[HN Gopher] Meta cancels high-end mixed reality headset after Ap...
___________________________________________________________________
Meta cancels high-end mixed reality headset after Apple Vision Pro
struggles
Author : tosh
Score : 102 points
Date : 2024-08-23 18:00 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.macrumors.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.macrumors.com)
| taylodl wrote:
| The Vision Pro is a solution looking for a problem. This is the
| same problem plaguing Apple Home. It just feels very - so what?
| Tech nerds like it because it's "cool", but everybody else is
| wondering why would I ever need this thing?
|
| Personally, I think they need to be thinking of a more Apple
| Watch type device wearable in normal glasses frames. Something
| more akin to Google Glass, and yes, I'm familiar with the term
| "glasshole." But maybe it was a product too far ahead of it's
| time? Or maybe these are just products we don't need?
| ubercore wrote:
| You mean HomeKit? I'm a big fan, despite the warts. I think
| that's really useful.
| kevinventullo wrote:
| I contend that almost every problem solvable by a wearable can
| be solved "well enough" by a smartphone, to the point where an
| additional device is not worth the trouble for the marginal
| benefit (unless you're a person who likes gadgets).
|
| For exercise specifically I do see the value of a watch form
| factor since people don't want to carry a phone in their
| exercise gear. But, that's pretty niche.
| fullshark wrote:
| Yeah we might end up just circling back to VR over AR and
| prioritizing immersive gaming, the only thing you can't do on
| a smartphone / desktop.
| danans wrote:
| > I contend that almost every problem solvable by a wearable
| can be solved "well enough" by a smartphone, to the point
| where an additional device is not worth the trouble for the
| marginal benefit
|
| I've found glanceable notifications on my smartwatch to be
| really useful.
|
| Dismissing or answering calls without taking out my phone (or
| without my phone at all since the watch has mobile
| connectivity), quickly seeing text messages (especially 2
| factor auth codes).
|
| The remote viewfinder for my camera lets me actually be in
| family photos. And of course exercise tracking (reminders to
| get a few thousand more steps today are helpful). AR/VR
| goggles would be useless for any of those, and make the last
| two worse.
| jemmyw wrote:
| But as the parent poster said, most of those things are
| adequate without the watch. I have a watch but it's a nice
| to have rather than essential.
| nox101 wrote:
| I've found notifications period to be a net negative to my
| life. I have almost all of them off.
|
| > Dismissing or answering calls without taking out my phone
| (or without my phone at all since the watch has mobile
| connectivity), quickly seeing text messages (especially 2
| factor auth codes).
|
| The distraction of even looking breaks me out of the zone.
| So no, don't need a watch for notifications.
| NameError wrote:
| I think something with the "wow" factor of the Vision Pro but
| the form factor of a pair of glasses would be the holy grail of
| AR/VR. I wonder if there are fundamental tradeoffs which would
| make that impossible in the near term? I think it would remain
| very niche indefinitely in that case.
| makestuff wrote:
| I wonder if in the next 5 years there could be a device where
| the compute is your smartphone but it streams to a display on
| your AR/VR glasses. I guess the main issue would be where do
| you put the battery.
| jayd16 wrote:
| The display technology is simply not there at the moment.
| pocketarc wrote:
| > Or maybe these are just products we don't need?
|
| That's exactly it, they're products we don't -need-. If you
| already have a smartphone, that's good enough. This is the same
| problem that plagues the AI assistant devices - it doesn't
| matter what they can do, they won't replace your smartphone.
| Which means you're asking someone to carry (and pay for) a
| smartphone + an extra device. That's a big ask.
|
| It's also the reason why you see these stories of people living
| smartphone-only lives, doing everything on their smartphones
| without needing or even having a desktop/laptop. Smartphones
| are good enough for everything, for a lot of people.
|
| For the record: I -love- the Vision Pro. Tried it out, loved
| it. But I fall into the `Tech nerds like it because it's
| "cool"` part. I recognize that that's not going to be the
| popular opinion. Not now, not ever. There's just not enough
| value in VR/AR to really change societal norms to the point
| that everyone's going to want to wear these devices.
|
| Ultimately: Just because a product is a cool idea, doesn't mean
| it's society-altering. Some products just aren't that valuable.
| sroussey wrote:
| > they're products we don't -need-. If you already have a
| smartphone, that's good enough.
|
| I disagree.
|
| If LinkedIn made AR glasses that told me who the person is
| I'm looking at (that I'm connected to on LinkedIn) and
| why/how we were connected, I'd buy that in a heartbeat.
| ffgjgf1 wrote:
| > If LinkedIn made AR glasses that told me who the person
| is I'm looking
|
| I could only hope that the EU would ban it ASAP if such a
| product existed making it unviable anywhere else. Except
| maybe China and such, should be pretty useful for the CCP
| enforcement agencies.
| brailsafe wrote:
| > If LinkedIn made AR glasses that told me who the person
| is I'm looking at (that I'm connected to on LinkedIn) and
| why/how we were connected, I'd buy that in a heartbeat.
|
| The idea of wearing LinkedIn on my face makes my stomach
| churn, but while that's my personal reaction, is there a
| real world context you've found yourself in regularly
| enough that you've found yourself wanting such a product,
| or is it more like a conference thing? I can't even think
| of a physical space I've been in, ever, where there would
| be even one person that I'm both connected to on LinkedIn
| and don't know why.
| FL33TW00D wrote:
| But there are so many things that can't be done without
| visual & audio context. I can't hold my smartphone camera up
| all day to capture and serialize useful data.
|
| AI just made the value proposition for smartglasses 10x.
| coltonv wrote:
| The Humane AI pin says hello and that the almonds in your
| hand have 16000 calories.
| throwway120385 wrote:
| Why do you need to "capture and serialize useful data?"
| Wouldn't it be more fun to just be present where you're at?
| FL33TW00D wrote:
| Wouldn't it be more fun to smash up your iPhone and be
| present where you're at?
| mckn1ght wrote:
| Disagree, I've been coordinating a lot of things lately-house
| projects, social events, travel, healthcare, work, etc etc-
| and have basically had a phone glued to my hand, which means
| i'm one hand down and constantly cranking my neck. if i could
| go hands free and be able to mind tasks, even menial ones
| like laundry and cooking, while researching things online,
| going through phone menus, messaging with people etc, it
| would really help. i think we are getting really close to
| that capability with chatgpt voice mode, we just need a piece
| of hardware that can bridge the gap.
| brailsafe wrote:
| > If you already have a smartphone, that's good enough.
|
| Sure, but I don't think nearly enough people are sufficiently
| critical of their need for a smartphone either; I tend to
| think of it like cars, we've just allowed ourselves to let
| these devices service so much our day-to-day tasks that they
| seem like necessary appendages. If it goes away, we panic and
| buy another one, never stopping to sit with that absence. If
| my mac had a built-in cellular modem, I'd leave the phone at
| home most days. It's not useless, but it is completely
| incidental to my life in terms of what I actually would
| _need_ it for. Likewise, if people didn 't have cars, they
| wouldn't likely have a life that's only palatable because
| they have one.
| PKop wrote:
| > it doesn't matter what they can do
|
| No it very much matters what they can do, and it's "not
| much". If they could do a lot more any of these products
| would be very popular.
| bsimpson wrote:
| Google Home was kind of magical when it launched, but as its
| reliability has degraded over time, its appeal has worn off. It
| is still nice to be able to ask it to play music or set an
| alarm or whatever without engaging with a screen.
|
| I haven't used a HomePod, but I suspect it's Apple's version of
| that experience.
| jauntywundrkind wrote:
| The Sonos patent wars sucked. Things are somewhat back to ok,
| but man, it's just absurd & sad seeing basic networked av get
| ravaged by lawyers like so.
|
| I'm super glum about audio casting at the moment. It feels
| like less and less speakers have audio casting builtin. For a
| while there was a spare of speakers, some even battery
| powered, but it's turned into a trickle. There's also
| incredibly few options for amplifiers with builtin audio
| casting; what the NexusQ originally did! So frustrating.
|
| This is an ecosystem I am super bought into, and it feels
| like it's fading and there's not a replacement (especially
| with Sonos's recent enshittification seppuku).
| 1propionyl wrote:
| Apple Home (as an integrated Matter/Thread client) is far more
| useful than the Vision Pro.
|
| It's easy to fixate on things like colorful lights, but
| consider instead automations based on how much energy is used
| when. For example, if I have a box fan or a portable AC unit on
| a smart plug, I can automate it running while I'm gone only if
| the temperature gets to a excess (for the benefit of pets,
| fruit on the counter, running computers, etc) or only when
| electricity is cheaper and/or cleaner.
|
| The most useful IoT devices, I think, aren't purpose devices
| that have a microcontroller integrated into them... so much as
| ones whose primary and only purpose bridge digital and physical
| by allowing you to actuate something remotely, be it the flow
| of electrify (smart plug), or physically flipping a switch
| (switchbot type).
| makestuff wrote:
| Yeah I frequently look at the vision pro reviews and think it
| would be cool to try, but I know after about a month I would
| get bored with it. $3500 is alot of money to spend on what is
| essentially the perfect device for watching movies on an
| airplane.
|
| It is an insanely impressive technology; however, like the
| iPadOS I think it is going to take a decade or so to have
| enough functionality to even consider being useful for
| professional tasks. I don't want to have to buy a macbook just
| to stream it to the vision pro to do any coding tasks.
| jordanb wrote:
| > Or maybe these are just products we don't need?
|
| Silicon valley needs a product that will make us spend even
| more time online than our phones, in order to sell more ad
| inventory and make the line go up.
|
| This is pretty much what's driving all of this, especially the
| AR stuff. It's not a solution in search of a problem. The
| problem is they need to sell more ads. The only issue is that
| it's a solution to _their_ problem, not ours.
| FL33TW00D wrote:
| Or, on the other hand, AR could BLOCK all ads that you ever
| see. Sanitise your entire visual input, replace all ads with
| a grey square!
| SoftTalker wrote:
| There are very few situations where I'd want to wear a bulky
| headset for any length of time. Although I don't play video
| games, I could see that people who are into it might find them
| pretty cool.
|
| The TV ads showing people at business meetings all wearing
| headsets and manipulating a shoe protoype in mid-air are just
| ridiculous. Or the one where a guy is trying to assemble a
| furniture kit and wearing a headset. Come on, you'll do better
| with a YouTube video and unobstructed eyes.
| psunavy03 wrote:
| There was a time when you didn't "need" a PC, either, and they
| were seen as just nerd toys and things yuppies used to balance
| their checkbooks, back when "balancing your checkbook" was a
| thing you had to do. This changed with the advent of the Web,
| and held until desktops gave way to smartphones. If you could
| time-travel back to the 80s and 90s, plenty of folks would have
| scoffed that anyone would ever "need" a computer, let alone a
| computer in their pocket. But a lot of that is because "a
| computer" was a bulky beige thing with a CRT monitor, and maybe
| if you were really into it a 2400 baud modem. But then you'd
| have to splurge for a second phone line or pick which device to
| use, the modem or the phone.
|
| So I'd be wary of writing off AR/MR/XR as a dead end, as
| opposed to a technology that still needs more innovation to
| reach the mainstream. Glasses themselves are mainstream, and
| have been for centuries. What's holding AR devices back is the
| ability to miniaturize the necessary holographic technology, as
| well as the batteries and processing power. This will
| eventually be solved, just like an iPhone now has more
| processing power than the supercomputers of decades before.
|
| The problem with VR will always remain the same. You can't
| interact with other people while you have a big thing on your
| face that's designed to supplant your entire field of view,
| which limits desirable use cases.
| tqi wrote:
| > If you could time-travel back to the 80s and 90s, plenty of
| folks would have scoffed that anyone would ever "need" a
| computer, let alone a computer in their pocket.
|
| Is that true? I feel like people have imagined portable
| communication / computing devices forever[1]. People maybe
| couldn't imagine that they could ever be small enough to be
| practical, but the utility of such a device was pretty
| obvious. Similarly, I think "VR" as a concept has obvious
| value and applications. However current implementations fall
| far short of what is necessary to unlock that value for most
| people / scenarios.
|
| [1] https://www.geeksandbeats.com/2016/02/star-trek-
| technology-t...
| jacobgkau wrote:
| I guess you're both right. People knew there'd be reasons
| computers would be nice to have, but scoffed at the idea
| that it would be realistic, or would become an actual
| necessity. People now know that there are ways VR could be
| cool, but many aren't yet convinced it can be done well
| enough/cheap enough to be worth it, nor are they imagining
| it being day-to-day tech yet.
| asadotzler wrote:
| It cannot be done well enough or cheap enough or in a
| form factor people are willing to use at scale. It's a
| dead end until those all change. Decades at least.
| Terr_ wrote:
| > I feel like people have imagined portable communication /
| computing devices forever
|
| Another example, comic-book detective Dick Tracy's
| wristwatch debuted in comic books back in 1946--or 78 years
| ago now. It even got some proof-of-concept work. [0]
|
| [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PpdyQCW7I0c
| tootie wrote:
| I'm pretty convinced that AR and specifically headset AR is
| just a dead end. No amount of sensors or pixels are going to
| make it viable for anything besides some tiny niches. VR is fun
| and has some uses. Everything else just needs a tactile
| keyboard or touchscreen.
| PaulHoule wrote:
| (1) Price matters. If Detroit was selling $25k reasonably sized
| EVs they'd be selling like hotcakes, even if they had limited
| range. There are a few people who will pay $75k+ for a luxury
| EV but they bought a Tesla 10 years ago. If Detroit wanted to
| sell XXXL EV SUVs at crazy high prices they should have done it
| ten years ago. Now it's too late and they have to make the kind
| of cars BYD does or pass legislation to keep BYD out of our
| market.
|
| The Meta Quest consumer has proven they'd rather save a few
| bucks and buy an MQ2 instead of a better MQ3. It's a big
| problem for Meta because they're never going to move towards
| making better games that need an MQ3 to run.
|
| (2) VR > AR Apple's just plain wrong about the focus on AR. The
| Apple Vision Pro has the hardware to provide far superior
| immersive world application story than the MQ3 but the software
| (and maybe controller) story isn't there. Apple acts as if
| there was something morally wrong with VR, like it is putting
| your hands in their toilet with all the conviction they have
| that it is OK to take 30% of all the revenue of the app
| economy. Sorry, visiting VR worlds is half the value you could
| get out of a product and throwing out half the value is like
| doubling the price.
|
| A cheap set of XReal glasses can say "this is just good for
| watching the HDMI output of a game console" but at Apple Vision
| Pro prices product that expensive really has to "do it all"
| with no excuses. People really do subscribe to VR fitness apps,
| they really do have fun playing games like _Asgard 's Wrath 2_
| or games like _Riven_. Have you ever heard anyone say that they
| were engaged with an app for the Vision Pro?
| salzig wrote:
| In regards to VR, I think Valve could really move the hole
| situation by building/providing SteamLink VR on AVP, as they
| do on Meta Quest. Buy any Bluetooth (VR) Controller and enjoy
| games streamed.
|
| And maybe in some future I will be able to stream from Linux
| hosts via SteamLink.
| spacemadness wrote:
| I feel like Apple missed the ZIRP window to release this to a
| larger quantity of tech nerds who weren't continually worried
| about being laid off.
| pzo wrote:
| If they wouldn't be too greedy they could make a device that
| combines: Apple TV, HomePod, Apple Router, Time Machine - that
| would be an ultimate smart home device... but they want to sell
| both Apple TV, HomePod and iCloud for storage.
| pie420 wrote:
| aww man i was looking forward to consuming even more content and
| seeing even more relevant ads in virtual reality!
| OsrsNeedsf2P wrote:
| This is another big problem for VR: The headsets are very
| locked down. Getting something like an Ad Blocker, sideloading
| apps, or general functionality hacking is too cumbersome. You
| burn out and go back to your laptop before long.
| jayd16 wrote:
| Sideloading on the Meta headsets is trivial. Its probably as
| hard to change the bootloader as it is on Android (I mean, it
| IS Android) but I'm not sure what you would need that for.
| zooq_ai wrote:
| Before the bandwagon jumps on "Metaverse is dead", Meta is
| pursuing multiple headsets, devices strategy and trying to find
| the right Features / Price mix.
|
| Quest 2 is the most successful headset and it seem to have the
| perfect balance. Quest 3 although great, probably is slightly
| expensive for the mass market. But there will be a chatGPT moment
| for Metaverse in the next 5 years and Meta's strategy will pay
| dividends.
|
| It's Ray-ban smart glasses is already a huge hit. Like a startup,
| you just have to keep iterating and I'm glad zuck is on it
| GaggiX wrote:
| >But there will be a chatGPT moment for Metaverse in the next 5
| years
|
| Honestly I doubt it.
|
| ChatGPT is a free service that is genuinely helpful. For the
| Metaverse you need to buy the headset and the hardware to run
| it for what? Wasting time in a virtual store instead of just
| using a UI? Using it on a worst version of VRchat?
| cut3 wrote:
| > It's Ray-ban smart glasses is already a huge hit.
|
| Sure, "huge hit". Anecdote but the only time Ive ever seen
| anyone wear one was when I interviewed at meta and one of the
| folks interviewing me was wearing them.
| jowday wrote:
| Also, completely anecdotal, but the only people I've ever
| seen wearing them are Facebook employees.
| throwway120385 wrote:
| I'm getting Google Glass flashbacks.
| FL33TW00D wrote:
| Here's Nat Friedman saying he's a DAU of them:
| https://x.com/natfriedman/status/1796986709751759304
| TaylorAlexander wrote:
| Well now we know at least one person uses them.
| FL33TW00D wrote:
| He's the CEO of EssilorLuxottica saying that they've sold
| more units of the latest version in a few months than the
| previous version did in 2 years.
|
| https://www.reuters.com/technology/artificial-
| intelligence/n...
|
| These things ARE selling, the product is just early.
| TaylorAlexander wrote:
| The CEO of a company selling them says he likes them, and
| they are selling more quickly than a product which
| flopped. I am not particularly swayed by this
| information!
| jayrot wrote:
| Hope you're sitting down, because the next iPhone is
| going to be the Best iPhone Ever.
| barbazoo wrote:
| > DAU
|
| "Daily active user" apparently.
| numpad0 wrote:
| DAU is really a common terminology used in mobile web
| apps and games(aka modern day tobacco and gambling).
| jowday wrote:
| If anything, what I've heard from friends at or adjacent to
| Meta is that they're paring back metaverse ambitions and
| capabilities on their future devices because of the success of
| the Ray-Bans glasses and the relatively middling sales of the
| Quest 3.
|
| The Ray-Bans are also a weird anomaly since they're leaning on
| the Ray-Bans designer pricing to justify a lot of the cost. If
| you're already buying a pair of luxury sunglasses that cost
| close to $200, what's another $100 to get the smart version?
| SoftTalker wrote:
| I'm constantly losing, scratching, or breaking sunglasses. I
| buy them at $30 tops, not $300.
| cdchn wrote:
| Sounds like there is an obvious feature for having FindMy /
| location beacons in your smart sunglasses.
| RockRobotRock wrote:
| In my experience I tend to lose my sunglasses less when
| they're expensive :)
| jacobgkau wrote:
| And I keep my sunglasses in my car's glove compartment to
| use when I'm driving, with the only times I wear them
| being then and when I'm doing physical activity (running,
| sports, etc).
|
| New, less physically risky use cases for sunglasses will
| not appear in my life just because I get a more expensive
| pair of them.
| Eggpants wrote:
| Don't understand the appeal being a spy cam for Facebook, but
| to each their own. The subsidized quest is on borrowed time
| if it keeps losing crazy billions a quarter as it currently
| does.
| hervature wrote:
| > But there will be a chatGPT moment for Metaverse in the next
| 5 years and Meta's strategy will pay dividends.
|
| You mean lose billions within an unclear race that may
| ultimately lead to commodity prices like TVs?
| barbazoo wrote:
| Anecdotal but of the few people that showed me their smart ray
| bans, 0 actually wear them, let alone use the smart
| functionality.
| smm11 wrote:
| Computer headsets. Blockchain. AI.
|
| Really hitting the mark recently.
| zaphod420 wrote:
| I use all three of those things every day... Couldn't imagine
| my life without them now.
| input_sh wrote:
| There are dozens of you, dozens!
| jayrot wrote:
| I'm racking my brain hard to try to imagine how someone
| uses the blockchain everyday
| user9925 wrote:
| Not sure why AI is on that list.
| nozzlegear wrote:
| Maybe "what most companies use AI for" (i.e. glorified data
| collection) or "what most companies try to pass off as useful
| AI" (i.e. what we used to call machine learning, but now that
| ecommerce app can also tell you your latest sales in the form
| of a poem).
| wrsh07 wrote:
| Honestly, this is a shame, because I think a lot of the vision
| pro's flaws are Apple problems.
|
| That said, meta seems to have found a sweet spot in
| price/performance, so maybe in a few generations we will have
| something with the quality of vision pro that is not locked down
| spacemadness wrote:
| I still can't believe they expected people to be excited about
| a floating iPad OS UX as the main experience.
| asadotzler wrote:
| It's not a sweet spot. It's less then 10 million MAU over 5
| years for about $40 billion dollars. How is that a sweet spot.
| If you can't get 10 million MAUs in 5 years for $40 billion
| dollars, you're a failure. Quest is a failure. AVP being an
| even bigger failure doesn't make Quest a success.
| paxys wrote:
| I feel like they have struck gold with the Meta Ray-ban glasses.
| Perfect form factor, looks cool, not obtrusive, has actual
| features that people want to use. That IMO is the future of
| wearables + AR/VR + AI, not a bulky headset.
| jowday wrote:
| Every company knows this, the problem is that you can't fit the
| compute you need for AR/VR + AI into a form factor like this,
| at least not right now.
| cdchn wrote:
| I don't think you'll ever be able to. Maybe not for decades
| for AR/VR. The AI stuff is cool; you can offload that, but
| mostly they'll just be a glorified camera mount and
| headphones for the actual 'glasses.'
| redundantly wrote:
| Your comment won't age well.
| dboreham wrote:
| The same thing happened with previous technologies. Steve Jobs
| didn't "invent the smartphone" -- he just made a smartphone at
| the time when the underlying tech (VLSI, displays, WLAN, WWAN)
| got to the point where it could fit in a pocket and have
| battery life of a day. Similarly he didn't invent the MP3
| player. He made one at the point when Toshiba were able to
| manufacture a very small, low power hard drive that meant you
| could get more than 10 songs on one.
| jayd16 wrote:
| They're working from both ends. VR/Passthrough content on a
| device with a screen and then the ideal form factor on the
| Raybans. The goal is to merge them. Its still TBD on when and
| if that's possible.
| jasonjamerson wrote:
| I would buy this today if it filmed horizontal video.
| asadotzler wrote:
| But the Ray-bans aren't AR or VR. They're just glasses with a
| camera, microphone, and speakers plus connectivity for
| streaming the camera's feed. How is that AR or VR in any way?
| screye wrote:
| A counter point on premium VR headsets. They are teleportation
| devices.
|
| I've used every popular VR device, but one Vision Pro experience
| stood out - 'The Haleakala environment'[1]
|
| It was literally like being transported there. I know because I
| had been in that exact spot a few years before. I have a rich
| visual memory which served as reference, and no exaggeration, it
| felt like was there. I was immediately in tears. It was profound.
|
| The Vision pro's lack of a killer app because development is
| unintuitive, userbase is small, the UX is alien and the hardware
| costs of constructing these experience is still rather high. Give
| it a few years. The hardware is already there. This isn't a
| solution in search of a problem. This is PalmOS, a solution that
| is too early to the market.
|
| I have family with disabilities. Being able to teleport my loved
| ones to places they could never go themselves is worth the $3000.
| If I could record my most profound memories with 'VR recorder', I
| would. My parent missed my graduation because of being continents
| away. You think they wouldn't want to be teleported to it ?
| Wedding photographers cost $4000+, so we can relive those
| memories through shoddy snapshots. Why not be teleported back to
| the most beautiful day ?
|
| Don't knock it till you try it.
|
| [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wK63OSmF1FM
| nox101 wrote:
| I had the opposite experience. Have had nearly every device.
| Rift, Rift S, Quest 2, Quest 3, PSVR, PSVR2, Index. Was not
| impressed at all the the AVP when I tried it. Worse experience
| almost entirely. Hand gestures suck. Stare to select sucks.
| Experiences weren't as good as even Rift for me.
| tchock23 wrote:
| Seriously? Come on. I was one of the first hundred people to
| kickstart the Rift and have owned every major consumer
| headset (except the Index) since. The AVP absolutely destroys
| the Rift in every way.
|
| The only strong argument for Rift/etc. would be for gaming,
| but the AVP isn't being sold as a gaming device. The new beta
| Vision OS2 also signicantly improves hand gestures.
|
| I too was unimpressed with the Apple Store AVP demo, but
| after owning it for a while I absolutely see where it fits in
| (especially once a non-Pro version comes along).
| asadotzler wrote:
| Right, because the AVP is ignoring the only useful
| application for VR today by eschewing precision controllers
| to try to get OFFICE WORKERS to strap on this monstrosity
| of a strap-on facial PC to do PRODUCTIVITY tasks. What a
| joke.
| minkles wrote:
| The missing point here is always: do I want to haul all the
| shit up the mountain to record that or not?
| angelkst wrote:
| At least we will be able to see what celebrities are doing.
| minkles wrote:
| They can bugger off. I had my dinner ruined by some
| Instagram celebrities earlier this year who were flying
| around with a DSLR filming some food and screaming a lot.
| The staff were visibly pissed off but too afraid to tell
| them to go away and stop annoying the customers in case it
| reflected badly on their restaurant. Everyone was held
| ransom.
| snicky wrote:
| The second part of your comment reminded me about that
| South Park episode where Cartman was "reviewing"
| restaurants on Yelp ...
| lostlogin wrote:
| > I have family with disabilities.
|
| This has an interesting history. I'm struggling to find it and
| hope I have it right. John Gruber or maybe Accidental Tech
| Podcast did a segment on an podcast ages ago in relation to
| accessibility settings on the iPhone.
|
| Whoever it was credited a particular Apple engineer who pushed
| hard with accessibility features arguing that at some point,
| everyone has some sort of issue (sight, hearing, movement etc).
|
| I've tried, but can't find the episode, which is a shame as
| this sort of thing is Apple at its best, which does get lost in
| the swamp of depressing decisions they have made in recent
| years.
| amelius wrote:
| > I know because I had been in that exact spot a few years
| before.
|
| Were you wearing some field-of-view limiting device at the
| time?
| numpad0 wrote:
| Isn't it simple why AVP isn't moving? They don't treat anime-
| loli-porn content, chiefly VRChat, as first class citizens, if
| they support those at all. Tons of people have bought and are
| buying Quest 2 and 3 as well as its competitors with _sole_
| intent of using it with VRChat.
|
| Don't you guys all remember that iPhoneOS had YouTube since
| version 1.0, before it even had App Store? Where would you think
| iOS would have been if it didn't? No way it could have been like
| Apple TV+ would have launched years earlier and completely
| obsoleted YouTube. But to me it looks that that is what Apple is
| banking on.
| nox101 wrote:
| $3500 is also a big reason. Why pay that when I can get a
| Quest2 for $199 new for the anime-loli-porn content?
| RockRobotRock wrote:
| That's a slightly unfair characterization. VRC kept me sane
| during quarantine as I suspect it did for a lot of people. It's
| also a nice oasis for people with a lot of social anxiety.
|
| Sure there's unsavory content on there, no denying that. So
| does every platform with user generated content. Have you seen
| Meta Horizon? It's no less than an Orwellian nightmare.
|
| I've seen people form meaningful relationships, and achieve
| amazing things by fostering a real sense of community.
| pzo wrote:
| On top of that AVP is very limited for 3rd party developer -
| much more limited than ARKit on iPhone - cannot access raw
| camera stream, run own CoreML object detection model, cannot
| even scan barcode/qrcode, pose detection. They openning up some
| API in new VisionOS 2.0 but only for enterprise applications.
| Keyframe wrote:
| Raise your hand who was there during the first boom and doom of
| VR/AR headset/glasses in the 90's? A cycle or couple of more and
| we'll be there, maybe.
| talldatethrow wrote:
| I feel like I have spectacular eyes. I can read absurdly small
| texts that shocks other people, great low light, yada yada.
|
| The quest2 made my eyes hurt after just using it for maybe half
| an hour. Tried it a few times over several weeks and decided
| that my vision is worth more than some entertainment.
|
| I'm not sure how they're going to get around that aspect.
| andybak wrote:
| Never had that personally and I regularly code (or at least
| interact with code) in VR
| asadotzler wrote:
| I was there in the 80s when it made the mall arcade circuit and
| again in the 90s when it made the college student union
| circuit. I was there in the 00s when 25,000 devices made the
| Silicon Valley circuit. I was there in the 10s when Oculus
| stirred things up again. I'm here in the 20s when Apple is
| trying. I'll be here in the 30s when the next round hits AND
| FAILS AGAIN.
|
| People care about their faces. They're not going to strap a 1.5
| pound dork-box to their face and head mussing their hair and
| makeup to do what they can already do on their phones or
| laptops. What they cannot do on their phones or laptops (or
| game consoles or tablets or rings or watches or whatever) they
| can do on a $500 Quest.
|
| There's no market for a PC-priced device that straps to your
| face like ski goggles. It's an accessory. Price it at $100 or
| $200 or even $500, but you can't price it at $1000 or $4000
| because it's a toy.
| salzig wrote:
| IMHO: the AVP is a DevKit that is sold to consumers. But more
| polished then the typical DevKit.
|
| But looking into the past and seeing how many people where eager
| to buy GoogleGlas/Oculus Devkits, why shouldn't a brand like
| apple decide to push out a devkit as high price consumer device,
| instead of trying to keep a devkit for a upcoming product a
| secret?
|
| I'm still wondering what direction the product can and will take
| from here on. If you compare it with iphone1 vs iPhones today, it
| could be quite interesting.
| pzo wrote:
| I wish Meta also created something similar to xreal glasses or
| even better: some modular RayBan smart glasses that can be
| transformed into xreal with addon.
| khazhoux wrote:
| I have an AVP. It's the best TV and movie-watching experience
| I've ever had, in some ways even better than Metreon IMAX
| amelius wrote:
| The killer app is pr0n, but Apple won't allow it while Zuck loves
| to watch over your shoulder.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-08-23 23:00 UTC)