[HN Gopher] Apple Vision Pro review: magic, until it's not
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Apple Vision Pro review: magic, until it's not
        
       Author : Handy-Man
       Score  : 276 points
       Date   : 2024-01-30 14:32 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.theverge.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.theverge.com)
        
       | Mindwipe wrote:
       | This strikes me as the best review I've seen if you read the text
       | (I'm not sure x/10 is useful). I learned a lot about it,
       | including quite a few things Apple has been quite coy about.
        
         | browningstreet wrote:
         | Agreed, per their video take.
         | 
         | Didn't realize how limited the field of view and the color
         | coverage was.
         | 
         | But all the popular reviewers are pretty skeptical. I think
         | when another company offers a less ambitious VR headset they
         | have given them a pass because the market target is more
         | limited. Apple's not getting a pass. It's impressive but not
         | magical and there are a lot of unoptimal design characteristics
         | for a general purpose face mask computer.
         | 
         | The travel case is stupid and costly but necessary. Can you
         | imagine buying the travel backpack that can hold it, and then
         | unpacking everything in economy plus, and then having to store
         | it away most of it for a flight, and then repack at landing?
         | Even in business class it'd be conspicuous and bothersome and
         | busy.
        
           | polyterative wrote:
           | I would prefer to bring an iPad on the plane.
        
             | akmarinov wrote:
             | Depends. On a 2 hour flight - yeah. On a 16 hour flight
             | (with power in the seats) - no.
        
               | browningstreet wrote:
               | On a 16 hour flight you can watch the onscreen
               | entertainment, use your wireless laptop, your wireless
               | tablet and your wireless phone. I've travelled a bit and
               | usually alternate among them.
               | 
               | But the Vision Pro would need two cables (power brick and
               | battery pack, which is required even when plugged in to
               | the brick) and when you get up to use the bathroom your
               | neighbor will absolutely trip crossing your seat and land
               | their ass on the Vision Pro you left behind.. that you
               | don't want to wear into the cramped airplane bathroom.
        
               | rcarmo wrote:
               | I just take a Kindle or buy a random analog book in Duty
               | Free.
        
               | coffeebeqn wrote:
               | The Steam deck or Nintendo switch are even better than
               | either. You can get good headphones and play real games
               | for 16 hours. And when you need to move they are easy to
               | stow away
        
             | macintux wrote:
             | One advantage: more privacy with the Vision Pro. Even for
             | innocuous content I feel self-conscious about people seated
             | nearby being bored and watching over my shoulder.
        
               | ImPostingOnHN wrote:
               | Indeed: better to let them _think_ you 're viewing
               | pornography, than to remove all doubt.
        
           | whycome wrote:
           | > general purpose face mask computer
           | 
           | I hope this term takes off more than "spatial computing
           | device"
           | 
           | GPFMC
        
             | vczf wrote:
             | "Hold up, let me take my face off real quick."
        
           | PaulHoule wrote:
           | The really funny thing is that people never notice how bad
           | the color gamut of their displays is. The usual way people
           | draw the color charts make it look like there are all kinds
           | of greens you are missing but they are not the green of money
           | or living plants but rather the green you see when you get
           | hit by a green laser pointer.
           | 
           | https://tftcentral.co.uk/articles/pointers_gamut
           | 
           | The charts obscure it but it is reds/purples/blues you are
           | missing, not the reds and blues that occur in naturally lit
           | scenes but rather colors you might see in fireworks or CGI
           | effects. The "Pointer Gamut" of naturally occurring colors is
           | relatively small compared to the colors you might see
           | hypothetically. There has been a lot of progress in the
           | greens for formats like Display P3 but more saturated red and
           | blue primaries are difficult because the sensitivity of the
           | eye drops off and you need a lot more light to get equivalent
           | perceived brightness.
        
       | asmallcat wrote:
       | Wonderfully written review. Happy to have read it and
       | disappointed with some of the takeaways. I wish that there were
       | more of a "mac-centric" approach taken for powerusers, rather
       | than barreling forward with visionOS. Once their OS is truly
       | consolidated I may have more use for this device.
        
         | samstave wrote:
         | > _...more of a "mac-centric" approach taken for
         | powerusers..."_
         | 
         | I think this the Apple Business plan in its entirety.
         | 
         | But we shorten it to "Lock-in" for brevity. (or platform, moat,
         | walled garden, etc)\
         | 
         |  _Not that theres anything wrong with that!_
        
           | purpleflame1257 wrote:
           | I don't know about that. MacOS remains a general-purpose
           | computing experience in a way that iOS simply hasn't ever.
        
             | samstave wrote:
             | I have this awesome HP Omen AMD Rizen RTX GPU Laptop.
             | 
             | Cant run MacOS.
             | 
             | Lockin, HW.
        
         | brookst wrote:
         | Decent review, but it is Nilay Patel, who sees himself as a
         | kingmaker. I'm interested to read reviews from people just
         | focusing on how it is to use the device.
        
           | htk wrote:
           | Absolutely, he kept trying to coin a phrase, and telling us
           | how it's not an ideal version he imagines.
        
       | testfrequency wrote:
       | It's been pretty disingenuous of Apple to have all their
       | marketing photos with the single strap, when the unanimous
       | opinion is that strap doesn't work at all for comfortability or
       | longevity.
       | 
       | Similar to AirPods Max, they oddly chose heavy materials just for
       | the sake of finish - rather than functionality. If they truly
       | cared about the user experience of the actual software/hardware,
       | they would have went with better materials.
       | 
       | In general, Vision Pro feels to me like another weird prototype
       | showcase product, released years before they actually had a real
       | viable solution
        
         | bitcurious wrote:
         | > It's been pretty disingenuous of Apple to have all their
         | marketing photos with the single strap, when the unanimous
         | opinion is that strap doesn't work at all for comfortability or
         | longevity.
         | 
         | "I found the solo loop much more comfortable" - direct quote
         | out of the article you're replying to.
        
           | testfrequency wrote:
           | The solo loop is more comfortable on the head, but it's not
           | practical for longer than a few minutes.
           | 
           | My point is this band just looks good in marketing photos,
           | but it will not be what the vast majority of people will be
           | using once they've put the common dual loop band on
        
         | deadbabe wrote:
         | It looks like something designed to look good in photos.
         | Something like a Quest 3 with the upgraded head strap is
         | probably way more practical and comfortable.
        
           | PaulHoule wrote:
           | Note the strap that comes with the MQ3 is atrocious and I
           | find it hard to wear for more than 30 minutes. I find Meta's
           | "Elite Strap" is really nice although it's expensive and I
           | know other people have had problems with it.
           | 
           | Current XR headsets are all too big to really be "mobile"
           | devices (you're really going to take it on a plane or use it
           | in a hotel?) but once you add something like the "Elite
           | Strap" you know you aren't taking it anywhere. Still the MQ3
           | is a nice self-contained package that you can walk around the
           | house with and do activities that involve a lot of motion
           | without having a battery pack to worry about.
        
             | deadbabe wrote:
             | I don't see myself taking any headset anywhere unless it
             | just looks like a pair of glasses.
        
               | soco wrote:
               | And we did have for a while a few AR glasses, then all
               | seem to have disappeared. No apps for them? No idea why.
               | When I picked on the idea (late, I know) it seemed to me
               | everything was in the stage of "almost there" and shortly
               | after that, nothing was available anymore.
        
               | PaulHoule wrote:
               | It's desirable but really hard. Remember how the Magic
               | Leap put the brains in a really awkward puck like the
               | really awkward battery pack on the AVP?
               | 
               | My understanding is that XReal's displays are really good
               | for a compact device
               | 
               | https://us.shop.xreal.com/
               | 
               | but those devices also tether you with a tail. They are
               | really focused on the "watch TV" angle and even support
               | HDMI at the expense of real spatial computing. (so far)
        
             | swozey wrote:
             | Check out the BoboVR stuff some time I have it on all my
             | quests they make really great stuff even though their name
             | sounds fake.
             | 
             | They're making upgrade parts to my mq2 stuff will work on
             | my mq3 which is really awesome of them so I can drop
             | another $20 not $70.
        
           | jwells89 wrote:
           | I wish more headsets would ape the design of the Vive Deluxe
           | Audio Strap.
           | 
           | Have never owned a Vive but have that head strap connected to
           | a Quest 2 with 3D printed adapters (a setup dubbed by the
           | community "frankenquest") and it works quite nicely.
        
       | Topfi wrote:
       | This is a very in-depth, informative and factual review. My hats
       | off to the Verge; great job.
       | 
       | I have racked up hours upon hours of actual, productive work in
       | my Quest 2 and 3, so to say that I am a big proponent of the
       | ideas that Apple is trying to advance would be an understatement.
       | This makes me all the more disheartened to read that, for all
       | their efforts, this release is mired by the same drawbacks that I
       | have encountered across numerous headsets over the last decade:
       | 
       | > [..] there's a little bit of distortion and vignetting around
       | the edges of the lenses, and you'll see some green and pink color
       | fringing at the edges as well, especially in bright environments.
       | [..] If you're looking at something bright or otherwise high
       | contrast [..] you'll see highlights reflecting in the lenses.
       | 
       | Prior to this review, I was actually willing to understand
       | certain seemingly odd decisions, such as the concept of putting
       | an OLED display on the outside, the potential for weight
       | distribution issues, and an external battery, as I was hopeful
       | that, similar to the iPhone, there'd be a cohesive whole in the
       | end that wasn't fully understandable until reviewers got to use
       | it.
       | 
       | I also was, somewhat naive, I admit that, under the impression
       | that their handling of vignetting, etc. would be less noticable
       | then what seems to be the case and, again naively following their
       | marketing videos, had higher FOV expectations.
       | 
       | To draw a parallel, the initial iPhone made some major tradeoffs
       | and at the time odd choices, to say the least, many of which were
       | laughed at for arguably justifiable reasons at the time, but I
       | could see something in that that went beyond then-available
       | touch-only smartphones and PDAs in terms of usability and
       | cohesiveness.
       | 
       | I fail to see the same in this review. Neither as an actual user
       | nor as an enthusiast, do I see anything here that has not been
       | done before. While your then-PDA may have supported 3G and came
       | with many other capabilities the first iPhone lacked, there were
       | certain things in regard to build, design, usability and
       | intuitiveness that were unparalleled in the products at the time.
       | Comparing an iPhone and an iPAQ Pocket PC made the latter seem
       | ancient, even though it could do a lot the iPhone couldn't.
       | Compare a Vision Pro to a Quest 3, I am saddened to say I don't
       | see the same.
        
         | theNJR wrote:
         | You captured my feeling perfectly. In particular
         | 
         | >> While your then-PDA may have supported 3G and came with many
         | other capabilities the first iPhone lacked, there were certain
         | things in regard to build, design, usability and intuitiveness
         | that were unparalleled in the products at the time. Comparing
         | an iPhone and an iPAQ Pocket PC made the latter seem ancient,
         | even though it could do a lot the iPhone couldn't. Compare a
         | Vision Pro to a Quest 3, I am saddened to say I don't see the
         | same.>>
         | 
         | I too was hoping for the sum of the parts to be something
         | special.
         | 
         | I'm picking my AVP up on Saturday. I'll give it an honest go
         | but expect to return it within a week. I've owned most VR
         | headsets and they sit in a drawer, rarely used. For a few
         | hundred dollars I'm ok with that. For a few thousand I am not.
        
           | PaulHoule wrote:
           | I got a Hololens 1 that turned out to be a white elephant and
           | I read a lot of stories about people buying VR headsets and
           | abandoning them so when I got an MQ3 I was quite deliberate
           | about getting a variety of games and apps and spending enough
           | time with VR to succeed at it.
        
             | theNJR wrote:
             | I co-founded a (failed) vr startup so I've got my 100 hours
             | in the Oculus and Vive
        
         | bombcar wrote:
         | The whole thing feels very ... "original xbox" to me. Hear me
         | out.
         | 
         | It was argued that a big part of the original xbox for
         | Microsoft was making sure they had a toehold in the gaming
         | console market _because that market had a change of disrupting
         | the personal computer_ - and if that happened, they wanted to
         | be there for it and have something ready to go.
         | 
         | They did something similar with phones, and we can see how it
         | spectacularly _failed_ - they have zero say or relevance in the
         | massive smartphone market.
         | 
         | I almost feel the Vision Pro is Apple's attempt to put a toe in
         | the water _just in case_ this VR stuff takes off and destroys
         | the smartphone market.
        
           | mhh__ wrote:
           | I could imagine that might have been why it came about
           | originally but that line of thinking doesn't seem to justify
           | the R&D spend alone. I'd imagine they have some belief in it
           | being able to make new business of its own.
           | 
           | If I'm not mistaken this is the first properly post-Steve
           | product?
        
             | ketzo wrote:
             | I think AirPods were post-Steve? And they were both widely
             | mocked at launch and wildly successful.
        
               | wharvle wrote:
               | Like so many Apple things, I thought AirPods were dumb
               | until I got some (as a gift). I'd tried some Logitech
               | wireless earbuds just a couple months before first trying
               | AirPods. Those _were_ dumb. God they sucked.
               | 
               | I've avoided the Watch for that reason. The little
               | conveniences of various Apple-thingies are the sort of
               | stuff you can't un-experience, and then you're stuck
               | buying the damn things forever.
        
               | hbn wrote:
               | I think about this frequently while using my AirPods.
               | It's annoying that we're all becoming accustomed to
               | spending anywhere from like $130 to $250 on in-ear
               | headphones that aren't guaranteed a particularly long
               | lifespan, to replace wired headphones that an acceptable
               | quality pair can be had for like $15.
               | 
               | But I'll be damned if the AirPods experience isn't far
               | more convenient, and has me using them more than I ever
               | did with wired headphones because they're so quick and
               | easy to use. I can pop one in an ear and immediately I'm
               | listening to a podcast while doing laundry. No cord
               | tethering my head to my pocket, nothing to get snagged on
               | a doorknob, it just works. When I pull one out of my ear
               | it pauses, and resumes when I put it back in. When you
               | only have one AirPod in, it knows and automatically
               | converts the audio stream to mono so you still hear
               | everything.
               | 
               | Still would be nice to have the 3.5mm jack back, but I
               | certainly haven't felt a desire to go back to wired
               | headphones since I got AirPods.
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | If it makes you feel any better, I think the watch is
               | more of a "pickup or put down" device, especially if you
               | do _not_ usually use a watch. I sometimes wear it
               | religiously, meaning all the time, and sometimes
               | religiously, meaning only for an hour on Sundays and holy
               | days ;).
        
               | jes5199 wrote:
               | I got an Apple Watch in 2019, and I don't wear it
               | anymore. It was just another thing that needed to get
               | charged every day, and none of the apps are very useful,
               | and most of them are buggy and poorly supported.
        
             | ninkendo wrote:
             | The Apple watch was 100% post-Steve, conception to delivery
             | [0]. This is definitely the first post-Jony Ive product
             | though. (Rumors are that Ive was against the idea of doing
             | a headset from the start, so it happened either without
             | him, or after he left, depending on when it started.)
             | 
             | - [0] https://www.wired.com/2015/04/the-apple-watch/
             | 
             | > Ive began dreaming about an Apple watch just after CEO
             | Steve Jobs' death in October 2011.
        
               | Topfi wrote:
               | > This is definitely the first post-Jony Ive product
               | though.
               | 
               | Ironic considering, if there is a product whose design
               | arguably should be driven by an obsession with reducing
               | weight and thickness, the AVP is it.
        
             | mcphage wrote:
             | > that line of thinking doesn't seem to justify the R&D
             | spend alone
             | 
             | I'm sure they're also looking to use the technologies they
             | develop for this in other products, too.
        
             | CharlesW wrote:
             | > _If I 'm not mistaken this is the first properly post-
             | Steve product?_
             | 
             | Jobs publicly bemoaned the lack of, and presumably thought
             | a lot about, "headphones for video". I think it's a safe
             | bet that he set the stage for Apple Vision (and probably
             | sketched out a 50 year plan) with current Apple leaders
             | before his death.
             | 
             | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WO0OGmNDKVg
             | 
             | > "You know, the fundamental problem here is that
             | headphones are a miraculous thing. You put on a pair of
             | headphones, and you get the same experience you get with a
             | great pair of speakers, right?
             | 
             | > "There's no such thing as headphones for video, right?
             | There's not something I can carry with me that I can put
             | on, and it gives me the same experience I get when I'm
             | watching my 50-inch plasma display at home."
        
               | Topfi wrote:
               | Yeah, I honestly hadn't thought about those statements in
               | quite a while. Thanks for bringing them back to mind. It
               | makes me ponder whether they had a very rough, early
               | prototype of an FPV display device at that time, and if
               | so, what that looked like. The interviewer briefly
               | mentions what was available at the time, which Steve
               | calls "lousy", so it could also be that he was more
               | fascinated by the inherent concept.
               | 
               | As is often the case, I'd give a lot for companies such
               | as Apple to be more open with their ancient prototypes
               | once a new device gets launched. Sometimes brands, such
               | as Microsoft[0] in the console field showcase iterative
               | prototypes or even produce full-on documentaries of their
               | history, but rarely for new device categories.
               | 
               | I understand why that's not possible, but still, one can
               | dream.
               | 
               | [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJYsA1jXf60
        
               | rylittle wrote:
               | https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/15z92if/apple_won
               | _a_...
        
           | PaulHoule wrote:
           | Good analysis.
           | 
           | Part of it too is that Apple feels pressure to do _something_
           | innovative. They made some big bets in the 2000s that paid
           | off very well but a company that has a hit like the iPhone
           | becomes profoundly conservative. The trouble is that there
           | aren 't many market opportunities bigger than smartphones,
           | there's a possible iCar and an iHouse and that's about it.
           | 
           | Apple's worst fear might be being successful as a niche
           | product: what if every seat of _Dassault 3Dexperience_ ends
           | up with an Apple Vision Pro? Apple might be left with the
           | maintenance burden forever but no real prospects for a
           | mainstream product.
        
             | nox101 wrote:
             | I wonder if an iTV would sell. All mondern smart tvs are
             | covered in ads and spying. monitors of similar sizes cost
             | 3x to 4x. so to me there might be a market for a non spying
             | iTV with bultin Apple TV for say 1.5x. Or not, not sure
             | enough people care about those issues.
        
               | PaulHoule wrote:
               | 10 years ago I thought Apple would fail if they tried it
               | because they'd have a chauvinistic attitude about having
               | HDMI or any other ports that aren't Ethernet. (You can't
               | plug your phonograph into an iPod) For that matter I'd
               | expect them to have a chauvinistic attitude about
               | connecting to my home theater.
               | 
               | Back then you were just going to have to deal with the
               | rubbish cable box but I think Apple wasn't going to stand
               | for it.
               | 
               | Today Blu Ray seems to be on the way out and so is the
               | cable box (now we have the spectacle of seemingly
               | competitive vMVPDs that are all priced the same within a
               | few dollars), it now is going to be a fight over game
               | consoles.
               | 
               | TVs though have a serious race to the bottom and the TV
               | with an Amazon Fire TV built in is going to be attractive
               | to a lot of people.
               | 
               | (Also already Apple makes a "TV" removes the tuner and
               | replaces the HDMI ports w/ something else and calls it a
               | "monitor" and charges 5x. No way are they going to
               | cannibalize that market to sell something that only costs
               | 1.5x)
        
               | Someone wrote:
               | I think a problem with TVs for Apple is that they'd be
               | under pressure to build them in a zillion different
               | sizes. That's not in their DNA.
               | 
               | A good beamer might be more fitting for them; they would
               | only have to build them in 'small', 'medium' and 'large'.
               | 
               | In either case, like you I'm not sure the market is large
               | enough for a company of Apple's size and DNA (it's
               | unlikely that they'll try to find not one huge next big
               | hit, but lots and lots of smaller ones. They're not Ikea)
        
               | Aaronmacaron wrote:
               | Not really. The vast majority of modern TVs are 43, 55 or
               | 65 inch sizes. That's three sizes.
        
               | throw0101d wrote:
               | > _I wonder if an iTV would sell. All mondern smart tvs
               | are covered in ads and spying._
               | 
               | Probably best to just connect TVs to some box (Apple TV,
               | Roku, _etc_ ) via plain HDMI and leave it that. There's
               | no technical reason to connect TVs to an IP directly
               | anymore IMHO: what would that actually provide over and
               | above what you get with some box/stick?
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | Ethernet over HDMI exists, luckily it hasn't taken off
               | ...
        
               | PaulHoule wrote:
               | I like wall-mounting TVs but it sure is a mess to have a
               | power cable and two or three HDMI cables and a composite
               | cable (got a VCR, rubbish Denon receiver won't convert
               | composite to HDMI) and an Ethernet cable and who knows
               | what else hanging below it.
               | 
               | Now that I think about it it wouldn't be hard to cut a
               | few holes and route the cables through the wall and have
               | them come out in a spot that's not too conspicuous but
               | who's going to do that?
               | 
               | People who believe in aesthetics uber alles (Apple fans?)
               | might appreciate a TV that has just a power cable and
               | connects through WiFi but you could mostly accomplish
               | that with the right kind of stick. You might say in 2024
               | who needs a cable box or Blu Ray but game consoles are
               | still a reason to have HDMI. (Though somehow I think
               | Apple would think plugging a Playstation into an Apple TV
               | is as unthinkable as plugging a phonograph into an iPod.)
        
               | hbn wrote:
               | Apple won't even make a consumer-targeted dedicated
               | monitor, I can't see them doing a TV.
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | Apple TV already exists as a set-top box.
               | 
               | And even something similar embedded in some TVs.
               | 
               | What I _could_ see Apple doing is some kind of  "Made for
               | Apple TV" feature that combines eArc, HDMI, etc, and
               | makes the TV turn into a "dumb TV" for the Apple TV when
               | it is connected and detected.
        
               | mynameisvlad wrote:
               | > And even something similar embedded in some TVs.
               | 
               | I don't believe there is an "tvOS Embedded". "Apple TV+"
               | is just an app within the OS; there isn't really any
               | similarity between the embedded app and tvOS.
        
               | smaccona wrote:
               | What I do is buy a smart TV, never connect it to the
               | network (thus making it a dumb TV), and plug an Apple TV
               | (or other devices) into it. So far, this has worked - I
               | haven't seen any ads from the TV itself (the apps running
               | on the Apple TV are another story), and it can't phone
               | home about what I'm watching or otherwise doing with the
               | TV.
        
             | kogepathic wrote:
             | _> Apple might be left with the maintenance burden forever
             | but no real prospects for a mainstream product._
             | 
             | This seems unlikely. Apple has not hesitated in the past to
             | exit market segments they felt did not suit them. To name a
             | few: servers, displays, routers.
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | And to be fair to Apple, on those sunsetted products,
               | they supported them quite well during the sunset and even
               | after, especially the Xserve.
        
             | timcederman wrote:
             | Do you not feel Apple has been successful with the Watch
             | and AirPods? Their wearables revenue dwarfs the revnue of
             | most top tech companies.
        
               | PaulHoule wrote:
               | Both of those are accessories to the phone.
        
               | bakje wrote:
               | Actually, I find airpods to be very usable as bluetooth
               | earbuds for all kinds of devices, these days I mostly use
               | them behind my desktop PC when playing games and they
               | work just fine. When I pop them out of the case they
               | automatically connect to my PC just like they would an
               | iPhone or other apple device. They won't automatically
               | switch to the PC like they would for apple devices but
               | they also won't just switch from the PC so I don't mind.
               | Taking them out doesn't pause media but the play/pause
               | controls do work.
               | 
               | I do think that most people without an iPhone won't buy
               | them so they're essentially still bought as iPhone
               | accessories, but they don't have to be!
               | 
               | I agree about the watch though, that's definitely an
               | iPhone accessory.
        
           | pjmlp wrote:
           | Originall XBox was also a money sink for Microsoft, bleeding
           | money, bringing everyone on board to develop for it.
           | 
           | Modern Apple is anything like that.
        
           | monkeynotes wrote:
           | No way will this tech destroy phones as you know them today.
           | What is going to destroy phones is natural language. Maybe,
           | maybe in the distant future this tech will be mature enough
           | to provide the visual support to a natural language first
           | device.
           | 
           | xBox addressed a very well defined product sector with a
           | couple of big players doing stuff that is well understood.
           | xBox wasn't a toe in the water, they planned a whole strategy
           | around it using known facts about the industry, how people
           | play, what kind of games work, they didn't break much new
           | ground with the xBox. All they had to do was make a
           | compelling, affordable gaming device that had amazing games
           | on it. The rest takes care of itself. Apple Vision Pro is
           | nothing like that. There is no existing market to put your
           | toe in, there are no real competitors, we haven't even found
           | a killer use case for these devices.
           | 
           | No one really knows how these AR/VR devices can fit into
           | everyday life. Currently Apple is working on finding the
           | water to put their toe in. Right now they are at an exclusive
           | oasis when they really need an ocean.
        
             | chrischen wrote:
             | Making interfaces natural language is like making all
             | buttons touch screen. Versatile, yea, but in practice it
             | can be less efficient than dedicated controls or more
             | tactile interfaces.
        
               | monkeynotes wrote:
               | Bare in mind I am not anticipating the Google Home level
               | of interaction, I am talking full sophisticated natural
               | language. And there is no reason touch cannot play a
               | role, I'm just saying these devices will be unlike our
               | current phones. I've listed some use cases that I think
               | beat out touch easily elsewhere in the comments.
        
             | mostlysimilar wrote:
             | Hard disagree. Phones and computers do text/images/video.
             | Voice input and audio output is a poor substitute for text
             | and not at all a replacement for images/video.
        
               | orangecat wrote:
               | Right. And there are too many scenarios where audio I/O
               | isn't usable (quiet libraries, loud streets) so you
               | always need an alternative.
        
               | monkeynotes wrote:
               | I didn't say there wouldn't be a screen. But natural
               | conversations will be much more fluid and efficient than
               | a keyboard and google search. Having a conversation is so
               | much better for all sorts of applications.
               | 
               | Today's smartphones have to evolve this way, imo. I don't
               | know what the most efficient hardware realization would
               | look like but I imagine it's something that isn't in your
               | pocket most of the time, more of a sleek wearable. It
               | will need to be able to hear and see what you do.
        
             | m3kw9 wrote:
             | Natural language really sucks as a UI because a lot of
             | things can be done faster than when you speak it. Like
             | volume control as a tip of the iceberg example
        
             | vel0city wrote:
             | > they didn't break much new ground with the xBox
             | 
             | I kind of disagree with this. They made networking and
             | online gaming on consoles finally a thing most home
             | consumers were interested in. Sure, there were some earlier
             | forays into online gaming/networking on previous consoles
             | (SegaNet, for example), but those were generally pretty
             | niche. Sega only included a dial-up adapter by default,
             | while the Xbox shipped with an Ethernet adapter. Shipping
             | the Xbox with Ethernet made networking on the box pretty
             | simple right at the time when people started buying home
             | routers and broadband internet and opened up the console to
             | easy LAN gaming.
             | 
             | Microsoft made Xbox Live a pretty massive feature of the
             | console a year after launch. While Xbox Live launched a
             | year after the console shipped, I'd still say the planning
             | of it and including the Ethernet port was something nobody
             | else in the console gaming world was doing and ended up
             | defining the console gaming future.
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | A big part of the success of the Xbox (and maybe it's not
               | the Japan destroyer the fanboys wanted it to be) was that
               | they really _really_ let it be its own product, and
               | develop an ecosystem. They not only made it a  "PC for
               | your TV" which was widely what it was held as on release,
               | but also expanded the capabilities of what a console was
               | expected to do.
               | 
               | Sadly they also popularized and solidified the "pay to
               | play games online" feature of consoles, vs the "online
               | play is free except for MMOs" that PCs normally have.
        
             | tverbeure wrote:
             | Natural language is even worse than video for quick content
             | consumption: you can't quickly skip through content that
             | way the can fast scroll through a blog post.
        
               | monkeynotes wrote:
               | Natural language in place of other inputs, the command
               | can result in summoning up a video for you, or a blog
               | post to view.
               | 
               | If I am cooking and can hold a whole conversation with my
               | virtual chef,that beats a video though. Talking through
               | ideas at my desk would be great. Talking for navigation
               | while I drive, yes please. Shopping with my headphones on
               | and the device seeing everything I see and making
               | suggestions about deals, recipe options, what's low in
               | your pantry, and so on. I'll take that. I see technology
               | becoming more and more transparent in our life. User
               | interfaces will feel awkward when all you need to do is
               | say "show me a video of cats" and it serves it to your
               | companion screen without ever needing to touch tap any
               | UI. No need to even have a web UI for youtube. Just an
               | API and your device does the rest. It can show you a list
               | of related videos without YouTube themselves providing
               | anything more than the data model.
               | 
               | The cost cutting of not needing sophisticated front ends
               | will be a big driving factor if this is as effective as I
               | think it could be.
               | 
               | Anyways, my head is full of ideas like this.
        
             | JKCalhoun wrote:
             | > What is going to destroy phones is natural language.
             | 
             | Then the Watch is the future.
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | Dick Tracy _will_ have his revenge, in this model or the
               | next.
        
             | throwuwu wrote:
             | Mobile phones and VR are different non competing markets.
             | AR might eventually compete with phones once you can wear
             | an AR device all day everywhere you go. AR and VR should be
             | treated as distinct; a good VR headset is bad for most AR
             | usecases and vice versa. Maybe at some distant time there
             | will be hardware capable of doing both really well but not
             | for many years. VR fits into daily life as a social
             | experience and will be obvious once eye, face and full body
             | tracking are included with the headset. Even before that if
             | someone solves the network problems with concurrent users
             | and delivers an experience that handles audio well enough
             | to work with multiple people having conversations within
             | earshot of each other. AR is really just putting screens
             | and overlays everywhere, conversational interfaces will
             | have more and better impact than that.
        
             | HDThoreaun wrote:
             | Natural language wont work as the main control until we
             | have a nueralink type product. I dont want to be talking at
             | my computer constantly.
        
             | Ancapistani wrote:
             | > No way will this tech destroy phones as you know them
             | today.
             | 
             | This device? No, absolutely not. I see it as a speculative
             | play by Apple: release a very capable device with a bare-
             | bones ecosystem at a high price.
             | 
             | "Early adopters" will buy it because that's what they do.
             | 
             | "Influencers" will buy it, because that's what _they_ do.
             | Their social media posts about it will give Apple all the
             | data they need to nail down the size of the potential
             | market.
             | 
             | Finally, developers will buy it, because it's cool tech.
             | We'll tell ourselves that it's an emerging market, and we
             | can get it early. The launch of the iOS App Store spawned a
             | gold rush for app developers; I expect that the launch of
             | the AVP and its visionOS App Store will do the same. The
             | size and profitability of that opportunity will be
             | determined by how well Apple develops and popularizes the
             | product.
             | 
             | This is where I'm at on it. I expect the AVP to be best-in-
             | class in terms of hardware and OS-level integration
             | (though, to be fair, I expect the latter will be limited at
             | first in odd ways, in the grand Apple tradition).
             | 
             | I'll get one. I plan to use it for productivity, and as
             | long as that justifies the cost I'll be happy with it. I'll
             | also work on some minimal apps for visionOS. The purpose
             | there will be to "skill up". If Apple releases a more
             | consumer-focus headset that gains adoption, I'll be in a
             | good position to take advantage of that by selling paid
             | apps that are already mature by the time the general public
             | are getting on the bandwagon.
             | 
             | > What is going to destroy phones is natural language.
             | 
             | Maybe?
             | 
             | We've heard about "wearable computing" and "personal area
             | networks" for decades at this point. While it still feels
             | like something in the near future, the truth of the matter
             | is that for a large segment of the population, it's already
             | here. I already have an iPhone with me whenever I'm away
             | from home, and usually an iPad as well. If I'm going to be
             | away from home for a while, I've got an MBP in my backpack.
             | All of those devices can hand off tasks between each other
             | to an increasingly large degree - it's not uncommon for me
             | to pull out my phone to show someone a website I had open
             | on my laptop before I left home, then pull out my iPad if
             | they're interested in it so they can interact with it more
             | easily. Until recently, I had an Apple Watch surfacing an
             | integrated notification stream from all of the above.
             | 
             | Today, smartphones are the central "wearable computing"
             | device that ties everything together. They act as a hub for
             | a computing experience. There's no guarantee in my mind
             | that it will continue in that role forever. Maybe the hub
             | will end up being the descendant of the AVP. Maybe it will
             | be something more akin to a Humane AI Pin, or a Rabbit R1.
             | 
             | In other words... phones have already destroyed phones.
             | Smartphones are really wearable computing hubs that we just
             | happen to still _call_ "phones", because that's what they
             | used to be. They're very rarely used for telephony, and
             | many other devices are capable of doing so.
             | 
             | > Maybe, maybe in the distant future this tech will be
             | mature enough to provide the visual support to a natural
             | language first device.
             | 
             | My hope is that it ends up being a "spatial" interface that
             | provides a generic interface so it can be used by pretty
             | much anything.
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | > They're very rarely used for telephony, and many other
               | devices are capable of doing so.
               | 
               | This is a really important distinction. And if you
               | calculate your phone bill by actual minutes used for
               | talking, it's an insane number of dollars per minute.
               | 
               | I'd be completely unsurprised if the amount of "talking
               | on Zoom/Teams/voice chat" is soon to surpass the total
               | number of minutes talking on phones.
        
             | kemayo wrote:
             | > No way will this tech destroy phones as you know them
             | today. What is going to destroy phones is natural language.
             | 
             | I'm extremely skeptical of this, just because of the vast
             | number of situations where speaking-out-loud isn't going to
             | be desirable. It'll have a place, for sure, but I think
             | it'll be more of a supplement to our current phone
             | paradigm.
        
           | m3kw9 wrote:
           | But it isn't hard to see that people who are constantly glued
           | to their phones scrolling wouldn't want to just have the
           | screen on their faces instead of holding it. To me it's the
           | natural evolution of the way we absorb digital
           | info/entertainment
        
           | penjelly wrote:
           | it feels like theyve been doing RnD on VR/AR, bleeding cash,
           | and theyre making a product to "justify" this cash burn to
           | me. That plus shipping a product is the only way you can
           | iterate, and a common mentality in tech companies is "to
           | ship". IMO theyre late to the game, and excited to see if
           | they can offer anything new
        
         | tfandango wrote:
         | Out of curiosity, what are you using for work on your Quest? I
         | also have a Q2 and have tried, maybe not too seriously, several
         | of the screen sharing apps to do work but couldn't quite get
         | past the resolution and lag. Perhaps that has gotten better
         | since, it's been some time.
         | 
         | Instead now I use it for entertainment and very much like it,
         | but if I could make that next leap it would be great!
        
           | swozey wrote:
           | Virtual Desktop for desktop work
        
           | Topfi wrote:
           | For that purpose, the difference between the Q2 and Q3 was so
           | vast that I cannot oversell it. While it's still not perfect
           | due to the resolution, the switch to pancake lenses made
           | screencasting to the Q3 something I could do for many hours
           | at a time and enjoy it, whereas on the Q2 with the limited
           | sweet spot in the center, it was really only for very
           | specific use cases. On the Q2, even slightly off center
           | becomes unreadable; on the Q3, you can move your eyes right
           | to the panel border and still read text at the edge. The main
           | use case is heavy multitasking with Confluence, Jira and an
           | IDE in full-sized windows.
        
             | tfandango wrote:
             | Thank you. Your experience with the Quest 2 mirrors my own.
             | I'm undecided if I will try a Q3 or skip a generation. It
             | definitely seems like things are moving in the right
             | direction and I'm excited about that!
        
           | tinyhouse wrote:
           | Same. I find it useless for work stuff. I have a large screen
           | at home and in the office. I don't need to look at a large
           | screen through a heavy headset on my face that I feel bad
           | after wearing for more than 30 min. I also don't find the VR
           | meeting experience better than a zoom call.
        
         | 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
         | > I have racked up hours upon hours of actual, productive work
         | in my Quest 2 and 3
         | 
         | I have a lot of questions. Would you recommend them? Do you
         | work primarily in VR? I haven't tried VR but the use-case I
         | envision is to put on a VR headset and be "at work".
        
           | Topfi wrote:
           | > Would you recommend them?
           | 
           | Yes, no, maybe. Thing is, I've never used a device or
           | software that I haven't found faults with. Overall, the Quest
           | has turned into a solid, though still imperfect, platform,
           | with Meta pushing updates at a consistent, but also breakneck
           | pace, sometimes at the expense of addressing existing issues.
           | Hand tracking from the early days of the Q2 has made massive
           | leaps and has become my preferred method of navigation for
           | its reliability and ease, yet at the same time, the changes
           | in camera placement between the Q2 and Q3 lead to a decrease
           | in controller tracking performance in very specific
           | scenarios. Essentially, they are constantly experimenting,
           | both on the hard- and software front, trying to optimize what
           | they can within their very low price point. Still, if you are
           | interested and have an idea what you'd like to use the
           | headset for, I'd recommend trying one within the return
           | window, though I'd strongly suggest adding a "halo-style"
           | strap (BoboVR is my current favorite) for comfort.
           | 
           | > Do you work primarily in VR?
           | 
           | No, a more healthy mix between a single 27" JOLED and the
           | Quest 3 for workloads that require more screen real estate
           | but can go without as much overall resolution. About 60/40 in
           | favor of the regular panel.
        
             | jbellis wrote:
             | I use my xreal air as my airplane display. I would love the
             | Quest 3's higher resolution but my understanding is that
             | compared to the XA the Q3
             | 
             | - Requires controllers - Requires wifi instead of plugging
             | in the cable and it just works* - Has fairly limited
             | battery life
             | 
             | Am I mistaken on these points / do you think it would work
             | on an airplane despite them?
             | 
             | * To be fair, the XA only "just works" in vanilla display
             | mode, the fancy xreal multiple virtual monitors feature
             | called Nebula doesn't work well enough to be worth the
             | hassle.
        
               | Topfi wrote:
               | Tried my hand at a Viture One for two weeks, but the
               | diopters did not work with my specific vision, perhaps
               | I'll give the new XA2 a shot now that they are more
               | available in the EU.
               | 
               | Concerning your question, it's very different. While VR
               | content can be cast both over USB or wireless, for flat-
               | screen casting, wireless is the preferred and most
               | comprehensively supported way, which, whilst tether-free,
               | can be less seamless when out-and-about than just
               | plugging in a cable. Note that wireless does not require
               | a local WiFi router or internet connection but can also
               | be handeled directly from a host device, still, less
               | reliable than a plain cable carrying video signal.
               | Furthermore, as the Quest has its own full on operating
               | system based on Android, rather than receiving an HDMI
               | signal like the Viture or XA, there is an additional
               | point of complexity to consider, and it looks a lot less
               | inconspicuous than the XA. Lastly, tracking via the
               | cameras is a great advantage in general use, though a
               | very inclosed, darkish space such as an aeroplane may
               | push the small sensors to their limit and yes, battery
               | life can be a limit as well, though I do hot-swap BoboVR
               | battery at the back of my skull for that. Still not as
               | convenient as just using your phones power and having
               | that charged.
               | 
               | Quest does not require an controller at this point, hand
               | tracking is currently my prefered way of navigating the
               | system day-to-day.
               | 
               | Overall, I'd agree, on an airplane I'd consider the Quest
               | to be of marginal usability.
        
         | chris-orgmenta wrote:
         | Sorry for the slight tangent, but: What's the current state of
         | VR&AR Headset friction / boot time? This is what I expected
         | Apple to solve first.
         | 
         | With VR/AR headsets, the friction to 'boot in' seems to be one
         | of the biggest problems in adoption, and one that I feel Meta
         | et al don't openly talk about. (Note, I am ignorant of this
         | field in general).
         | 
         | How close are we to seamless, quick boot, such that one puts on
         | a headset and are 'immediately' immersed? (Compare to my phone,
         | which unlocks before my eyes even have time to focus on the
         | screen).
         | 
         | (My admittedly poor) web searching of this question just tends
         | to offer webpages on common boot issues (e.g. 'Quest boot
         | time'/'Vive startup time' just leads to complaints and support
         | forums.)
         | 
         | I suspect this also to be a primary issue with the true
         | 'metaverse' taking hold. GTA6 will, in my opinion, be the
         | luxury 'hang-out' metaverse, but will likely take many minutes
         | to access. I feel that Microsoft could have made Minecraft the
         | de facto metaverse (by implementing certain features), but will
         | never quite get there. Perhaps a WebGL game that can take you
         | to a bookmarked 'spacial' lobby within 3000ms can get real
         | traction.
        
           | spywaregorilla wrote:
           | boot time is not nearly as relevant as with a phone where
           | you're constantly turning it off.
        
           | Topfi wrote:
           | Cold boot time on a Quest is roughly half a minute, though
           | most of the time, you'll just wake it up from standby. For
           | testing, I just put my Quest 3 on my head, and without
           | pressing the power button, I counted five mississippis
           | (seconds) before I was fully in their heavily customized
           | version of Android with hand tracking recognizing my digits.
        
           | swozey wrote:
           | I have a MQ3 I haven't used in a few weeks sitting on the
           | charger. I picked it up, spent 10 seconds finding the power
           | button, hit button, put it on, waited 25 at the meta logo
           | then was in VR. Didn't test opening a game but for a big one
           | it's probably the same 10-45 seconds to start I'd imagine.
           | 
           | It's not something I ever really thought about, you boot it
           | once a session and it goes idle/wake, not hibernate if you
           | just put it on your desk for a minute.
           | 
           | The MQ3 is WAY better than my Vive and better even than the
           | MQ2 at being a "throw on and gun" quick device. It's way
           | lighter, less work to get going with.
           | 
           | The MQ3 is an awesome device, I love it.
        
           | jayd16 wrote:
           | This is a pretty strange complaint to me. When you use a VR
           | headset you don't really put it on and take it off frequently
           | during a session. When you take it off you can plug it in and
           | it'll stay in standby, which is similar to phone standby. Its
           | also not any slower than Playstation standby.
        
             | chris-orgmenta wrote:
             | It's not a complaint (from me or my acquaintances), it's
             | something that I thought (possibly incorrectly, but as
             | mentioned I am ignorant hence me asking) was a hindrance to
             | the success of the market. I.e. when I speak to most people
             | re: VR/AR, they say something like "It sounds like a lot of
             | faff", or "I have one gathering dust, I can't be bothered
             | to use it".
             | 
             | I have no skin in the game and no intention of buying
             | anything for another couple of years at least, FWIW.
             | 
             | Anyway: Sibling post says ~5 seconds from standby - Which
             | seems very reasonable to me, so I suppose it's just lack of
             | compelling features (subjectively to the people in
             | question, not regular users) that result in the 'gathering
             | dust'... Which means the people I have spoken to haven't
             | wanted to bother keeping it on standby (thus increasing the
             | barriers further).
        
               | kllrnohj wrote:
               | It takes substantially more effort to put it on than it
               | does to "boot up"
               | 
               | And while it may sound weird that putting it on is such
               | an ordeal, keep in mind that there's a lot of inherently
               | fiddly bits and many have compromises. Like the PSVR2
               | requires me to go turn the lights on, because it uses
               | inside-out tracking which doesn't work well in a dark
               | room. But also you have to fiddle around with the
               | position of it, get it in a comfortable spot, wiggle it a
               | bit so the lenses line up with your eyes as you had it
               | last configured, etc... Then realize that you smudged the
               | lens with your forehead so take it off and clean it and
               | do it again but more carefully this time.
        
           | wharvle wrote:
           | What's booting?
           | 
           | Nothing I use with any frequency gets rebooted except for
           | updates, more or less.
           | 
           | Exception: non-Apple stuff. Because those things tend to die
           | while "sleeping" and unplugged, very quickly (my secondary
           | work Windows laptop, which burns almost half its battery per
           | 12 hours in "sleep mode"; my Steamdeck, which is barely
           | better than that; the Switch though it's almost always on the
           | dock anyway so that's rarely an issue)
        
             | chris-orgmenta wrote:
             | I agree that we should pretend that my question said "from
             | standby" instead of "boot"
        
               | wharvle wrote:
               | If it's like iOS devices, I'd assume less than a second
               | to interactive, potentially so fast that most people
               | don't notice it isn't instant.
               | 
               | If it's like macOS, maybe 2-3 seconds to interactive.
        
           | s3p wrote:
           | Having used a Quest 2 and owning a Quest 3 personally I can
           | tell you the delay is essentially zero. It takes 2-3 sec to
           | get the headset fully secured around your head, and the Quest
           | will wake up the very moment it starts to get moved. That's
           | part of the reason it annoys me so much-- just moving the
           | controllers will wake it up, even if it's sitting on my desk.
        
         | treprinum wrote:
         | Never buy version 1 I guess (unless the company is fighting for
         | survival and has to deliver, with 100% focus).
        
         | KronisLV wrote:
         | > I have racked up hours upon hours of actual, productive work
         | in my Quest 2 and 3...
         | 
         | I have a Quest 2 right now and attempting to use it for desktop
         | computing just doesn't work all that well for me (their Quest
         | Link app with desktop windows, or SteamVR desktop feature;
         | might also have to use the Meta Workspace app or whatever it
         | was called in the future). All of the text feels a bit blurry
         | and it's like the resolution just isn't there.
         | 
         | I don't even have that high of a resolution dev setup outside
         | of VR, just four 21.5" monitors running at 1080p. I do catch
         | myself squinting a little bit at them sometimes, but 10, 11 and
         | 12 font sizes (in JetBrains IDEs and VS Code) seem too small in
         | VR and going bigger decreases the lines of code per screen to
         | an annoying degree.
         | 
         | Best I can do in VR for that ends up being one huge monitor in
         | front of me, two on each side, as well as a huge overhead one,
         | but that leads to a lot of turning my head, maybe just a bit
         | more than I'd like to.
         | 
         | I'm not sure whether it's the headset with the lenses that's
         | messed up, whether it's my eyes that are just bad, or the fact
         | that the distance between the lenses should be _a little_
         | higher than the headset allows for (at least based on what an
         | IPD test I read online suggests), but the end result is that
         | the experience isn 't very good... yet.
        
       | rubicon33 wrote:
       | Good points for sure. VR gaming has always had an edge because if
       | you value physical immersion (the feeling of being in the game)
       | then it DOES have a significant leg up over traditional gaming.
       | 
       | Can the same be said for productivity and general computing yet?
       | I don't think so. Will I prefer a Vision Pro over 2 4K monitors?
       | Highly unlikely. Will I grab my Vision Pro as I head out the
       | door, rather than my laptop? No.
       | 
       | There are some fundamental technology problems that need solving
       | before that becomes a reality. Size and weight need an order of
       | magnitude reduction, and the pass through has to be better which
       | will require advancements in dark scene video processing.
       | 
       | Realistically speaking, if AR does "take off" as a productivity
       | and general computing tool I don't see it happening for another
       | 7-15 years.
        
         | spywaregorilla wrote:
         | > VR gaming has always had an edge because if you value
         | physical immersion (the feeling of being in the game) then it
         | DOES have a significant leg up over traditional gaming.
         | 
         | Good controls on a 2D screen are far more immersive than bad
         | controls on a VR headset. VR makes good controls very hard to
         | do.
        
       | pivo wrote:
       | Oh boy: "Listen to me, do you want to use a computer that is
       | always looking at your hands?" It took a second for that warning
       | to sink in.
        
         | bombcar wrote:
         | Someone at Apple had to design the watch to detect certain hand
         | motions _and purposely ignore them_. That 's a thing that
         | someone had to do, otherwise false positives would be
         | embarrassingly pasted across the Internet for to be laughed at.
        
           | Hamuko wrote:
           | Shouldn't the watch be on your non-dominant hand?
        
             | addandsubtract wrote:
             | Wouldn't your dominant hand be on your mouse?
        
               | Hamuko wrote:
               | There's actually data on this!
               | 
               | https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1357650X.202
               | 1.2...
        
               | swozey wrote:
               | lol, it doesn't show in the shortened url. I clicked this
               | and read other things then went to that tab and went "wtf
               | was I looking up here?"
               | 
               | possibly nsfw if you work for the puritans and love
               | kelloggs
        
               | wharvle wrote:
               | There's either got to be a big generational gap on
               | preference for this, or a lot of folks out there have
               | developed mousing ambidexterity.
        
               | brewdad wrote:
               | I'm a lefty through and through in my sixth decade going
               | around the sun. Mousing with my left hand is _weird_.
               | Like completely wrong. Even on a touchpad I tend to
               | "mouse" with my right hand.
        
             | Eric_WVGG wrote:
             | Why? (I switch wrists every six weeks ago because I think
             | the tan line starts to look weird, it's similar usable from
             | either)
        
               | Hamuko wrote:
               | Because it allows you to use your dominant hand to
               | control it, and also your non-dominant hand is more often
               | free than your dominant hand, so it's free to swing
               | around when you walk and better count your steps.
        
             | michaelt wrote:
             | That's all very well for the folks who only need one
             | hand...
        
           | brookst wrote:
           | No, it's all ML models. It is very unlikely that an ML model
           | trained on wrist motions for walking and running would
           | falsely report steps for... other activities.
        
             | planede wrote:
             | They possibly had to include training data tagged with
             | "inactive" though, including _that_.
        
             | nox101 wrote:
             | One of the reasons I got rid of my apple watch is because
             | it would congratulate me for successfuly completing my
             | exercise for the day just from turning over on the sofa. It
             | would also tell me how good I slept when I forgot to wear
             | it to bed. So, at least for me, that ML doesn't work
        
               | ThalesX wrote:
               | I didn't give it up, but I did laugh one morning at
               | 2:30AM, laying in bed, dozing off and getting startled by
               | the watch telling me I've been sitting for awhile and it
               | suggests I get up and move a bit.
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | It's rare, but I've been woken up at least once by a
               | "congratulations on completing your stand/exercise!".
        
         | chaostheory wrote:
         | "Hands"
         | 
         | Yeah, but at least Apple focuses on privacy
        
         | addandsubtract wrote:
         | The video also offers a solution. Obscure the view of your
         | hands from the camera(s).
        
         | LeafItAlone wrote:
         | I'd wager most people take their phones in into the bathroom
         | with them and use them on the toilet. I've even seen people on
         | video calls in public restrooms!
         | 
         | I honestly don't think the general public is all that
         | concerned.
         | 
         | (But I am)
        
         | solarkraft wrote:
         | I think we're past that. Our phones have already seen so many
         | things we could find embarrassing.
         | 
         | One smart thing Apple usually does when using cameras for
         | sensing (see Face ID) is never showing you the image, making it
         | feel a lot less creepy.
        
       | PaulHoule wrote:
       | The large carrying case means it is not a "mobile" device. Sure
       | you can take one on an airplane but it is going to be awkward.
       | (What is the stewardess supposed to say? Are you supposed to take
       | it off for takeoff and landing? Are you supposed to stow it?
       | Where?)
       | 
       | I was thinking you might use a device like this as a laptop
       | replacement while traveling. Maybe I would because I'm a
       | notorious overpacker but I think most people wouldn't. The
       | carrying case for my Hololens 1 is crazy big and I know a grad
       | student who sometimes shuttles a Meta Quest Pro to work and it
       | fills his whole backpack.
        
         | akmarinov wrote:
         | On the MKBHD video it looks like you can disassemble most
         | things and the only thing you care about is the actual display
         | and glass. So you might get a smaller case from a third party
         | vendor just for that part and then the rest - light seal,
         | spacer thing, band - you can squish those in your bag.
        
         | seydor wrote:
         | Looks like you can skip the $3500 and buy this instead
         | https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71ceiw0-DxL.jpg
        
       | pornel wrote:
       | According to the review Mac is limited to one screen at 1440p.
        
         | jitl wrote:
         | It's 1440p of "screen real estate" logical resolution, like a
         | 27" monitor with 5k pixels like the Apple studio display or LG
         | UltraFine, full 4K video feed - not as high res as the LG
         | UltraFine.
        
       | shmatt wrote:
       | This sounds pretty great for a first iteration. My first iPhone
       | was a 4S, but I can definitely see the "buy everything first"
       | crowd enjoying this vs. the first iteration from every other
       | company, as Apple usually succeeds doing
       | 
       | I would bet the version announced in 4 years will be naturally
       | usable all day
        
         | monkeynotes wrote:
         | > will be naturally usable all day
         | 
         | What do you imagine that device to look like, and cost?
        
           | ThalesX wrote:
           | Not GP but... thinner, lighter and maybe 1k cheaper?
        
       | swozey wrote:
       | Ha, I was downvoted and told "why do we need controllers, the
       | iphone and macbook dont come with controllers" yesterday when I
       | said this is stupid without controllers.
       | 
       | I have a vive, q2 and q3. Look at him trying to type on that
       | keyboard. I have hand gestures on my q3. They're nice for a few
       | certain things, but thankfully I can forget they exist for 99% of
       | what I do, that isn't flinging windows/screens left and right and
       | expanding them in front of me. Or turning wifi on and off, etc..
       | 
       | And.. you can't do multiple screens and it has less resolution
       | than my real life monitor when connecting to a mbp.. hm. I
       | thought that was a super cool feature when I thought you could
       | just add monitors wherever. I hadn't even thought of it before
       | they showed it in the demo.
        
         | nickthegreek wrote:
         | Pains me to think about what this sucker would cost with
         | controllers (which I agree are needed for many VR experiences).
        
           | jayd16 wrote:
           | Who knows what Apple would charge but the BOM for a bluetooth
           | controller with LEDs is not a lot when they already have
           | good-enough hand tracking.
        
             | jsheard wrote:
             | Yeah, the way the non-Pro Quest controllers are implemented
             | isn't expensive at all. The tracking hardware is just
             | commodity accelerometers/gyroscopes for high resolution
             | (albeit only relative) motion sensing, and a constellation
             | of IR LEDs to give a clear reference point for the headset
             | cameras to follow in absolute space and correct the IMU
             | drift.
             | 
             | Knowing Apple they would more likely follow the lead of the
             | Quest Pro controllers though, which have their own set of
             | cameras and perform their own inside-out tracking
             | independently of the headset. It's expensive and power
             | hungry but more robust since they work just as well when
             | the headset can't see the controllers.
        
           | swozey wrote:
           | I'm so bummed that this is what they came out with. If it was
           | some insane res better than pancake lense with no screen door
           | effect or color wash out at all and had some amazingly well
           | researched controllers that finally rocket shipped VR AND AR
           | they'd have much more of a market and I'd consider one.
           | 
           | But maybe in my 5 years these will be in every single
           | hospital, school, etc. Who knows.
        
         | hbn wrote:
         | > And.. you can't do multiple screens and it has less
         | resolution than my real life monitor when connecting to a mbp
         | 
         | I think there's still appeal in that you can take this monitor
         | with you and float it in front of you wherever you want. That's
         | worth the reduced resolution imo
        
         | janeshchhabra wrote:
         | > And.. you can't do multiple screens and it has less
         | resolution than my real life monitor when connecting to a mbp..
         | hm. I thought that was a super cool feature when I thought you
         | could just add monitors wherever. I hadn't even thought of it
         | before they showed it in the demo.
         | 
         | That's the main feature I would have bought this device for -
         | seamless window sharing between apple devices/macbooks. Sad to
         | see it isn't the case. Hopefully the immersed visor [0] pans
         | out for work! Excited to try vision pro, but seeming likely
         | that I'll end up returning it by the 2 week period.
         | 
         | [0] - https://www.visor.com/.
         | 
         | Disclaimer, I have a preorder for both Visor and Vision Pro.
        
           | gamblor956 wrote:
           | _Hopefully the immersed visor [0] pans out for work!._
           | 
           | $40 monthly membership. And that's the cheaper option to get
           | the cool features like multiple work spaces and the extended
           | battery.
           | 
           | I get the feeling that the Visor will not be long for this
           | world if they don't change their business model.
        
       | monkeynotes wrote:
       | I think this is like a modern example of the Apple Newton in the
       | sense it's impressive, has uses, but it too soon to be widely
       | adopted.
       | 
       | I think this device will flounder, early adopters will struggle
       | to make full use of it because of all the compromises. Take it on
       | the plane? Why? It will run out of power in 1-2 hrs (if you
       | remembered the full charge before you board). Lugging all that
       | bulk just for a movie on the plane while you look like a black
       | mirror drone.
       | 
       | Then there is TV, it's great if you live by yourself, but what
       | couple has $7k to drop so they can watch TV together. For ~2hrs.
       | 
       | Office work? No thanks, I can't wear that all day and actually be
       | productive.
       | 
       | It's an amazing accomplishment, but who is it for? The ~200k
       | wealthy people who mostly live by themselves isn't going to
       | fulfill an AR revolution for Apple.
       | 
       | I wonder what Jobs would have done.
        
         | seanmcdirmid wrote:
         | When all plane seats seem to have power these days, is the
         | battery in a plane really a limitation? Can't it charge while
         | being used?
        
           | zerbinxx wrote:
           | Doesn't it have some weird and Very Apple design flaw where
           | it's hard to charge and use at the same time?
        
             | seanmcdirmid wrote:
             | I don't know, which is why I'm asking. I can see it not
             | charging as fast as it's being used.
        
               | monkeynotes wrote:
               | It's basically a laptop on your head, so a meaty 60w
               | charger could be needed to power and charge it.
        
               | seanmcdirmid wrote:
               | Then I guess that is fine, since airlines are typically
               | providing 75 watts per seat.
        
             | bearjaws wrote:
             | _cries in magic mouse_
        
             | swozey wrote:
             | That'd be fitting. Maybe the charging port is inside of it
             | right between your eyes so you have to charge it like their
             | old mouse you had to flip over dead.
        
             | gr__or wrote:
             | The battery is external, i.e. already next to you anyway,
             | so plugging in power is rather simple. You could also have
             | multiple batteries with you, though I don't know the price
             | of an additional battery.
        
               | jsheard wrote:
               | It's $200 for an extra battery, all of the accessories
               | have a steep early adopter tax. Besides, has anyone
               | confirmed whether or not the AVP has an internal backup
               | battery so you can hotswap the external battery without
               | rebooting it?
        
               | nonfamous wrote:
               | According to the linked review, hot-swapping is not
               | possible - disconnecting the battery powers down the
               | device.
        
               | jsheard wrote:
               | In that case if you want to use it for many hours without
               | access to wall power you're better off buying a generic
               | USB power bank and plugging that into the Apple battery.
               | Very elegant.
        
             | naravara wrote:
             | No. When it's plugged in it just passes the power through.
             | 
             | The annoying Apple limitation is that you can't hot-swap
             | the battery.
        
         | coffeebeqn wrote:
         | The plane thing is funny. I can't imagine anyone actually using
         | VR in economy. At best you'll annoy people next to you and the
         | flight attendants if they need you to move or respond. At worst
         | you'll hit your head on something or whack someone with the
         | controllers
        
           | seanmcdirmid wrote:
           | I can see it being used on a long haul in economy after
           | dinner service and before breakfast. Most of that doesn't
           | really apply, except for the occasional bathroom run.
        
             | monkeynotes wrote:
             | And that's my point, it's such a tiny niche usage window,
             | why bother to bring it?
        
               | seanmcdirmid wrote:
               | If you have to take a lot of trans Pacifics in economy,
               | you get desperate quickly. This is only the price of one
               | discounted business class ticket.
        
           | whynotminot wrote:
           | There's a lot to question about AVP, but this doesn't make
           | sense. What are you hitting your head on sitting in your seat
           | on an airplane? If you've got the aisle seat and someone
           | needs to move, they do the same thing they do when you're
           | wearing your noise canceling headphone or taking a nap--tap
           | your shoulder. It's not rocket science.
           | 
           | The device has breakthrough--when someone comes near (eg a
           | flight attendant), it breaks through the immersive VR and
           | shows them to you. You can take off the headset at that point
           | if you choose.
           | 
           | Again there's a lot to question about how this headset will
           | practically work for people, but this ain't it. In fact I'd
           | argue airplanes are one of the use-cases for this device that
           | makes the most sense. How many places do I want to completely
           | disappear from my environment and pretend I'm somewhere else?
           | A long haul flight is tops on that list.
        
           | whamlastxmas wrote:
           | Using it in economy is actually a top use case for me.
           | Working on my laptop is miserable for multiple reasons, the
           | biggest of which is that I can't even tilt the lid open past
           | 90 degrees out of fear the person in front of me will recline
           | and catch my screen in the seat crevice and smash it. Lots of
           | photos of this happening online
        
             | monkeynotes wrote:
             | I wonder how that will work out. It just looks so clunky
             | and bulky, with limited FOV. I'd feel blinkered and
             | constantly wanting to check my surroundings. For me an iPad
             | is the best thing for movies on a plane. It's small,
             | versatile, and I am aware of my surroundings.
             | 
             | I guess we'll see how people use it, but right now it is
             | too expensive and full of compromises for me to consider.
        
         | pmontra wrote:
         | > what couple has $7k to drop so they can watch TV together
         | 
         | Together and alone at the same time. Eye contact and unhindered
         | vision of the face of a partner are important things.
        
           | LeafItAlone wrote:
           | There's no requirement to wear them 24/7...
           | 
           | You can get an awesome 2-3 hour immersive movie experience
           | and still look at your partner after. A good cinema
           | experience already envelopes me and makes me forget I'm
           | surrounded by a hundred others.
        
       | seydor wrote:
       | Glad i got an oculus before they spike the price
        
       | GeekyBear wrote:
       | Some other early reviews that are up:
       | 
       | CNET - Apple Vision Pro Review: A Mind-Blowing Look at an
       | Unfinished Future
       | 
       | https://www.cnet.com/tech/computing/apple-vision-pro-review-...
       | 
       | WSJ - Apple Vision Pro Review: The Best Headset Yet Is Just a
       | Glimpse of the Future
       | 
       | https://www.wsj.com/tech/apple-vision-pro-review-39f2d82e?mo...
       | 
       | Tom's Hardware - Apple Vision Pro review: A revolution in
       | progress
       | 
       | https://www.tomsguide.com/computing/smart-glasses/apple-visi...
       | 
       | CNBC - Apple Vision Pro review: This is the future of computing
       | and entertainment
       | 
       | https://www.cnbc.com/2024/01/30/apple-vision-pro-review-the-...
        
         | htk wrote:
         | It's interesting to see a common theme of "It's great, but not
         | there yet."
        
           | GeekyBear wrote:
           | Can you think of examples where a company starts making a
           | product in a new category and nails it on the first
           | iteration?
           | 
           | Experience shows that they will keep on iterating on it year
           | after year.
           | 
           | The thing I was most interested in was if they could nail an
           | intuitive UI right from the outset.
        
             | browningstreet wrote:
             | VR headsets have been around for many years now and why
             | does anyone believe a somewhat better version of those
             | things would hit critical mass? It seems like the form
             | factor is as much the problem as any of the
             | implementations. Many people really wanted an _Apple_
             | version to be a game changer. Maybe this game can't really
             | be changed?
        
               | whamlastxmas wrote:
               | If this was $500 I'd call it a game changer, and
               | hopefully it gets there in 5 years
        
               | rootusrootus wrote:
               | I wonder what the BOM cost of the device is. At $500
               | they'd sell 100x as many. Hell, even at $999 they'd sell
               | quite a lot of them. I'd probably give it a try for that
               | price, but I'm hesitant to blow $3500.
        
               | GeekyBear wrote:
               | This isn't the mass market version of the tech. This
               | iteration is a developer kit that early adopters can also
               | buy.
               | 
               | Apple has always said that they want a version that fits
               | in a glasses style form factor as their mass market
               | product, but the tech wasn't there yet.
               | 
               | > Apple CEO Tim Cook said that it will be a while before
               | the technology available for augmented reality glasses
               | rises to Apple's standards, according to British Vogue.
               | 
               | "There are rumours and gossip about companies working on
               | that, and we obviously don't talk about what we work on.
               | But today I can tell you that the technology itself
               | doesn't exist to do that in a quality way," Cook told
               | Vogue.
               | 
               | https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/11/apple-ar-glasses-tim-
               | cook-sa...
               | 
               | They keep iterating on it in-house, and keep finding that
               | the tech still isn't ready.
               | 
               | https://www.tomsguide.com/news/apple-glasses
               | 
               | I think the current plans are to focus on a cheaper
               | version of Vision Pro in the short term.
               | 
               | https://www.tomsguide.com/news/apple-glasses-reportedly-
               | dela...
        
               | browningstreet wrote:
               | When they released dev kits, that's what they called
               | them.
               | 
               | This is a Pro product release. I'm personally inclined to
               | believe that this product is more likely to kill off the
               | entire VR/goggles dream than lead to a $500-$1000
               | iteration that's at least as big as iPad.
               | 
               | Glasses? Like the ones I have on my face? Not in my
               | lifetime...
               | 
               | This is Tim Cook's trash can Mac.
        
             | smoldesu wrote:
             | The original Oculus Quest was pretty much that. Granted,
             | they had an unrealistic amount of talent on their side and
             | a decent history taking stabs at the whole "consumer VR"
             | thing.
             | 
             | But I mean, look at it - the first Quest was $300-400,
             | fairly comfortable, self-contained and standalone _with_
             | tethering capability. If you just wanted to watch TV or
             | browse the web in VR, that 's what you'd want to buy.
             | Oculus made the Steam Deck of VR, and all the other
             | business models seem kinda extreme by comparison. I doubt
             | we'd be seeing the reservation towards Vision Pro today if
             | there weren't cheaper entertainment-focused headsets
             | already on the market.
        
           | chaostheory wrote:
           | That's also a good summary of the 1st iPhone's reviews.
        
             | saiya-jin wrote:
             | Its not comparable. At that time, phone was already a
             | necessity for most folks and most had one. VR (they are not
             | AR from outside)? Still 90% of folks around me (doctors,
             | IT, rest of reality) think whole concept of VR/AR is for
             | kids and... big old kids lets say.
             | 
             | Also it costs 10x as much with huge drawback above.
             | Inflation makes this a smaller number but the difference is
             | still massive, for a plastic toy soon to be obsolete
             | looking like kids ski googles.
             | 
             | But if they persist, which all reviews seem to hang their
             | overall positive rating on, magic we all hope for _might_
             | eventually happen
        
               | chaostheory wrote:
               | [delayed]
        
         | oatmeal1 wrote:
         | Joanna Stern is an incredible reviewer.
        
       | oatmeal1 wrote:
       | > Apple is so incredibly capable, stocked with talent, and loaded
       | with resources that the company simply went out and engineered
       | the hell out of the hardest problems it could think of in order
       | to find a challenge. That's good!
       | 
       | I think they knew before halfway through that it was not possible
       | to build a practical product, but Apple thinks it's important to
       | stay relevant and appear innovative, so they went along and built
       | it anyway. Maybe that was the intention from the start.
       | 
       | I'm not sure why they created and marketed so many dystopian
       | features though. The part of the demo where the dad played with
       | his kids while wearing the Vision Pro and then watched the
       | playback alone later was disturbing. Same with people talking
       | using the EyeSight feature instead of taking of the goggles and
       | making real eye contact.
        
         | causal wrote:
         | Yeah it's interesting how the Quest seems like a less-creepy
         | product by just owning the fact that users will be isolated.
        
         | npteljes wrote:
         | >The part of the demo where the dad played with his kids while
         | wearing the Vision Pro and then watched the playback alone
         | later was disturbing.
         | 
         | I'm glad I'm not alone who feels the same. To me, that scene is
         | so out of place, so dystopian that it's outright ridiculous
         | that it's presented in a demo like this.
        
           | naravara wrote:
           | Every parent I've talked to has found that pretty appealing.
           | 
           | We're already looking at pictures and videos of our kids on
           | the phone a lot of the time anyway. Which required us to be
           | holding our phones in hand while playing with our kids.
           | 
           | It only seems weird because it's unfamiliar. But it's not
           | more dystopian than trying to capture special moments with a
           | camcorder.
        
             | erklik wrote:
             | > We're already looking at pictures and videos of our kids
             | on the phone a lot of the time anyway. Which required us to
             | be holding our phones in hand while playing with our kids.
             | 
             | A phone in the hand is objectively far less intrusive than
             | a full on mask on your eyes that prevents half of your face
             | being seen by your kids.
        
           | saynay wrote:
           | Everyone I have heard talk about that initial demo mentioned
           | it was weird and creepy.
           | 
           | But I do not think it was ever the plan that you would create
           | spatial videos primarily from the headset. You can also take
           | them with the latest gen of iPhones, but the VisionPro demo
           | predated the iPhone announcement.
        
         | tsunamifury wrote:
         | I was told Jony Ive personally quit over this project. He felt
         | it was fundamentally wrong, and the first product Apple made
         | post Jobs that directly contradicted the vision of the company.
         | 
         | And not in a Porsche shouldn't make an SUV sort of way --
         | rather on the way out he shared some pretty well articulated
         | moral issues with the product and how Jobs would release buggy
         | products, but rarely fundamentally flawed ones.
         | 
         | This IMO is Tim Cooks first totally original product. The Watch
         | was an Ive product. It will mark whether or not he can find
         | original needs in the market, or simply will fall into what
         | Jobs accused every bad CEO of doing -- SKUs for SKUs sake.
        
       | alexawarrior3 wrote:
       | The only wearable headset so far has been Google Glass. It was
       | great for wearing around 24x7 with only pauses to recharge. I
       | even had mine in prescription glasses so I could wear them as my
       | primary.
       | 
       | Then, as Google does, they dropped it, and no one took it up
       | again. I'd have to imagine that in 10+ years of display and
       | battery improvements an even better Glass is waiting to hit the
       | market. It seems more a social issue rather than a technological
       | one: we as a society are not ready for universal AR.
        
         | whycome wrote:
         | > It seems more a social issue rather than a technological one:
         | we as a society are not ready for universal AR.
         | 
         | At one point talking on the phone in public (video chats,
         | bluetooth earpieces, etc) would have been weird. Now it's
         | annoyingly common.
         | 
         | Maybe this release is a longer term play at "culture/social
         | change" rather than a true non-just-prototype device. Soften up
         | the market and make "spatial computing" more acceptable. And
         | then integrate a "non pro" version for general consumers.
        
       | causal wrote:
       | Many HN'ers are probably like me, in that hearing about its
       | imperfections is kind of a relief. If it really DID mean a new
       | era of tech, well then frick I need to learn some new skills to
       | keep up, have to buy one for myself, etc. etc.
       | 
       | That being said, it feels like a few small things would make a
       | consumer version of this really take off:
       | 
       | - Cut the weight in half (i.e., use plastic).
       | 
       | - Drop the gimmicky eye TV (save weight, and probably make the
       | whole thing thinner).
       | 
       | - Make it thin/modular enough to collapse into a headphones-sized
       | case.
       | 
       | - And then if its light enough, a magnetic strap might be strong
       | enough, making the transition in/out smoother and less likely to
       | mess up hair.
       | 
       | - Drop the price $1k.
       | 
       | That is, simply paring things down might be enough to take this
       | product out of the awkward-nerd-goggles category and into
       | something more like a cozy-interactive-sleepmask for travelers.
        
         | spywaregorilla wrote:
         | - have worthwhile apps
        
           | causal wrote:
           | Fair. In general I'm assuming the software piece will develop
           | regardless, but you're right that there isn't really any
           | killer app to draw people in yet.
        
             | spywaregorilla wrote:
             | well we're in 2024 now and people still try to suggest Beat
             | Saber (2018) is proof that VR gaming is good.
        
               | jwells89 wrote:
               | The problem with VR gaming is that it's been hamstrung by
               | requiring either a substantially beefy gaming PC or
               | limited onboard midrange smartphone with underwhelming
               | developer buy-in.
               | 
               | If the rumors are true that Valve is working on a
               | standalone VR headset based around an AMD APU, I think
               | that might be the shot in the arm that VR gaming needs,
               | with hardware more powerful than can be found in the
               | Quest lineup as well as x86/Windows compatibility and
               | greater general openness.
        
               | spywaregorilla wrote:
               | eh. disagree. as someone with a beefy gaming pc there's
               | nothing good.
               | 
               | Alyx is very well made, but its not hard to see that they
               | designed around fundamental limits that make VR suck.
               | they don't overcome them. They perhaps manage to cover it
               | with enough polish to get people to not notice. but its
               | hard for anyone with design or, let's call it "gamer
               | sense"
        
               | RockRobotRock wrote:
               | Why does the age matter? It's a popular game for a
               | reason, but VR gaming is still obviously niche.
               | 
               | I think that HL:A is easily the best VR game that exists,
               | but it doesn't have a lot of replay value and can only be
               | played on desktop.
        
               | spywaregorilla wrote:
               | Platforms with so few noteworthy games in the past 6
               | years are a red flag of the health of it. Nothing wrong
               | with that, but plenty of folks argue that VR gaming is
               | great.
               | 
               | HL:A, as I said in another comment, is just a case study
               | on why VR won't work. With no disrespect to the devs
               | because I think they really did do a good job with what
               | they had, but it still sucks if you dare to peek under
               | the hood. It coddles you (because it needs to).
        
               | RockRobotRock wrote:
               | The people I know that are heavily into VR all play
               | VRChat. The games might not be that fantastic, but the
               | social immersion is really amazing.
               | 
               | During lockdown, I was playing 8 hours a day. It became a
               | problem.
        
               | spywaregorilla wrote:
               | sure. VR chat is good. Closer to the metaverse and its
               | defining features as described in the actual book than
               | any self proclaimed metaverse fan seem to know.
               | 
               | But yeah, not really game.
        
         | ramesh31 wrote:
         | >Drop the gimmicky eye TV (save weight, and probably make the
         | whole thing thinner).
         | 
         | Strong disagree. This is the single best idea they had with the
         | headset. VR isolation is at the very top of things keeping back
         | mass adoption, and Eyesight is a brilliant solution to that.
        
           | causal wrote:
           | Maybe if done well, but the article makes it seem that
           | sticking googly eyes to the front would work better under
           | most lighting conditions.
        
             | oatmeal1 wrote:
             | Sticking googly eyes on the front would be much better than
             | the existing solution because that would be disarming and
             | joyful instead of disturbing and dystopian.
        
         | NegativeLatency wrote:
         | They'll probably never do this but the idea of not being able
         | to play PC VR games on it is a nonstarter.
         | 
         | I've wanted a VR headset for a few years and if it was a bit
         | cheaper and compatible with existing flight sims and stuff I'd
         | be interested but the lack of compatibility is a deal killer
         | for that price.
         | 
         | I know I'm not the target market apparently but I'm all in on
         | the rest of the apple ecosystem.
        
         | JeremyNT wrote:
         | I just don't know if it'll ever happen, at least not until
         | there are truly massive advances in miniaturization and display
         | tech.
         | 
         | I have much lower spec'd VR goggles and they mostly gather
         | dust. There's just something about having a screen pressed up
         | against your eyes that's _weird_ and _uncomfortable_ in a way
         | that is hard to articulate.
         | 
         | No screen door? Cool! Great motion tracking? Awesome! Premium
         | materials? Eh, OK! But as long as I still need to strap a
         | little box around my eyes with screens in it, I'm going to be
         | limiting my exposure time. My eyes like air, and "better than
         | the competition at all the things" doesn't actually make it
         | solve any real problems I have.
         | 
         | For me, such a thing just can't be more than a toy.
        
       | poulpy123 wrote:
       | I'm sure apple will manage to sell it by the millions, but both
       | the price and the lock-in in the apple ecosystem are a no for me
        
         | poulpy123 wrote:
         | well maybe not millions but "a lot"
        
           | LeafItAlone wrote:
           | Supposedly they've already sold ~200k. Before release. Before
           | reviews of it.
           | 
           | That's still a far cry from "millions" (plural), but I
           | wouldn't be surprised.
        
             | B56b wrote:
             | Odds are word of mouth is not going to be kind to this
             | though. I can see pre-order statistics being overly
             | optimistic.
        
       | spywaregorilla wrote:
       | > The goal is for the Vision Pro to be a complete device that can
       | sit right alongside the Mac and the iPad in Apple's ecosystem of
       | devices and let you get real work done. You can use Excel and
       | Webex and Slack in the Vision Pro, and you can also sit back and
       | watch movies and TV shows on a gigantic virtual 4K HDR display.
       | And you can mirror your Mac's display and just use the Vision Pro
       | to look at a huge monitor floating in virtual space.
       | 
       | As someone who used a living room tv with a wireless keyboard as
       | a monitor for a while, I felt it sucked. Can't see why this would
       | actually be a plus.
        
         | swozey wrote:
         | That's like when I visit a friend who is an accountant and
         | they're working on a laptop in the kitchen 8 hours a day, and I
         | just.. "that's your whole office? You aren't miserable? You can
         | work like that?"
         | 
         | I would riot without my 49", mouse and kbs, and aeron.
        
           | pmontra wrote:
           | Everybody has very different subjective preferences and is
           | subject to somewhat objective tradeoffs. I worked in two
           | different places of my house today, with the same laptop. One
           | location when the sun heated up an external room with no
           | heating, another location in a heated room before and after
           | then. I couldn't do that if I had to move around a large
           | monitor, a mouse and a keyboard: too much troubles. I didn't
           | move my chair, that stays in the main working location for
           | the period of the year.
        
       | schmorptron wrote:
       | Honestly, as someone who isn't an apple fan and uses a quest 3,
       | this is still very cool. Obviously a first-gen hardware product,
       | but the software and UX seems on point. eye-tracking and hand
       | tracking combined for UX seems like a very good idea.
       | 
       | one thing I'm super surprised about is that it doesn't use their
       | stage manager window management. When they introduced that to the
       | mac os, it seemed like it was _designed_ for this, and
       | introducing it on the mac would get their users ready to already
       | know how to use the vision pro before it even releases.
        
       | boringg wrote:
       | Having used the meta 3 and having been blown away by the step
       | function in capability. I have to imagine that even if this
       | product itself isn't a homerun future iterations will be very
       | successful.
       | 
       | As much as I don't love VR - it makes me nauseous, it leaves
       | marks sometimes on my face I can't help but notice how amazing
       | the immersive quality is. It isn't going to replace everything
       | and it won't replace a computer - its a different product
       | vertical and it will certainly be around in the future. It's been
       | around since the 90s and will last a long time.
       | 
       | Early innings still...
        
       | teeray wrote:
       | I feel like this will be a spectacular flop. It's the first major
       | new Apple product announcement that I completely forgot about
       | (and I mean completely) in the time between announcement and
       | ordering. _Nobody_ I know is even talking about it, unlike when
       | the Apple Watch came out, or the iPad. The experience needs to be
       | as life-changing as the iPhone if you're going to normalize
       | people wearing ski goggles around the house... I'm not convinced
       | that it is.
        
         | selimnairb wrote:
         | Not to mention, there is no chance I would ever wear this at
         | home in front of my family. My guess is that many feel the
         | same; it's just too anti-social and weird. If it can be used
         | for VR/AR, there might be some industrial applications, but
         | Apple seems to be positioning this more as a replacement for
         | monitors.
        
         | jyunwai wrote:
         | To provide a contrasting anecdote, I've spoken to a couple of
         | people who are already interested in virtual reality (VR) who
         | have been very much looking forward to the release (we talked
         | about it, and one forwarded me links to news articles).
         | 
         | One has worked with VR for research, and is familiar with the
         | HTC Vive and Meta Quest headsets, but has not used VR for
         | personal use. The other person used the Quest for gaming, and
         | has been curious about Apple's approach.
         | 
         | Outside of people with past experience using VR, though, I
         | haven't personally heard people talking about Apple's version.
         | The price point is likely a major factor: a larger number of
         | people could imagine owning an Apple Watch or iPad shortly
         | after release (even if relatively pricey), in contrast to the
         | Apple Vision Pro upon release.
        
           | spacemadness wrote:
           | People already invested in VR are not a big market at Apple's
           | scale.
        
         | fshbbdssbbgdd wrote:
         | They don't need the average consumer to buy it. It's
         | practically a developer platform. It includes a bunch of parts
         | that have never been manufactured at scale before. Based on
         | rumors, Apple is projected to produce 400k of these and already
         | sold >200k.
        
           | gamblor956 wrote:
           | Microsoft sold around the same number of Hololens and that
           | was considered a huge market failure.
        
       | PKop wrote:
       | I stare at screens way too much already. I can't imagine
       | strapping one on my face inches from my eyeballs as substitute
       | for getting real work done on a laptop. My eyes would suffer more
       | than they already do.
       | 
       | This really is an amazing tech "solution" looking for a problem
       | to solve.
        
       | ninkendo wrote:
       | I ordered mine on day one and it'll get here Friday. I work from
       | home and intend to use it at my desk for (1) a bigger display for
       | my mac and (2) native apps for things like Slack/video
       | conferencing/notes/imessage/etc and hopefully I can have a
       | productive environment with it. I figure it'll be cool to work at
       | a national park or on the moon or some such, and to have more
       | real estate to put my apps. I plan to use my physical keyboard
       | and trackpad as much as possible, so I'm not too worried about
       | the inputs sucking.
       | 
       | My thought at this point is that I'm going to decide pretty
       | quickly after using it whether this is actually going to work,
       | and there's about a 50% chance I'm going to return it, because
       | I'm starting to doubt whether it will.
       | 
       | Some things I'm worried about:
       | 
       | - The weight may make it so uncomfortable that the whole
       | experience isn't worth it for 8 hours a day
       | 
       | - FOV and vignetting issues are likely going to be worse than I
       | thought and a distraction
       | 
       | - App compatibility means it's possible that 90% of the work I'm
       | doing is going to be on the mac virtual display _anyway_ ,
       | meaning I paid $3500 for a bigger (virtual) screen that I have to
       | put a heavy/uncomfortable headset on my head to see
       | 
       | We'll see what the verdict is. I'm hoping they have a software
       | update at some point that lets you "tear out" macOS app windows
       | into virtual space... that may put it over the edge from not-
       | worth-it to worth-it if it happens.
        
         | PKop wrote:
         | I don't see a virtual screen being as nice or productive as an
         | Apple Pro XDR for actually doing computer work. Too many layers
         | between your eyes and the pixels, and then all the drawbacks
         | like weight and finicky input glitches.
        
           | ninkendo wrote:
           | The vision pro is far cheaper than an Apple Pro XDR, and
           | input glitches shouldn't be a problem as I'm using a physical
           | mouse and keyboard. Plus I get to add additional apps outside
           | the screen if visionOS natively supports them (Slack, email,
           | and iMessage are good examples. Plus the web browser can be a
           | native app. You can seamlessly move your mouse/keyboard
           | between them and copy/paste too.)
           | 
           | The weight is definitely on the "let's see how big of a deal
           | this becomes" list though.
        
             | PKop wrote:
             | Yes but it doesn't hurt your neck or make you sick after a
             | few hours while also having better resolution and easier
             | usability for basic computer interactions. Vision pro as
             | desktop computer replacement sounds like a Rube Goldberg
             | solution to a problem that doesn't exist. Possibly Vision
             | Pro as laptop screen replacement sounds plausible but I
             | still don't think the UX will be comfortable nor do I think
             | the virtual screen will actually hold up as good for
             | typing/reading text.
             | 
             | A mouse, keyboard, and proper monitor/screen work likely
             | work better than a virtual screen without all the well
             | known negatives that come with the latter. We'll see how it
             | plays out though.
        
         | madeofpalk wrote:
         | I can't imagine this being a good computer monitor. Low
         | resolution + pixel scaling issues would make this be a pretty
         | uncomfortable experience.
         | 
         | But, i haven't tried it (nor do I plan to any time soon), so I
         | can only guess.
        
           | whamlastxmas wrote:
           | Review said text was perfectly readable and not blurry and
           | when combined with multiple floating windows it seems like
           | it'd be serviceable
        
       | SushiHippie wrote:
       | I'm not really interested in apple and its ecosystem.
       | 
       | But this review got me really hooked, and I didn't even notice
       | that it was 30 minutes long. Easily the best tech review I've
       | ever seen. And it also felt very well-balanced between the good
       | and the not so good things about the vision pro.
        
         | TillE wrote:
         | The Verge is great, especially Nilay himself. I don't listen to
         | a ton of tech podcasts, but Vergecast and Decoder are some of
         | the best.
        
           | AISnakeOil wrote:
           | I agree, but they tend lean too heavily on Apple as their
           | tech overlords and compare everything to their products.
        
             | SushiHippie wrote:
             | I don't watch/read the verge that often, but I don't find
             | that this the case for this review.
        
         | rcarmo wrote:
         | Nilay batted it out of the park on this one, for sure. The best
         | video I've seen on the Vision Pro yet (and I've been watching
         | all the usual suspects in a row).
        
       | jayd16 wrote:
       | Interesting that gaze-to-focus is panned and not because it
       | doesn't track well. I've worked in VR games for a while and gaze
       | tracking excites designers but I find it a very annoying input
       | mechanism and we usually don't ship it. Maybe it's still the
       | right call for the AVP but being able to interact with things you
       | aren't looking at is important.
        
       | igammarays wrote:
       | This review confirmed this is exactly what I need. I don't care
       | about my hair messing up, I work from home. I don't care if the
       | display doesn't look as good as reality, that was never my
       | expectation anyway. The display just needs to look good enough to
       | work with fine text and hi-res images. I don't care if it's too
       | heavy to wear for hours at a time, I always work in 25 minute
       | blocks anyway. Breaks are good. I don't care if personas look
       | creepy, Zoom virtual backgrounds are also creepy. I don't care if
       | the eye/hand tracking isn't up to par for "serious" work, I plan
       | to use it with a keyboard and mouse anyway (at least while
       | working, not in entertainment/writing mode). Every single "fault"
       | which this reviewer mentioned doesn't matter to me, I was never
       | expecting this device to replace reality for me anyway.
       | 
       | What I want is, the ability to have large displays laid back on
       | my bed/couch, and the ability to walk around the room and place
       | different open Safari windows and apps around my physical space
       | as I think and study some new topic. That's all. The new virtual
       | world stuff is just a cute addition for me, it's not what I am
       | buying it for. I am buying this thing to have an infinite number
       | of screens placed anywhere in my space, and that's all I wanted.
        
         | walteweiss wrote:
         | My train of thought was similar to this, but I'm worried about
         | my eyes. Although I'm not sure whether it's worse than me
         | looking at a regular screen all day long.
        
         | whamlastxmas wrote:
         | Same for me but there was a single sentence that more than
         | halved my interest in buying this: you can't have multiple
         | floating windows of MacOS. It's all in one single floating
         | window. This is by far the biggest flaw for me, and a really
         | stupid one. Hopefully a software update changes this
        
           | igammarays wrote:
           | But you can have one floating macOS window (for your
           | workhorse app) and then infinite other visionOS and iPadOS
           | windows. For me, that's good enough, most of my other
           | monitors are just Safari tabs or something that can be
           | replaced with iPad apps anyway. Anyway the fact that you can
           | continue to use your phone with the headset on means you
           | could theoretically use another computer with external
           | monitors for desktop apps while having lots of extra virtual
           | space for iPad/Safari apps.
        
           | hbn wrote:
           | The 1 monitor cap and the fact that it's only a 1440p
           | resolution makes me think it's a bandwidth/latency
           | limitation, I wouldn't hold my breath on software fixing it.
        
             | janeshchhabra wrote:
             | Yeah, you would likely need a hardwired connection over
             | thunderbolt to do more. It's unlikely such a connection is
             | possible with the specs today (only usb-c is on battery,
             | and unsure if that can transfer data).
        
           | janeshchhabra wrote:
           | +1, this makes it harder to interop with mac working
           | environments which was my biggest usecase for this device.
           | 
           | Sure, I can do other safari windows for research and stuff,
           | but what I really want is different windows of IDEs, code
           | search, docs, and _work_ artifacts. Many of which may not be
           | accessible through the vision pro (VPN, device certs, etc.),
           | but are through my macbook.
           | 
           | If we could have at least 4 or 5 mac windows, it would be
           | much better, otherwise it's akin to a macbook + external
           | monitor. Hopefully they figure out a way to add it in, but
           | it's hard to buy with such an obvious usecase missing.
        
         | strunz wrote:
         | Can you describe the tasks you will actually be doing like this
         | and why this headset is actually helpful?
        
         | saiya-jin wrote:
         | There is always an idea what one needs, the idea itself is
         | perfect, flawless. Then there is reality. Those never meet,
         | good luck with getting them at least close
        
         | kccqzy wrote:
         | The hand tracking system is among the faults in the review. I'm
         | not sure whether this will be addressed by having a real
         | keyboard and mouse. The reviewer never tried the device with a
         | real mouse. Do you know how the experience will be when using a
         | mouse rather than the hand-tracking system?
         | 
         | Anyways this sounds infuriating:
         | 
         | > you have to be looking at something in order to click on it,
         | and that means you are constantly taking your attention away
         | from whatever you're working on to specifically look at the
         | button you need to press next. I spent some time playing a
         | lovely little game called Stitch that quickly became maddening
         | because I kept looking away from the piece I wanted to move to
         | the place I wanted to move it, which meant I wasn't picking it
         | up when I tapped my fingers.
         | 
         | And also:
         | 
         | > I talk through writing video scripts to make sure things
         | flow, and I talk with my hands. So as I was writing the video
         | script for this review in the Vision Pro, the system kept
         | catching my hands moving and started scrolling and clicking on
         | things by accident. I cracked up the first time I realized what
         | was happening. But eventually, it meant that I took the Vision
         | Pro off and wrote the rest of the script on my Mac, which only
         | does things when I actually want it to.
        
           | elicash wrote:
           | Brian Tong's review shows use of it with a trackpad, 9:09 in:
           | 
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkPw6ScHyb4&t=549s
           | 
           | This seems, to me, the only possible way to use this as a
           | productivity device and wish more reviews would have tried it
           | to get a better sense of whether it changes things.
           | 
           | Gruber's review also talks about the trackpad a bit:
           | 
           | https://daringfireball.net/2024/01/the_vision_pro
        
         | rootusrootus wrote:
         | > the ability to walk around the room and place different open
         | Safari windows and apps around my physical space as I think and
         | study some new topic
         | 
         | That right there might be worth the price of admission.
        
       | surfingdino wrote:
       | I guess Apple had to do Vision Pro to make investors shut up, but
       | I have a feeling it will be the next Pippin or Lisa. Apple does
       | exceedingly well when there already is a growing mass market and
       | they can offer something "better". Home computers (Apple II), PCs
       | (Macintosh), smartphones (iPhone), tablets (iPad). They don't
       | always succeed, e.g. servers, gaming consoles. There isn't a
       | growing mass market for heavy and expensive VR headsets. And as
       | the review states, their AR may be best in class, but it is still
       | lacking. Ultimately, I don't know what question/need does Apple
       | Vision Pro answer? Anyone has an idea?
        
         | happyopossum wrote:
         | > tablets (iPad)
         | 
         | There effectively wasn't a tablet market before the iPad.
         | 
         | You also forgot 'mp3 player' - which was a market not created
         | by Apple but there wasn't really a "growing mass market" - it
         | was niche at best.
        
           | surfingdino wrote:
           | There was a massive portable analog audio player market
           | before MP3 players came along. So Apple could improve on the
           | attempts to offer a digital audio alternative. And they did.
           | This supports what I wrote about the purpose of Apple Vision
           | Pro. There is none. VR has forever been a solution looking
           | for a problem.
        
         | s3p wrote:
         | >There isn't a growing mass market for heavy and expensive VR
         | headsets.
         | 
         | According to Statista, there is[0]. The market is expected to
         | grow by about 10% annually for the next half decade. Moreover,
         | if this weren't a growing mass market, I don't think FB would
         | have renamed to Meta and gone all-in on VR headsets. They just
         | dropped the Quest 3 which undercut their 3x as expensive Quest
         | Pro. The tech is rapidly improving and the market is definitely
         | growing so I think it's natural that Apple wants to enter it.
         | 
         | [0]https://www.statista.com/outlook/amo/ar-vr/worldwide
        
       | lukev wrote:
       | Interesting that almost all his critiques relate to the concept
       | of a head-mounted VR-passthrough device _itself_ , not the Vision
       | Pro specifically.
        
       | annexrichmond wrote:
       | I haven't used VR/AR in a while, so I don't know if I should have
       | expected this, but those black borders seem pretty large, and I
       | think Apple made it seem the field of vision is much larger than
       | it really is.
       | 
       | The Verge hit the nail on the head with hand gestures. The input
       | device is critical for a new computing platform. This is too
       | awkward to be something you do all day.
       | 
       | I wouldn't be surprised if this is the most returned Apple
       | product.
        
       | mouzogu wrote:
       | > "it's magic, until it's not"
       | 
       | apple can use this on their next keynote.
       | 
       | VR falls apart for me when you realise there is no tactileness or
       | depth to anything. no touch, no smell, no feeling, nothing.
        
         | sentientslug wrote:
         | I suppose haptic feedback provides some sense of touch/feeling,
         | but other than that you're correct. Smell is probably the next
         | in line technology-wise but not sure anyone is asking for that
         | one.
        
         | jsilence wrote:
         | Was recently kajaking in KayakVR in the Arctic scenery. Wife
         | snuck by and opened the window. Felt real.
        
       | crakhamster01 wrote:
       | If I'm an executive at Meta, I'm not sure whether I should be
       | happy or sad reading this review.
       | 
       | By all accounts, Apple is at least 5 years ahead of Meta in terms
       | of hardware. With all of Apple's compute/display tech, and at
       | 8-9x the price point of Quest, it still seems like the Vision Pro
       | falls short of delivering the breakthrough experience needed to
       | make AR/VR mass market.
       | 
       | Not to mention that it still doesn't seem like AVP answers the
       | "killer app" question that Meta has been trying to answer. If the
       | value prop at this point is "a big virtual screen", I guess their
       | work over the next few years will be getting the price point down
       | to a level where consumers buy this over a monitor?
        
       | erickhill wrote:
       | 200 points in 4 hours, yet someone has flagged it so it isn't on
       | the homepage where more can join the conversation? The anti-Apple
       | reflex by some can be so petty, and so annoying.
        
         | apozem wrote:
         | Right? Even if you don't like Apple, a perfectly valid
         | viewpoint, the Vision Pro is a huge deal. It should be on the
         | homepage.
         | 
         | Also, if you don't like Apple... read the review! Nilay Patel
         | has a lot of really good critiques of the headset. He concludes
         | by basically saying he's not sold.
        
       | dang wrote:
       | Related video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdwaWxY11jQ
       | 
       | Related ongoing thread: _Apple Vision Pro review_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39190468
        
       | jug wrote:
       | > Basically, I keep asking if I prefer using a computer _in
       | there_ rather than _out here_. And as interesting as the Vision
       | Pro is, there's a long way to go before it can beat _out here_.
       | 
       | I have to agree with this. We're getting more and more physically
       | lonely as we find ourselves represented by personas on social
       | networks and messaging services. I find the thought of viewing
       | even the real world through a lens an extension of the wrong path
       | we're already onto. Letting technology improve our daily lives
       | and to connect doesn't have to be done this way. It's ironic,
       | because mental health is plummeting in the western world and
       | loneliness has been seen as a major contributing factor. That
       | isn't letting technology help us, but letting technology consume
       | us.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-01-30 23:01 UTC)