Takeaways from the Vision Pro after 6 months(matthewball.co)
matthewball.co
Takeaways from the Vision Pro after 6 months
https://www.matthewball.co/all/applevision2024
16 comments
You need to pair the headset screens with something better than a keyboard. I want to lay in bed with my glasses on, all my screens open, let my brain party and let my body rot like in wall-e.
Meta is working on a wristband that let's you do gestures without a camera seeing your hands. But typing really needs to be tactile I think.
Someone needs to put straps on one of those broken-in-half keyboards so I can sit in a sensory deprivation tank with just Vim and Firefox. And cereal and a piss jug. My idea of heaven.
Meta is working on a wristband that let's you do gestures without a camera seeing your hands. But typing really needs to be tactile I think.
Someone needs to put straps on one of those broken-in-half keyboards so I can sit in a sensory deprivation tank with just Vim and Firefox. And cereal and a piss jug. My idea of heaven.
Yeah that is the dream
There are a bunch of options right now, Xreal and Rokid are the two most common.
They currently only do effective 1080p, but I suspect 4k is around the corner. The devices are rather unremarkable in of themselves. They're essentially just a Sony micro-screen with lens systems.
https://www.sony-semicon.com/en/products/microdisplay/oled.h...
They currently only do effective 1080p, but I suspect 4k is around the corner. The devices are rather unremarkable in of themselves. They're essentially just a Sony micro-screen with lens systems.
https://www.sony-semicon.com/en/products/microdisplay/oled.h...
I would hardly call the Xreals and Rokids as having "crisp resolution".
I could live with having to move my eyes and not my head to see the corners but everything is blurry, especially around the edges, getting much worse on the corners. Even the centre is not so crisp!
These glasses are fine for entertainment, watching videos, playing games. Working on them for a short time in the lack of something better is ok. I would never want to use them for hours of work though.
I could live with having to move my eyes and not my head to see the corners but everything is blurry, especially around the edges, getting much worse on the corners. Even the centre is not so crisp!
These glasses are fine for entertainment, watching videos, playing games. Working on them for a short time in the lack of something better is ok. I would never want to use them for hours of work though.
I think the current iteration is weak for work, but I expect them to become fantastic once they're able to build them with 4k screens.
Unfortunately these two don’t track head movement. An essential feature is being able to position (and size) an arbitrary number of virtual screens in 3D space around you. Otherwise it’s pointless, just a normal screen in front of your eyes.
Yes they do. I own the Xreals.
It’s the story of VR all over again:
- Awesome technology.
- Strong “wow” moment.
- Doesn’t do anything particularly better than the devices you already have.
It’s technology in search of a problem. There are legitimate problems it solves, but they are always elusively niche.
- Awesome technology.
- Strong “wow” moment.
- Doesn’t do anything particularly better than the devices you already have.
It’s technology in search of a problem. There are legitimate problems it solves, but they are always elusively niche.
I would say that mine is just plain better for solo movie watching than any display I've ever had. If the hardware was less cumbersome, I'd give serious thought to never buying a bigger TV again and maybe actively downsizing the one I have.
On a similar note, it's almost but not quite good enough to replace the displays of my working/gaming desk setup, and a version 2 or 3 with a slightly denser display - if it was actually comfortable enough to wear sitting up for more than an hour or two - would be a serious contender to replace several high-end monitors plus my audio setup.
To sum it all up, I think the 'killer app' here is the one that's so simple it seems kind of self-referential - having a display on your face instead of in the world. The UX and the display quality are already 75-100% of the way to filling that role. The basic problem is that the hardware is just too heavy and uncomfortable, so the value prop vanishes because you can't actually use it comfortably for 8-16 hours a day.
On a similar note, it's almost but not quite good enough to replace the displays of my working/gaming desk setup, and a version 2 or 3 with a slightly denser display - if it was actually comfortable enough to wear sitting up for more than an hour or two - would be a serious contender to replace several high-end monitors plus my audio setup.
To sum it all up, I think the 'killer app' here is the one that's so simple it seems kind of self-referential - having a display on your face instead of in the world. The UX and the display quality are already 75-100% of the way to filling that role. The basic problem is that the hardware is just too heavy and uncomfortable, so the value prop vanishes because you can't actually use it comfortably for 8-16 hours a day.
With how much that headset costs I will be buying a home theater that will rip the paint off the walls every time a bass hits, to make my solo movie experience "plain better".
As someone into music prod and audio engineering, I'd implore you to reconsider listening that loud. Also make sure your subwoofer sits 6-12' behind the tweeters!
Not entirely feasible in dense housing/cities, unless you want to be _that_ neighbor.
Sound transmission can be reduced in dense urban housing.
> To sum it all up, I think the 'killer app' here is the one that's so simple it seems kind of self-referential - having a display on your face instead of in the world.
The problem is that, at the end of the day, that's just a feature, not a benefit.
It reminds my of the ongoing push for speech interfaces. Supposedly they are "more natural" but in reality, even when you have a screen, the keyboard is still significantly better (even if it's virtual like on a phone)
The problem is that, at the end of the day, that's just a feature, not a benefit.
It reminds my of the ongoing push for speech interfaces. Supposedly they are "more natural" but in reality, even when you have a screen, the keyboard is still significantly better (even if it's virtual like on a phone)
speech interfaces have gotten amazing in certain contexts, especially now that speech to text is decent. Think times when you can't call the person but need to send them a quick message, eg noisy festival or loud bar while you are moving and aren't able to stop to type.
I know that some people even use voice assistants to do things like set timers, reminders, or initiate calls
I know that some people even use voice assistants to do things like set timers, reminders, or initiate calls
Yeah, "some people" -- my partner for one. But efficacy is low, even with all her practice. And there aren't many such people -- look at what's happening to Amazon's alexa unit.
I do mainly use voice to control my watch, which means in practice it's pretty much a read-only device (which is just fine for me).
> Think times when you can't call the person but need to send them a quick message, eg noisy festival or loud bar.
Aren't these precisely cases where speech doesn't work? Too noisy to hear you; too noisy for you to hear the message.
I do mainly use voice to control my watch, which means in practice it's pretty much a read-only device (which is just fine for me).
> Think times when you can't call the person but need to send them a quick message, eg noisy festival or loud bar.
Aren't these precisely cases where speech doesn't work? Too noisy to hear you; too noisy for you to hear the message.
My #1 use for my Quest 3 is fitness. It provides me a legitimately new and engaging experience.
Can you explain? (I'm curious, as someone who's trying to lose weight.)
Is it the same rhythm & movement games like first-gen VR (slicing fruits, hitting beats, etc.) or is there something new and better these days?
Is it the same rhythm & movement games like first-gen VR (slicing fruits, hitting beats, etc.) or is there something new and better these days?
I prefer shadow boxing experiences. The pacing on this fitness first apps is way better than a generic rhythm game. One big player is Les Mills BodyCombat. This is a 1 time fee, generic music experience. It checks all the boxes and will work fine.
The other big player is Supernatural. This is a monthly sub but has an extensive and growing catalog of boxing workouts with top notch music and impressive environments. If you are going to be serious and put in the time in a vr workout app, the sub price is a good deal.
The other big player is Supernatural. This is a monthly sub but has an extensive and growing catalog of boxing workouts with top notch music and impressive environments. If you are going to be serious and put in the time in a vr workout app, the sub price is a good deal.
+1 for Supernatural. It's a valuable exercise app for VR.
Awesome, thank you for the suggestions! I train kickboxing IRL, so this might be a good way to supplement that at home. Appreciate it :)
> It’s technology in search of a problem
Great way of putting it. It’s the shiny new iThing that nobody asked for. Feels more like a poor excuse to fill their quota of releasing something as significant as the iPhone. Especially considering everything else is just a rehash of iPhone technology.
Great way of putting it. It’s the shiny new iThing that nobody asked for. Feels more like a poor excuse to fill their quota of releasing something as significant as the iPhone. Especially considering everything else is just a rehash of iPhone technology.
AR isn’t a technology in search of a problem. It’s solving a problem, one of them is allowing you to bring 5 screens without hauling 5 screens.
Not really. Even on Apple Vision Pro, the text quality is lower than native pixels and less comfortable to read.
In addition, it turns out that five screens isn’t as useful when there’s only one you, who can do only one thing at a time. It saves a few clicks for most, not much more; and certainly not enough convenience to wear a brick on your head.
If people found multiple screens so useful that it’s worth lugging an extra bag around, external 13” monitors should be bestsellers.
In addition, it turns out that five screens isn’t as useful when there’s only one you, who can do only one thing at a time. It saves a few clicks for most, not much more; and certainly not enough convenience to wear a brick on your head.
If people found multiple screens so useful that it’s worth lugging an extra bag around, external 13” monitors should be bestsellers.
> If people found multiple screens so useful that it’s worth lugging an extra bag around, external 13” monitors should be bestsellers.
While I mostly agree... I partially disagree.
IMO, the problem isn't so much about screens not proving to be helpful - but about good screens. Here in The Netherlands it's very common to find assistants/secretaries having multiple monitors. Heck, (some of?) the staff at the court in The Hague have curved ultrawide monitors. Evidently people recognize the benefits of screen real estate.
The big problem, IMO, is that "standard" portable screens - 99% of which are 16:9 - are simply not tall enough. My 13.5" FW13 screen (3:2 ratio) is about as tall as a 15" 16:9 screen, but is much smaller than a 15" laptop. Windows particularly is excellent/terrible at having a ton of horizontal bars, making usable vertical height terribly little. Why would someone bring another monitor to see more bars?
While I mostly agree... I partially disagree.
IMO, the problem isn't so much about screens not proving to be helpful - but about good screens. Here in The Netherlands it's very common to find assistants/secretaries having multiple monitors. Heck, (some of?) the staff at the court in The Hague have curved ultrawide monitors. Evidently people recognize the benefits of screen real estate.
The big problem, IMO, is that "standard" portable screens - 99% of which are 16:9 - are simply not tall enough. My 13.5" FW13 screen (3:2 ratio) is about as tall as a 15" 16:9 screen, but is much smaller than a 15" laptop. Windows particularly is excellent/terrible at having a ton of horizontal bars, making usable vertical height terribly little. Why would someone bring another monitor to see more bars?
I don’t know what to tell you, but an Apple Vision Pro isn’t going to help you.
Right now, the individual pixels are about the size of a human blood cell(!), and yet, the panels for each eye are not quite 4K.
Not quite 4K, for your entire FOV. As iFixit notes, for a virtual desktop inside that FOV, forget about it looking anything like a good 4K monitor. The Vision Pro can have 3,386 PPI and it’s still no monitor substitute.
https://www.ifixit.com/News/90409/vision-pro-teardown-part-2...
Right now, the individual pixels are about the size of a human blood cell(!), and yet, the panels for each eye are not quite 4K.
Not quite 4K, for your entire FOV. As iFixit notes, for a virtual desktop inside that FOV, forget about it looking anything like a good 4K monitor. The Vision Pro can have 3,386 PPI and it’s still no monitor substitute.
https://www.ifixit.com/News/90409/vision-pro-teardown-part-2...
Just to clarify, I wasn’t commenting so much on the AVP than on small monitors often being shitty in general. It’s probably also a mini rant- my ideal monitor would probably be 1:1 lol.
> curved ultrawide monitors
I have a 32:9 curved ultrawide monitor that I bought for games but has ended up invaluable for work (software dev). It's nigh perfect to divide into 3-4 full-size panes and gives enough space to have 6+ documents open and easily readable simultaneously, in a way I think would take three separate monitors to awkwardly emulate otherwise (and even then you'd lose the benefit of being able to go from 3 to 4 main groupings and back as needed).
The downside is, of course, the thing weighs over 30 pounds and is completely ungainly. Good luck setting it up or moving it without two people.
I have a 32:9 curved ultrawide monitor that I bought for games but has ended up invaluable for work (software dev). It's nigh perfect to divide into 3-4 full-size panes and gives enough space to have 6+ documents open and easily readable simultaneously, in a way I think would take three separate monitors to awkwardly emulate otherwise (and even then you'd lose the benefit of being able to go from 3 to 4 main groupings and back as needed).
The downside is, of course, the thing weighs over 30 pounds and is completely ungainly. Good luck setting it up or moving it without two people.
>In addition, it turns out that five screens isn’t as useful when there’s only one you,
This is nonsense. I have essentially 6 screens on my desk, it it absolutely is very useful. Just because you can't imagine it being useful doesn't mean other people can't or don't take advantage of the extra screen real estate.
That said, I'd never use a VR/AR headset strapped to my face 8 hours a day to replace my 6 high-resolution screens. And I don't need to move my screens from place to place. If I'm not at home, that mean's I'm doing something else that isn't working, and that's a good thing.
This is nonsense. I have essentially 6 screens on my desk, it it absolutely is very useful. Just because you can't imagine it being useful doesn't mean other people can't or don't take advantage of the extra screen real estate.
That said, I'd never use a VR/AR headset strapped to my face 8 hours a day to replace my 6 high-resolution screens. And I don't need to move my screens from place to place. If I'm not at home, that mean's I'm doing something else that isn't working, and that's a good thing.
I'm not saying it isn't useful, but refer to my original post:
> It’s technology in search of a problem. There are legitimate problems it solves, but they are always elusively niche.
6 screens is "elusively niche." It will never be a mass-market attraction that convinces people to strap on a headset.
> It’s technology in search of a problem. There are legitimate problems it solves, but they are always elusively niche.
6 screens is "elusively niche." It will never be a mass-market attraction that convinces people to strap on a headset.
Is it really bringing 5 screens? Most of the apps I've seen tend to be gimicky apps that I wouldn't commit to a single screen. Some of which I wouldn't even have maximized to access via Cmd+Tab. Even if they're all useful, most users typically never use beyond 2-3 screens, and you typically don't look at more than 2 via AR anyways. Instead of virtual desktops, you put apps in spaces where you have to redirect your attention.
What a UI failure to require 5 screens for optimal use.
I think the moment when vr/ar becomes really popular amongst regular people is when the size of the device is the same as a pair of sunglasses. Maybe just slightly more bulky. But till that time its not becoming a successful story. People feel akward wearing the thing. Its uncomfortable and a bit of a gimmick without a real purpose. When the thing could replace my raybands. It looks awesome and contains software that enhances the real world I see with information, it might become something.
I know a Google exec that was put on the Google Glass project early on, when the scope was for it to be a full AR/VR device (not like the very scaled-back thing Google Glass rolled-out as). Even he knew many years ago that it would be impossible within the foreseeable future with the state of available tech or even near future available tech to fit that experience into the size of a pair of sunglasses. That person is now involved with Google's quantum computing efforts which seems like a more solvable problem than fitting a full AR/VR experience into a something close to a standard size pair of sunglasses.
I've got a Quest headset and the thing causes a lot of pressure on my sinuses, making it unwearable for more than about 15 minutes at a time. There are no AR/VR headsets that I'd be willing to strap on to my face for more than about 10 or 15 minutes.
I've got a Quest headset and the thing causes a lot of pressure on my sinuses, making it unwearable for more than about 15 minutes at a time. There are no AR/VR headsets that I'd be willing to strap on to my face for more than about 10 or 15 minutes.
For the Quest, take a look at BOBOVR headstraps (https://www.bobovr.com). They replace the "clamp to your face" style that companies keep idiotically insisting on with a much more comfortable welding mask/hard hat style arrangement where the weight sits around the crown of your head.
There's an anime from 2007 called "Denno Coil" that focuses on AR compute with devices that look like normal glasses and integrated with everyday life. This is the piece of culture I'd compare against, and use as a barometer to compare where this type of interface can reach a critical mass.
That's interesting, Dennou Coil is actually the first thing I thought of (and rewatched) when the Apple Vision Pro was announced. I thought that if it lived up to the hype and I wanted to build something for it, then it would be good to have some sci-fi use cases fresh in my mind.
It seems like there are several high technological barriers to surmount though. I don't expect to see that kind of AR for decades.
It seems like there are several high technological barriers to surmount though. I don't expect to see that kind of AR for decades.
https://www.ray-ban.com/usa/ray-ban-meta-smart-glasses
These are a start.. taking the opposite approach of the Apple device and limiting functionality to what will actually fit in a reasonable form factor right now.
These are a start.. taking the opposite approach of the Apple device and limiting functionality to what will actually fit in a reasonable form factor right now.
Though to avoid any confusion for other readers, these aren't "AR" at all. They're a voice assistant and camera that happens to be attached to the same body part that AR goggles would be.
No visual display included, because that would require a clunkier form factor still.
No visual display included, because that would require a clunkier form factor still.
This is the bottom line and it has been obvious since the first time I ever put a VR headset on my head 10 years ago.
Today's products, even AVP, are way, WAY too big and inconvenient in 50 different little ways to be seriously used for anything.
Today's products, even AVP, are way, WAY too big and inconvenient in 50 different little ways to be seriously used for anything.
[deleted]
Consumers are way more wary of shovelware and getting stuck on the hook with an abandoned product these days.
It's a cool device, but does Apple have the balls to stick with it, and built it into the platform they believe it can be?
My magic 8-ball says: Doubtful
It's a cool device, but does Apple have the balls to stick with it, and built it into the platform they believe it can be?
My magic 8-ball says: Doubtful
Apple is making a 3D movie for the device and coming out with more immersive experiences . Also, they are upgrading the OS with more features .
Which Apple device has Apple abandoned recently?
Which Apple device has Apple abandoned recently?
When was the last time Apple released a totally new product vertical in the same vein as vision pro? 10 years ago? 15?
That would be the Apple Watch most likely.
My magic 8-ball says: Doubtful
Considering how long Apple supports its other products, I'd take a chance on Vision Pro before a Google product. My nine-year-old iPhone 6S got a software update a couple of weeks ago.
Still, before I'd drop that kind of money on a device, I'd like to see an Apple Graveyard website, like the Google Graveyard site, to reassure myself.
Considering how long Apple supports its other products, I'd take a chance on Vision Pro before a Google product. My nine-year-old iPhone 6S got a software update a couple of weeks ago.
Still, before I'd drop that kind of money on a device, I'd like to see an Apple Graveyard website, like the Google Graveyard site, to reassure myself.
I'm less worried about them supporting it with drivers/security, and more with them supporting it with new software. It will take compelling experiences for adoption to take off, and if they don't keep adding experiences....
Google doesn't have any VR products.
It isn't Apple v Google, it's Apple v the ecosystem it needs other people to build for this to take off.
The iPhone took off because the web browser + Youtube app on it had all the content anybody needed at the time.
It isn't Apple v Google, it's Apple v the ecosystem it needs other people to build for this to take off.
The iPhone took off because the web browser + Youtube app on it had all the content anybody needed at the time.
Google does have a vr product. It’s just insanely dated but was pretty cool back then.
https://arvr.google.com/cardboard/
https://arvr.google.com/cardboard/
Listen, I went to magic 8 ball online and that is what it said. Don't blame me.
Disappointed with the article. I was expecting a bit more depth since the title claimed "after 6 months". Especially because the article claims -
The Apple Vision Pro debuted six months ago. I was hesitant to provide any detailed thoughts on the device and its implications until I (and others) had a few months to use it. Here are my eight takeaways on the Apple Vision Pro after six months.
Takeaway #1: Apple Did Not (and Does Not) Want to Manage Expectations for the Vision Pro
-- Talks about keynote and marketing quotes from the day of the launch
-- Revolutionary company believes their product is revolutionary.
Takeaway #2: The Vision Pro Probably Cost Tens of Billions to Develop
-- Company spent truckload of money making a new product
Takeaway #3: The Vision Pro Is Not Really From The Future
-- Talks about what Zuckerberg thinks. This isnt really a "takeaway", nor a "personal experience"
Takeaway #4: EyeSight is An Expensive Feature —and Not Worth It
-- First true experience, and interesting to read
Takeaway #5: The Vision Pro is, Today, Mostly a VR device (Even Though Apple Claims Otherwise)
-- Good. VR headset is being used as a VR headset.
Takeaway #6: The Benefits of Using a Vision Pro Fall Significantly Short of its Drawbacks
-- The product isnt as revolutionary as we thought folks.
Takeaway #7: Developer Adoption Remains a Problem
-- Not really a personal experience, but an observation.
Takeaway #8: Apple has Promptly Reshaped Terminology, Customer Perceptions, and Competitor Plans
-- Has it though?
So many words to say Vision Pro is a disappointing mess. Of the 8 takeaways, only 2 takeaways were made based on experience. Others were either fluff, or repeating news articles or mere observations.
The Apple Vision Pro debuted six months ago. I was hesitant to provide any detailed thoughts on the device and its implications until I (and others) had a few months to use it. Here are my eight takeaways on the Apple Vision Pro after six months.
Takeaway #1: Apple Did Not (and Does Not) Want to Manage Expectations for the Vision Pro
-- Talks about keynote and marketing quotes from the day of the launch
-- Revolutionary company believes their product is revolutionary.
Takeaway #2: The Vision Pro Probably Cost Tens of Billions to Develop
-- Company spent truckload of money making a new product
Takeaway #3: The Vision Pro Is Not Really From The Future
-- Talks about what Zuckerberg thinks. This isnt really a "takeaway", nor a "personal experience"
Takeaway #4: EyeSight is An Expensive Feature —and Not Worth It
-- First true experience, and interesting to read
Takeaway #5: The Vision Pro is, Today, Mostly a VR device (Even Though Apple Claims Otherwise)
-- Good. VR headset is being used as a VR headset.
Takeaway #6: The Benefits of Using a Vision Pro Fall Significantly Short of its Drawbacks
-- The product isnt as revolutionary as we thought folks.
Takeaway #7: Developer Adoption Remains a Problem
-- Not really a personal experience, but an observation.
Takeaway #8: Apple has Promptly Reshaped Terminology, Customer Perceptions, and Competitor Plans
-- Has it though?
So many words to say Vision Pro is a disappointing mess. Of the 8 takeaways, only 2 takeaways were made based on experience. Others were either fluff, or repeating news articles or mere observations.
I got a Quest Pro for free from Meta, and only realized that it was great for watching TV after Vision Pro came out, lol
The article's claim that Apple "priced the device quite reasonably, given the devices it could replace" is dubious at best. Yes, if you buy a high end TV, surround sound system, a computer with multiple displays, and so on, you'd spend more than the Vision Pro costs, but the difference is that all of those devices are individually much better at doing what they do than the Vision Pro is. In fact, one of the devices mentioned (a computer with multiple high-definition displays) is simply not possible to replicate at all on the Vision Pro, as you're limited to one Mac display. Similarly, there's no way that the spatial audio tech built into the headset, as impressive as it is, would actually rival a true multi-speaker home theater setup.
So you're spending $3500, a serious chunk of change to most people, to get a somewhat passable facsimile of the devices the headset replaces. That doesn't seem reasonable to me.
So you're spending $3500, a serious chunk of change to most people, to get a somewhat passable facsimile of the devices the headset replaces. That doesn't seem reasonable to me.
I have a apple Visio pro, I personally think it is a very good device, control by finger is impressive, except it is way too expensive
Not it's biggest problem and before you think it's lack of killer app I would say it's form factor. Get that right and people wearing it more often and naturally the applications will come. Yea Meta onto this now with Rayban tie-up
The difference between a million dollars and a billion dollars is about a billion dollars. The difference between Meta 'smart' sunglasses and an AR headset is an AR headset. How are they 'onto' anything by selling sunglasses with a sneaky phone camera strapped to them? People wear them like sunglasses, because they are?
Curious what the problem what the form factor is? I wear it several hours a day every day and have had no complaints.
(I will say I use the double-loop strap instead of the adjustable head-band you see in the ads all the time. The top loop seems to take enough weight off of your cheeks where it's comfortable enough for all-day wear)
(I will say I use the double-loop strap instead of the adjustable head-band you see in the ads all the time. The top loop seems to take enough weight off of your cheeks where it's comfortable enough for all-day wear)
I'd love to try one, but their price in my country (Australia) is absolutely bonkers. For the same money I could literally buy a perfectly usable secondhand car.
If it was at most, the same cost as a Macbook Pro or ideally a Macbook Air I might think about getting one.
If it was at most, the same cost as a Macbook Pro or ideally a Macbook Air I might think about getting one.
Just by envisioning what AR can do, you can tell that AR is the future. It just needs miniaturizations and cost reductions
It's frustrating because after reading the announcement thread I purchased one after many reputable Hacker News commenters stated this was the next big thing, the 'next iPhone' if you will. Being an early adopter and sharing in the innovations with other members of the community here was something I was really looking forward to, especially as some claimed we would get weekly threads showing what cool things people achieved with the product.
I got a demo in Cupertino, and was blown away. I’m not a sports fan, yet I would get one of these to watch sports games. The realism is mind-blowing. One second you’re behind Team A’s net and watch the oncoming attack. Next second you’re at the other end. It’s better than being there in person.
If they can figure out how to keep up with a running attacking player, that’s the killer app.
[deleted]
I'd like to try one, but I require prism in my lenses (my eyes have a slight cross to them when viewing anything perceived as distant) which is something they currently do not support when ordering lenses.
I'm able to get them for my Quest 2, however.
I'm able to get them for my Quest 2, however.
They can't say it replaces a computer until it does full generic computing. Until then it replaces a monitor maybe.
Come on people, full 3d world where there are pipes representing all the IPC and network connections, random arbitrary switches and buttons you can hook up to automation scripts, unlimited windows you can program how they are created / moved/ and managed and manipulated. for ALL operating systems, not reinventing the damn wheel for every operating system. This will never be in ubiquitous use unless it does universal generic OS interface
Come on people, full 3d world where there are pipes representing all the IPC and network connections, random arbitrary switches and buttons you can hook up to automation scripts, unlimited windows you can program how they are created / moved/ and managed and manipulated. for ALL operating systems, not reinventing the damn wheel for every operating system. This will never be in ubiquitous use unless it does universal generic OS interface
My take has been that there is literally no good software for it, and it's a real shame because the hardware (and low level eye/AR/etc.) fucking rules. Just do whatever you have to to let me run mac os x apps on this thing and I'll use it everyday
edit: also, i'm an apple fanboy and still very disappointed in how poorly apple handled the launch. They spend billions on R&D and wont even throw a few million at some game developers to port to the platform? what the fuck?
edit: also, i'm an apple fanboy and still very disappointed in how poorly apple handled the launch. They spend billions on R&D and wont even throw a few million at some game developers to port to the platform? what the fuck?
The lack of controllers make the Vision Pro poor for games; it can't handle even bog standard VR games like Beat Saber.
The lack of controllers make the Vision Pro poor for games; it can't handle even bog standard VR games like Beat Saber.
I'm pretty sure I remember Apple demonstrating hooking it up to an Xbox controller. I think the only thing more bog standard than that is an Atari 2600 joystick.
I'm pretty sure I remember Apple demonstrating hooking it up to an Xbox controller. I think the only thing more bog standard than that is an Atari 2600 joystick.
I'm with you. I use my Vision Pro several hours every single day but 95% of the time I have my macbook mirrored into it. At the very least I was hopeful VisionOS 2 would let me pull apps into my space without the desktop, but that was not to be.
Yep, mac os x external monitor is the best use case for it (and pretty good tbh) but just so disappointed in Apple for not doing more in terms of SW/OS development for it
> They spend billions on R&D and wont even throw a few million at some game developers to port to the platform? what the fuck?
Porting good games might cost more than a few millions, considering that Metal is a proprietary graphics stack that doesn't have good support (or at all) in AAA engines.
Porting good games might cost more than a few millions, considering that Metal is a proprietary graphics stack that doesn't have good support (or at all) in AAA engines.
sure, but this was a problem they really needed to solve and as far as I can tell they didn't even attempt it
A device with 2-3 hours of battery life cannot provide the 4-8 hours of unsupervised entertainment that parents are most willing to pay dearly for.
I don't think giving a child an even more isolating way to escape reality is going to end up well for the child.
What a bizarre take. The Vision Pro is not designed for, or marketed to, children.
[deleted]
Is the iPad?
4-8 hours is a pretty excessive goal for battery life. A Switch Lite will only do just under 4 hours in the best case with a newish game (e.g. playing Smash and not just NES emulators), and plenty of parents are happy with that.
Of course, that's leaving aside that the AVP is (for good or ill) obviously targeted at working adults and not kids or even college students.
Of course, that's leaving aside that the AVP is (for good or ill) obviously targeted at working adults and not kids or even college students.
[0] https://www.visor.com/