Comment by llm_nerd
3 years ago
It's interesting that HN is completely overloaded right now...with people coming to announce how unimpressed they are and how it isn't for them.
The displays in this device are crazy. I honestly didn't think they'd be able to put together a value proposition, but I think they legitimately did. It's super expensive, and some of the cost of the device seems kind of silly (if I heard correctly, the display on the front is 3d and gives different perspectives based upon the viewers), so obviously they're going to have a lot of room to improve value in subsequent generations.
But it's going to be a hit. HN is going to be swamped with "How I used Vision Pro to..." posts when it comes out.
One element that didn't get a lot of play (if any...though I was distracted with work) -- did they talk about using it as a display for a Mac? I'd love to use a real keyboard mouse interacting with flexible Mac displays.
> It's interesting that HN is completely overloaded right now...with people coming to announce how unimpressed they are and how it isn't for them.
Agreed, polarization is a good sign that this is going to make an impact. Ironically "unimpressed" is communicated by a lack of response, not by a negative one (which more likely indicates people's beliefs are being challenged). The only way this would be a flop is if they shipped something really buggy and worse than the competition (which at the time will be the Meta Quest 3). Otherwise...
> it's going to be a hit. HN is going to be swamped with "How I used Vision Pro to..." posts when it comes out.
100%!
> did they talk about using it as a display for a Mac? I'd love to use a real keyboard mouse interacting with flexible Mac displays.
Looks like it's going to be a standalone device that you can pair with a magic keyboard and trackpad. Considering it ships with an M2 I expect iPad/Air level performance (assuming the spatial stuff is solely handled by R1). I can totally see myself using it as "the one device" (pun intended) and get rid of my Macbook, assuming there's an easy way to share content with someone who's next to me, e.g. on my iPhone.
I can't wait for it to be publicly available.
> Agreed, polarization is a good sign that this is going to make an impact.
Virtually every new Apple product is going to generate this sort of response, and while many Apple products have had a large impact, just as many haven't, I don't know how much predictive strength "this new Apple product generated a lot of conversation on HN" has.
Exactly. Especially in this case, where we knew this was coming for months. It's generating a response because people have been waiting to talk about it since the rumors started.
For myself, my "unimpressed" reaction is because the experience they're selling is the same as what Meta has been trying and failing to sell for years now. It's definitely typical Apple—wait for the tech to mature and execute better than anyone else—but I'm unconvinced there's an actual need being filled here.
The iPhone took a market that had already taken off in business—PDAs—and blew the roof of of it by revolutionizing the tech. The VR-for-productivity market is practically non-existent, and even in gaming it's still very niche. Neither are anywhere near where PDAs and Blackberries were when the iPhone made it big.
I'm just not convinced the "execute better" strategy will work when there is no proven market.
The YouTube stream I watched mentioned it can detect when you are looking at your Mac and offer the screen up in the googles with full sizing and layout control. Your Mac appears just as another app and you can multitask as ususal.
Yup -- I was a bit disappointed that it can only simulate a single monitor, but I guess since it's working wirelessly there's bandwidth limitations.
Ideally I'd love it if I could simulate a 3 monitor workstation. Maybe for the next iteration.
15 replies →
I don't think it can simulate any app. Likely, it is a feature akin Continuity, and you have to have corresponding app installed on your Vision Pro to pick it up from Mac and continue working on a headset.
2 replies →
Yeah I had missed that. It's such a neat feature!
I don't get this. There is no live demo so far, only a pre-rendered ad. So you have no idea what the actual experience will be like (in an industry famed for over-promising and under-delivering; remember Magic Leap?). The use-cases are also dubious: you can... watch TV alone? Scroll through photos alone? Take pictures? Only the virtual desktop thing was something that I thought "that's useful".
I'm unimpressed so far, maybe that will change maybe it won't. But right now I don't see anything worth being impressed by.
They gave 30 min demos to WWDC attendees the following day.
I'm excited mainly for two reasons: fantastic eye and hand tracking (according to reviewers such as MKBHD) and replicating my office/entertainment setup wherever I am (except for shared experiences, that is).
I think Apple tried to nail the seamlessness of the experience, rather than give you some amazing use case nobody ever thought of. That will be a good challenge for developers.
>Agreed, polarization is a good sign that this is going to make an impact. Ironically "unimpressed" is communicated by a lack of response, not by a negative one (which more likely indicates people's beliefs are being challenged).
To quote Elie Wiesel: "The opposite of love isn't hate, it's indifference." It's an extremely good barometer.
It's interesting that every single top HN thread is mostly unanimous praise for this device (which presumably no one has yet seen or used), while also painting themselves as the minority opinion.
Techcrunch concluded "The price reveal turned any ‘would buy’ in the room into a ‘definitely not’ without hesitation."
Anyways, bookmark the threads of folks calling an Apple product dead on arrival for a revisit in a few years.
The ipod, the iphone, the watch, the airpods... they've had a pretty good record and almost all these have had harsh criticism out the gate (while then going on to absolutely PRINT money for apple).
Apple is sitting on lots of cash and investment with operating cash flow of something like another $100B a year? Why aren't they allowed to take some risks on products like this. Facebook certainly has burnt billions in a similar space.
I remember hardly any significant negative criticism of the iphone, watch, or airpods.
Someone below brought up "when the iphone first came out it was 2G, was only on AT&T" - well, yeah, and those were very valid initial shortcomings that Apple pretty quickly rectified.
With the Vision Pro, I see very few comments putting down the actual technological achievements here. Comments seem to be pretty universal in thinking this is the best VR device there is. But the valid question is people are still having a difficult time imagining real, extended use cases where it doesn't feel like a novelty.
Personally, I think it's great Apple took a swing at this. I wouldn't be willing to bet one way or the other on its success, I think there are lots of unknowns, but I don't really have anything but high praise for the folks that built this.
18 replies →
I've never spent more than $400 for a smartphone, always bought second hand Android phones. My income went up in the last couple of years and a few months ago my phone broke. I bought a $900 iPhone.
If it's good people will buy it. I will buy it. No doubt about that.
5 replies →
People paid $550 for a pair of headphones. They'll buy this if it's good
37 replies →
Whether or not it's the right device, it's definitely being introduced to the wrong economy.
13 replies →
It is the first version of the Vision Pro and I would expect it to fail due to its price.
The second or third version maybe something worthy of the consumer having a look at. This is directly competing against the Quest Pro, and the Vision Pro is still at prices like the HoloLens.
Apple will probably announce a 'Lite' version which will directly compete against Meta's cheaper Quest VR headsets.
> Facebook certainly has burnt billions in a similar space.
And their Quest VR headsets already outsold Xbox Series X/S. [0]
[0] https://www.thevirtualreport.biz/data-and-research/65297/que...
1 reply →
> The ipod, the iphone, the watch, the airpods... they've had a pretty good record and almost all these have had harsh criticism out the gate (while then going on to absolutely PRINT money for apple).
Looks like you and me have a completely different memory on this? iPod, iPhone were almost unanimously praised at the moment of announcement, thanks to Steve's magic. AirPod also received generally positive reactions. Apple Watch had a genuine issue on its product positioning and its success came after fixing that issue.
3 replies →
Not claiming it's a minority opinion, but early on there were multiple submissions that were dominated by people rushing to proclaim that it was DoA. One claimed it was the end of Apple. There is a huge disparity between people who click an arrow and people who comment.
And you are absolutely correct that the enthused haven't used this device, or even heard from a non-Apple employee that tried a beta. I am hugely concerned about long term comfort, particularly in the eye fatigue realm, for instance, and will be watching to see what the sentiment around that is.
If it were many other companies I would honestly be much more skeptical about it, but I mean Apple has a pretty good track record of actually delivering products that meet or exceed their promises. And they really promised the moon with this reveal.
I completely agree with you about the tiredness of the eye or fatigueness of the eye. It's really hard to imagine someone wearing this kind of device for a very long time without feeling any pain. I'm not sure exactly the reason why this pain came from. But I think the question we face is going to be maybe the next big thing for humans, which is going to directly connect all those sensors directly connected to our central brain without using the eye. But that's kind of a science fiction thing. I'm not sure I'm going to have a chance to experience those things.
1 reply →
I see the pattern is that C is complained by most of people. And there is another type of programming that is that, which people never talk about. So just by talking about, regardless it's positive or negative, there is a tension in there and it's expectation, it's our will to kind of devices or this technology came into being. So eventually it will become part of our life and I hope that day comes sooner and this company will not disappoint us.
There's a famous macrumors forum post of people raging against the iPod, saying it will be a massive failure. We've seen the same reaction from every Apple hardware announcement since.
The original post in 2001 is still live. Read it for a laugh: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/apples-new-thing-ipod.5...
TBF, there's an equal amount of "I haven't touched the product, nor even read reviews of people handling it in their hands, but I'm totally gonna buy this only based on the marketing material"
I kinda loved how Accidental Tech Podcast's host joke about not having even heard of the product yet but they'll probably buy it for personal use either way.
The pendulum has fully swinged the other way for the a sizeable chunk of people I think.
Apple also released https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Newton
Which was a great idea and a very innovative product literally ahead of it’s time by 15 years.
I bought a used newton from the lead engineer on the newton. I loved the device and used it regularly until my then girlfriend stepped on it and broke the display. Needless to say that relationship wasn’t long after that ;-)
I later had a palm. It was garbage compared to the newton even if it was 1/8 the size. I’m glad to see the newton essentially return as the iPhone/iPad.
> There's a famous macrumors forum post of people raging against the iPod,
Back in the day, it was the Slashdot take: "No wifi. Less space than a Nomad. Lame."
https://slashdot.org/story/01/10/23/1816257/apple-releases-i...
> Read it for a laugh
Steve Ballmer also laughed so much of the iPhone being without a keyboard :) , It turned out to be one of the most innovative products in history.
I'll admit to being quite skeptical of the iPad and was wrong about that.
That said, despite owning a Quest 2 and eagerly awaiting the Quest 3 release, nothing in this headset particularly appeals to me. (Am mainly into rhythm games and am guessing those wouldn't be nearly as fun without the haptics in into other headsets' controllers which this seems to lack).
That was actually quite funny thank you. Reminds me of my friend in highschool who was a Zune fanboy.
> NO!
> Great just what the world needs, another freaking MP3 player. Go Steve! Where's the Newton?!
Personalities have not changed.
> But it's going to be a hit. HN is going to be swamped with "How I used Vision Pro to..." posts when it comes out.
I'm not going to predict whether or not this is going to be a hit, I just don't know.
However, remember when Google Glass came out there were tons of these "how I use" posts and I remember people even changing their LinkedIn profile pictures to be with Google Glass. And, we all know how that turned out.
So, early posts by self-styled influencers or wannabe's are in no way predictor of success, or failure, of a product.
I wonder how intentional Apple was about picking a name that can’t be turned into a schoolyard insult like “Glasshole”?
If you ignore the “vision”, you can just call them A(pple) Hole Pros.
You can pretty easily make fun of apple products. We just don’t do that because their products are good.
The moment a bad iPhone comes out someone will start calling it an iSore.
Pission
Most Google hardware products turn out similarly bad
> The displays in this device are crazy.
I'm actually curious about this, and how the displays will actually feel. The ads/keynote all talked about how they're "more than 4k for each eye", which sounds like a lot when you're talking about TVs or monitors, but... stops sounding quite as impressive when you realize you're talking about IMAX-sized screens (which is the main "wow" draw for watching movies in VR), or when talking about augmenting reality.
Yeah, 4K per eye stops being impressive when it's five inches from your retina and you're trying to read fine text. Pimax has had a 4K/eye device for years already: it's nice but still nowhere near good enough to do things like replace your computer monitor. They're planning to ship a 6K/eye device next year, which will probably still not be enough. The real world has a very high pixel density!
They have eye focus tracking for sure in this, so maybe they can render in adaptive resolution mode je only highest rest in center of vision? Who knows?
Adaptive resolution rendering doesn't add more pixels to the display -- if you want high resolution for the spot the user is currently looking at, you need that resolution across the entire display.
1 reply →
They already listed foveated rendering in the features (which I believe is what you're describing). It use the graphics performance budget efficiently, but it can't physically add more pixels.
It's really cool technology anyway, and according to PSVR2 reviews, it seems to work well.
Hopefully focal adjustment tracking too. I've got a feeling it's just for the selection UI.
I think resolution will be important the smaller (or further away) the movie you’re watching is. And for things like text in apps.
If you’re watching an IMAX-size screen in AR, the resolution of the content will be the main factor, I think, rather than the density of the goggle displays.
Each pixel is 7.5 microns. Assuming RGB, that's 22.5 microns. Thats at the maximum limits of detail an eye can see.
I have 2 4k screens in front of me right now. I can close one eye, and without moving my head make out the entirety of both screens. They cover most of the non-peripheral horizontal field of view, but you could easily fit in another 4k screen on top of each vertically. I can make out individual pixels (when there is a gradient, like with a small font) on the screens. Higher resolution screens of the same size at the same distance would let me read slightly smaller fonts.
That is, at a resolution in which pixels are still perceptible, I can make out more than 33,177,600 pixels (4 4k screens, equivalently 1 8k screen) per eye. This device has less than that. Less than half that per eye. It's not "at the maximum limits of detail an eye can see" even assuming they just have no wasted pixels in your peripheral vision.
7.5 microns means nothing without knowing what lenses it goes through.
That said, I think it might be enough pixels to be useful for reading text. Unlike the index I own, where that is just unpleasant.
That's not enough information. It's behind a lens that spreads it across your entire field of view.
4 replies →
This is an over confident audience very sure that their experiences and perspective is representative of the mainstream. See the rsync vs. Dropbox meme.
The execution is all that matters here not any speculative flaws. If it’s a delightful, polished, responsive experience for the stock applications, other use cases will come. I don’t want to bet against Apple achieving that bar. They’ve done it over and over again before.
> If it’s a delightful, polished, responsive experience for the stock applications
IMHO this is a perfect description for the Apple TV.
I’m still amazed Dropbox is making money. Doesn’t windows come with a Dropbox clone built in?
Every. Single. Apple product launch post. “Meh”, “I can’t see the use case for this”, “it’s all already been done before”. Like clockwork. Then they’ll sell a million of these, and by v3 it’ll be much smaller / better / cheaper, and gain mass adoption. It’s like people have an “apple event reaction” algorithm going, and it never changes.
It sure can be used as a display for a Mac. Just stand in front of a Mac, and the screen will go dark and the windows will be moved to your Vision Pro.
Here's the point in the Keynote showing it: https://www.youtube.com/live/GYkq9Rgoj8E?feature=share&t=552...
I'm wondering if a similar trick will be used with iPhones and Apple Watches that are within view. Will they bother with the camera reading the screen and then rendering to the visor, or will they just seamlessly talk to the phone and watch to get the screen imagery. I'm assuming that would improve the quality.
There was one moment in the presentation when a guy at the office opened his Macbook Pro and the screen popped up above it much larger.
He also used a keyboard and trackpad.
I agree 4k in each eye sounds insane. But eye strain that's going to be the big determinant. I initially thought it was transparent OLED at the start but to my disappointment it's just screens. Perhaps they've got the focal adjustment thing Magic Leap was trying to do right.
4K is not much if you consider that these pixels have to cover the entire field of view, not just a relatively small screen.
It’s certainly a generational jump from the Quest series at least. Of course the price is completely ridiculous
The best an eye can discern is roughly 20 microns, but generally far higher at 100 microns. They said 7.5 microns per pixel (X3 for RGB is 22.5 so roughly there without space).
Assuming they're square. Roughly calculating (23 million pixels between the two with no space between 7.5 microns,) that's 25.432mm^2. they've said they're the size of postage stamps. This ties in.
I think it's near safe to assume there's no real gap between pixels and thus indiscernible. The lag might be a thing and focus, but this might actually not be a problem.
8 replies →
There’s Sightful’s $2000 device you can buy right now https://www.sightful.com/ I’ve used an early demo of this and was very impressed. After the demo I had the strong feeling Apple is going to build something similar and I was right
4 Million Pixels is so terrible for an AR/VR headset. 23 million pixels will be indistinguishable from reality for all intents and purposes.
The human eye has an approximate pixel resolution of 120 million pixels per eye. On top of that, our brain constantly processes and integrates the output of our eyes. This creates an even higher perceived pixel resolution of about 480 million pixels per eye. Some estimates are even higher.
I'm not saying Apple created a bad product...but I wouldn't expect a mere 23 million pixels to be indistinguishable from reality.
2 replies →
I think it’ll be 5 generations before it’s a real product. I’d note the first iPhone was kinda garbage as was the first iPod. For the iPhone the App Store was empty and the apps that existed for years were pretty rudimentary. It couldn’t hold a phone call open. It was clunky and comparatively terrible hardware. Apple has the ability to invest and innovate on an idea for decades incorporating advances, fostering investment, and building an ecosystem.
The jaded take to my ears sounds a lot like the LLM / generative AI take - looking at the first real generation and claiming it’s an evolutionary dead end of hype monsterism. I feel sad that people that likely got into this field as a dreamer of what can be are stuck seeing what simply is.
Will this usher in rainbows end within the next 20 years? Maybe. Maybe not. But I’m always happy to see there are still nerds that can dream of what can be, even if they’re often drowned out by the chorus of what today isn’t.
I do see your point and it is true that every product is going to be more mature, more complete for the later publication. But things of a first generation product like this is going to be a huge risk for a lot of people. But the things I want to talk to myself is probably if I can pick up one thing or maybe one or two things that this device can solve that probably doesn't have a good solution in the market, then just go for it. And if it is affordable, then go definitely do it. The upside of doing this is you cannot change your workflow in the early stages. So if you consider the time you put into that product in this new workflow, the things or the productivity you gain from this early experiment is going to be more productive. But gain, it's a risk.
Yeah I think first generations of apple products are for the curious, the rich, and the engineer seeking to build the next generation of apps on their new platform. I never look at them as “a good deal,” or a mature product. I think that’s foolish for any 1.0 of anything. Generally 3.0 is where maturity begins, and 5.0 is where incrementalism starts.
Wow a reference to Rainbow’s End! IIRC that novel was set around 2026. I don’t think we’ll have Vinge-style AR/VR contact lenses for many years to come. Certainly not by RE’s fictional timetable… :(
It’s ok. Error bands on SF are wide and shifted right. Mostly because jaded skeptics that cling to the constraints of the present kill the dreams until someone has the wherewithal to ride out the skeptics. Say what you will about Musk, apple, etc - they set absurd goals and fail half way, but that half way is the stuff of science fiction.
The cost is prohibitive, but I can't think of anyone who I trust more to introduce a cutting edge consumer device.
I wont be a user, but I hope they succeed.
The fact this thing has an M2 makes me surprised Apple didn't try to sell it as a Mac.
I feel like at the price point, this device makes much more sense as the kind of thing that could replace a laptop/desktop than as a companion to it.
If you can check connect a magic keyboard/mouse to it, this thing could conceivably be a MBA and badass multi-monitor setup rolled into one. And to me, that's really the only way this form factor makes sense.
It is a viable first entry as an AR computer. Does it need to be anything more than that?
In 10 years with GenAI video creation and GenAI NPCs it could be bonkers cool.
> It is a viable first entry as an AR computer. Does it need to be anything more than that?
It needs to do what HoloLens and Google Glass didn't.
Sell well enough to attract developers and improve manufacturing economies of scale.
For what it's worth, I think Apple has a chance here - there were smartphones before the iphone, but apple made the first one good enough to take off. Perhaps this will be the same?
Don't think we'll take 10 years. GenAI NPCs are like 1-2 years. GenAI video is about 3-5 years max.
A little scary bringing a kid into this world. I've seen how my nephews and nieces get completely absorbed by screens.
I too have trouble thinking this is truly “cool” - it’s basically a self-contained Plato’s Cave. I feel like the “cool” of the next decade will be distinctly luddite-inflected, but who knows.
Until all of the cool stuff is hidden behind paywalls.
Yes, the presentation shows it used as a display for a Mac. Incidentally, you can also do this with the cheaper Quest Pro headset (or any headset in the Quest line, so $300-$1000 price range - but you don't get as many pixels). There are a few options for the software, VRDesktop (https://www.vrdesktop.net) being one.
> the presentation shows it used as a display for a Mac. Incidentally, you can also do this with the cheaper Quest Pro headset
You may be technically be able to do it on Quest, but it's mostly useless because text at non-massive sizes is completely illegible on current headsets.
> But it's going to be a hit.
Well, if nothing else, the influencer / celeb culture will make it so. Apple, unlike other tech companies, almost has a monopolistic grip over it.
I mean, they sold AirPods for the most ridiculous price and yet they beat sales numbers of just about everyone in the audio industry.
This, still?
Do people like you think that people like me buy AirPods because influencers do?
Might it just be that they’re astonishingly good wireless headphones? I mean is that possible in your mind?
The product may be good, but I am talking about its price, and how it sold like hot cakes anyway. Consumer goods don't sell as much without marketing, which influencers / celebs provide for free to Apple.
I'm predicting right now that it's going to have performance problems with that display. While they haven't released exact resolution numbers per eye, 23M would give it a slightly higher resolution than the HTC Vive Pro 2, a headset which requires a GPU. While mobile chips have really impressive CPU performance, I don't think they're nearly as competitive in the graphics space.
Knowing Apple, they're also not going to support anything else besides Apple Hardware so you won't be able to hook it up to an actual gaming rig like you can with the Meta Quest 2. While this isn't a big deal for a lot of people, Apple is taking a huge risk releasing a very premium product like this without supporting the largest established VR market (gamers).
> Apple is taking a huge risk releasing a very premium product like this without supporting the largest established VR market (gamers).
This reads like "Apple is taking a huge risk releasing a new smartphone without supporting the largest established market (BlackBerry device users).
The VR gaming market is microscopic compared to what Apple is likely aiming for here. They do not give a single flying fuck about this "established market", nor have they for any other market they've entered. The entire Apple ethos is to completely change the narrative for whatever product category they enter. They did this for phones, for bluetooth audio, for watches, and—whether or not they're ultimately successful—you can bet your ass this is their intent for wearable headsets.
What's the eventual end goal for these devices? I'm not sure yet, but I'm certain it will become clearer in the coming years. My expectation is they anticipate this will come to replace fixed displays for a huge number of office workers. Maybe not with this first revision, but by gen 3 that's my bet for the market of this device. If you assume it get lighter and comfortable, higher res, and better battery life over the next few iterations it's clearly something that could just be your work machine with a paired bluetooth keyboard.
VR headsets are very personal from a cleanliness perspective. I would never share one. There's a reason why the padding around the visor is removable and washable.
2 replies →
To chime in on the last part, I imagine that it could be beneficial for Apple’s offices alone; every employee is able to create their preferred workspace while using less physical space; only really needing a desk, keyboard, mouse, power & internet source and a seat
1 reply →
> nor have they for any other market they've entered
They don't care about iOS games? Apple Arcade?
> The VR gaming market is microscopic compared to what Apple is likely aiming for here. They do not give a single flying fuck about this "established market", nor have they for any other market they've entered. The entire Apple ethos is to completely change the narrative for whatever product category they enter. They did this for phones, for bluetooth audio, for watches, and—whether or not they're ultimately successful—you can bet your ass this is their intent for wearable headsets.
Apple is also the company which released https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Newton back in the day… They turned out to be right at the end but still had to renter the market entirely from scratch after 10 years. So far Apple has been great in “perfecting” products that already exist by doing the right thing at the right time.
They weren’t the first or the second to release a smartphone, smart watch, tablet, BT earphones etc. all of those had established markets and somewhat clear use cases Apple “just” streamlined and turned them into something that normal people would actually want to use. It’s seems a bit to early to do that for VR yet. So in a certain way they are in somewhat uncharted territory.
2 replies →
> Apple is taking a huge risk
Let's contextualise this ... they have so much money in the bank there is literally no way to spend it. This could completely flunk and have zero impact on them. There's no risk here for Apple. Perhaps the question is why they aren't being more adventurous, or pushing this harder by subsidising the gen 1 device to get it off the ground.
The risk is brand dilution. Apple has a reputation for not launching products that flop
Yeah it's clear their focus isn't games. There's no way the GPU can push those pixels with the graphical fidelity expected by gamers. But I'm sure it will have no problem pushing the raw pixels as long as you stick to mostly graphical compositing-level graphics like all the productivity/lifestyle stuff they were showing in the demo.
Roughly double the amount of pixels = "slightly higher resolution"?
Sqrt(2) = 1.4 so there are 40% more pixels per inch. It’s not a different order of magnitude.
2 replies →
Performance wise, in the Platform State of the Union, they mentioned that they will use eye tracking to choose which parts of the "screen" to render at high resolution. That should help a bit.
First off, mobile chips are actually quite good at high resolutions (but usually lack bandwidth). But this is an M2. That's not a mobile chip.
100 games at launch isn’t aiming for gamers? That’s at least decent compared to the quest.
100 games on Apple Arcade*
How many of these will be windowed iOS apps? I assume most of them.
It doesn't matter what games it has if it doesn't have _my_ games.
That's really what sets casual gaming devices (Apple TV, iPhone, iPad, etc) apart from actual gaming devices.
Yeah, although the part about it just had someone use it to extend the native monitor.. I'd be curious how deep that integration went... more than a large virtual monitor, to have you able to spawn multiple/infinite windows of any of the mac apps on it, that'd be killer!
Probably a v2 feature that isn’t ready yet. But I’d be surprised if they weren’t working on it after the widget stuff on Mac desktop.
> did they talk about using it as a display for a Mac
Yeah, you look at the screen through the headset and then pinch to move it around and grow/shrink it.
Early to tell. No point predicting who will say what, when people will say everything on the scale eventually.
People have different needs, and use cases and are affected by the way things become implemented. The details of usability, impossible to tell just now.
Probably one thing is easy to tell, is that chatting with a helmet on while moving around in the room is not going to work. : ) That's just stupid marketing crap.
I am looking forward its feasibility for external virtual screens of a Mac - or even a PC! -, with physical keyboard and mouse, that sounds attractive. But with patience, let's see how it works first in long run for the masses. And if it gets to a more realistic price tag sometime.
> if I heard correctly, the display on the front is 3d and gives different perspectives based upon the viewers
This effect probably relies on a lenticular lens overlaid on an OLED screen. This was similar to the method used by the Nintendo 3DS to create a stereoscopic image without glasses.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenticular_printing
Any word on how many interlocutors standing opposite you this can support?
I'm reminded of the Hallway Projection Scene in Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol, which works beautifully until more than one person looks at it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtA0JS1lBaY
The guy on the commercial was using a real keyboard so I imagine this can be used relatively standalone, with the caveat that it uses iPad apps.
Taking a positive sign because now the consumers expectations are high and if they not deliver what they promised here then they're gonna have a huge trouble so as a consumer it would be nice if the consumer can provide some our expectations to say how to show our interest and kind of motivate them to build a better product.
> did they talk about using it as a display for a Mac?
Yes, in the keynote at 1:32:02. It discusses how looking at your computer then turns the Vision Pro into a display.
https://www.youtube.com/live/GYkq9Rgoj8E?feature=share
Yes, they showcased that you just have to take a look at a Mac screen and the glasses become the display.
They did share that it can be used as a display for your mac. It sounded like you're limited to 1 screen (i'm guessing because of bandwidth limitations; also guessing that upgraded macbooks may have the necessary hardware to stream more pixels)
> did they talk about using it as a display for a Mac?
Actually the did:
> bring the powerful capabilities of their Mac into Vision Pro wirelessly, creating an enormous, private, and portable 4K display with incredibly crisp text
I wonder what the latency would be like though.
They mentioned the device can detect when you are using your Mac and show the desktop as an app in your headset. So yes that will be possible as well as just using normal bluetooth mice and keyboards.
They explicitly said in the keynote, that you can bring up the screen of your Mac as a virtual display. So it looks like you can use this to work with your Mac.
23M for both eyes doesn't seem that far off from Meta Quest 2 Pro at 9.3M (2,160 x 2,160 x 2).
And Meta Quest 2 Pro is one year old at $999.
> 23M for both eyes doesn't seem that far off from [...] 9.3M
It's almost 2.5x the pixels [edit: was ~~resolution~~ which is incorrect]. How is that "not far off"? It's more pixels per eye than the MQ2P has for both!
2.5x the pixels is more like 1.5x the resolution in terms of the smallest features that can be seen - remmber that displays are two-dimensional and in order to halve the width of the smallest discernable detail like say a line you need to double the pixels in both directions for a total of four times as many pixels. On the other hand, it is going to be close to 2.5x the rendering cost.
1 reply →
MQ2P has super blurry texts though. It's hard to take think 50-60% bump up the resolution will be enough.
you can (over simplified, tech people yell at me or whatever, but) display your macbook screen inside Apple Vision as a screen/monitor/window, whatever it's called same way you would an app.
The device seems amazing, it's just... not really Apple, that's all.
Hmmm, I don't get that. Apple builds personal computers. That has been there mission from day one. This is easily the most personal computer they have ever created. I don't see how it could be more Apple.
It looks neat.
> did they talk about using it as a display for a Mac?
Yes ! In 4k
[dead]