely disappeared from the market.

I'm still full of myself for postponing getting a 3D TV enough times that the technology died.

> Same with various "waggling" input technologies like the Wiimote and Kinect.

... but I have a PS Move gathering dust somewhere. Which I even preordered.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#975

Post by vikramkr »

cwalv wrote: post #733
vikramkr wrote: post #560

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An addendum - I'm surprised at how spot on so many of these iPhone 1 reviews are outside of the not getting the browser thing (and even there folks complaining about how web2.0 is taking off and there's no js/java/flash support? Good point!). Keyboard should work in portrait mode, voice calling is bad, 3g support is needed, no multimedia messaging. No replaceable battery and not user servicable enough. Camera is OK b…

Before the 3g the web browser thing wasn't really that useful. If you have to be on wifi to get reasonable speeds, it's easier to just use your laptop vs a tiny screen with a slow processor.

Yeah (though apparently the wifi support was good idk) and honestly from the reviewers perspective - I think they'd be doing their jobs wrong if they were 'right' about the iphone. What were they supposed to say/forecast? "Oh and while the browser is pretty good, it's obviously incomplete, doesn't support flash, can be hard to read websites, etc. However, this won't be a problem if the iphone ends up catapulting apple to becoming one of the most powerful companies in the world, at which point they'll kill flash. Also while all websites are designed for viewing on desktop screens - that's OK because in the future the iphone is going to be so damn impactful civilizationally that basically the entire human species will start accessing the internet through small mobile computers in their pocket (and start accessing it a lot!) which means that society itself will reshape itself to prioritize making sure websites work on this phone."

Like seriously idk what people want from those reviewers. If they were 'accurately' predicting an outlier product like the iphone I doubt their wild fantasies would be accurately predicting much else

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#976

Post by camgunz »

xw39011 wrote: post #961
camgunz wrote: post #908

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TL;DR: I'll be super surprised if this thing makes any dent in tech/culture whatsoever. It's way too expensive (we're not too far out from used car territory here [0]) and breaks no meaningful new ground. Eh I think there are a couple of important differences. The first difference is that the iPhone wasn't 300% the price of the contemporary Nokia N95. It was actually around 30% cheaper ($500 vs. $730). The Vision Pro…

> The second difference is that the iPhone foretold how people were going to use phones in the future. I don't know if I buy that. Watch the original iPhone announcement. Steve spent most of the time talking about what a great phone it was and how much better voicemail is. Connecting to the internet was tacked on to the end of the presentation. "Now, what’s the killer app? The killer app is making calls!" I don't thi…

Nah. I'm rewatching and they have the whole "breakthrough internet communicator" thing right at the top, and he makes fun of existing smartphones for only having the "baby internet". Also there weren't apps at first, the whole thing was supposed to use web apps (Carmack famously gave Jobs the hard sell on apps).

But aside from all that, the point was the UX. There's the whole "smartphones are hard to use" angle which was really the raison d'etre for the whole thing. And now? Phones work like the iPhone worked.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#977

Post by chaostheory »

bastawhiz wrote: post #916
chaostheory wrote: post #601

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

1. You can use a TV if you want to watch with people physically near you. Using a headset for that is nonsensical. I was talking about watching with people you don’t live with

2. Setting it up is as trivial as setting up Zoom

3. You’re still ignoring the fact that the majority of media consumption is done alone. It’s not all or nothing either. People both watch media alone AND in groups depending on the context.

Besides, how would you know the problem isn’t solved if you don’t use a headset yourself?

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#978

Post by antoniuschan99 »

zaptrem wrote: post #691
antoniuschan99 wrote: post #662

Was thinking they should have made it an accessory to the iphone instead. Have the iphone do all the compute and glasses just have sensors. It’s already wired because of the battery: it would weigh much less, iphone has magsafe portable battery for that extra juice, and would cost less (more adoption too) Won’t be surprised if some android manufacturer like xiaomi release something like this. Also, makes sense why Me…

Given that this has an M2 and a dedicated sensor processing chip the size of an M2 I have a feeling the power draw and heat generated would be unusable with a phone in a pocket. I bet they'll go in this direction with a non-Pro version in four years or so when chips catch up.

true i read the m2 on ipad 2 gets hot when playing games. And iPhones don’t have fans.

Maybe it’s apple trying to push the limits of this tech, a16 bionic compared to m2 is like 40% slower in the various computational performances so won’t be surprised to see the form factor show up in android devices soon for sure.

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#979

Post by diebeforei485 »

enos_feedler wrote: post #535
diebeforei485 wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first gen iPhone had a much better UX than other phones, so missing a few features like copy and paste was palatable. I do think future generations of AVP will do well. Iterating and applying learnings and customer feedback will make this a good product.

You could say that about literally any product. The most important factor that will determine success is the starting point. Initial conditions matter. I actually believe this a developer tool from start to finish. It will end of life a lot quicker than we expect. The real product is going to be lightweight glasses we wear all day. But when? How many iterations of the AVP to meet the developer needs for seeding this…

> The most important factor that will determine success is the starting point. Initial conditions matter.

So, I don't know if I agree with this considering Apple has such a large cash cushion. They can easily make missteps the first few generations until they figure it out.

Early Apple Watches focused on luxury and personal communication with loved ones. But later iterations de-emphasized all that and pivoted to being a health and fitness band and some subset of iPhone features like cellular phone calls and texts (instead of the weird heartbeat sharing stuff we saw at launch of the 1st gen device)

Re: Apple Vision Pro review

#980

Post by spaceman_2020 »

habitue wrote: post #732
spaceman_2020 wrote: post #728

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can’t get over how goofy and stupid it looks, and how awkward those gestures are. There’s a video circulating of someone cooking while wearing it and gingerly pinching a virtual timer and placing it on a pot of boiling pasta. It looks so stupid that I couldn’t help but laugh out loud. Maybe younger people might think differently but for me, this stuff is dead on arrival because of simply how uncool and stupid it ma…

I'm not really an Apple fan nor am I going to buy this thing, but this seems like a criticism that goes away as soon as everyone does it. We all look stupid staring at our black rectangles, with notches at the top, with little headphone stems sticking out of our ears. It looks stupid at first and then you get over it

The black rectangle form factor is the same as a notepad. Nothing about it screams "I'm completely out of touch with my reality"
Post reply on HN