The problem is, that you are still going to look weird walking around with these. I am also not sure if that is practical (ie the battery/power situation).
Airpods look idiotic - like the worst of the 90's/00's era "bluetooth headset bro" stereotype, only on BOTH ears now.
But they're considered fashion-forward. Humans and society vote with their feet.
"FaceTime on Vision Pro can display life-sized individuals over video calls. There is an optimized experience for viewing photos and videos."
How are they going to prevent going to a website and streaming video? Or having a (private?) session with a model on some messaging/streaming app?
Does someone really sit on their couch, put on a massive headset, and scroll through their vacation photos? Does someone watch an entire 2+ hour movie with a sweaty headset strapped to them (and plugged in to a socket) instead of on a couch with their family/friends? Would I want to be in a group call with generated avatars of people rather than their actual faces? If the kids are having a fun moment would I want to run inside, grab my headset, strap it on and record a video, or just go join them? Would I rather work on this all day instead of a laptop?
And the one thing I could maybe see this being useful for – gaming – was barely even mentioned in their keynote.
If I'm dropping $3,500 and cutting myself off from the outside world (and no, that weird eye display thing doesn't count), a half-assed substitute for consuming the same content as I would on any other screen isn't going to cut it. Show me the actual future, in terms of software/content/communication/immersiveness, then we'll talk.
I’ve toured sublets recently and met the current tenants, and some of them are not using ipads, laptops and TVs for their digital entertainment consumption, but instead using a Quest or other wireless headset.
But what do they see? And what happens when you call your friend who also owns a Vision Pro?
It is clear that this is a a first product in a category that will change a lot over the next several years, especially as the hardware improves.
I don't see Apple discontinuing this quickly like Google Glasses and Microsoft HoloLens.
I would not wear this out, but in a few years maybe things can shrink down enough to make that more realistic.
We have a lot of UI and software interaction that we need to figure out before we have the proper hardware.
This will remain very niche, but it is a starting point.
There is space for both, this will actually help Occulus if it strengthens the supply chain and makes better apps available for them.
It doesn't really send a great message to children, jm2c.
I'm also a bit scared we'll move from laying in bed with loved ones scrolling on our devices to even further isolation and distraction.
What? Why?
It seems Apple's primary selling point will be decent software, which the VR space desperately needs. E.g.
> Vision Pro also allows users to connect to their Mac and expand its display in a virtual space, including alongside apps running on Vision Pro itself.
has been possible for a while, just poorly. Hopefully this'll create some good competition.
Edit: Whelp, I was wrong. I wrote this before they had announced the method on the keynote. Turns out you are creating a digital scan of your face, that is dynamically rendered based on the perspective of the outside observers in realtime. Quite impressive. Possibly overengineered. But But arguably a necessary feature to make this feel more friendly to other non-headset users and family members or coworkers.
Otherwise, a live image works too. Doesn't even need to be 3D.
Downside is that a lot of work still is 2d: browsing websites for information. And even casual distraction like reading news, browsing sneakers…
Measuring stuff to make the product fit, requires removal of the headset. Although that might actually be done with vr if it is accurate enough (0.1 mm). Interesting.
Ipod: it just works. No need to swap AA batteries any more.
MBP: light and powerful, all in one.
Iphone: the whole internet in my pocket.
But, Vision Pro Headset doesn’t feel like that. The cable that goes behind… awful. You use glasses, oh well, then the headset won’t work out of the box until you buy the appropriate lenses for it. 2h of battery… well, I guess it will stay more time connected to the charger than in use.
I know, they’ll improve it substantially in v2… but my point is: if v1 is not good enough, then perhaps v2 would never come to life.
I think this is overstating how it was for the first version of the iPhone - not only was there a total lack of third party apps, but accessing the internet was also not great because nothing had been mobile-optimized yet.
I agree Vision Pro feels lacking in terms of the sleek feel + design that we've come to expect from Apple, but it may well be that the experience of using it is substantially better than Meta's headsets. If so, that feels about right for Apple - swoop in when the market is just starting to be worth it with a product that's better than what's out there, then stay ahead by making meaningful improvements in the first few generations.
Obgviously it doesn't plug in...down there...but it kinda looks like it in the ads
Going to a show has turned into watching thousands of people record the show on their iPhones. It's great that I can now watch those videos with a VR headset I guess?
On the dystopian front, I believe that the problem is that any AR/VR headset is going to require a similar form factor to include all computational pieces and sensors. I truly believe they would've made it look a lot more like regular glasses if it was feasible. I think over time the Vision Pro will start to approach something of the sort when that technology becomes available.
I was really hoping for AR centric device, like a vastly superior Google Glass. VR isn't exactly revolutionary at this point.
It gets very slightly worse every year. I often get the feeling like the presenter has had a "cleanse" of all unclean thoughts, bitterness and humanity and all that's left is an excessively soft, fragile and beige demeanour. Almost inhuman.
I guess it's a risk aversion tactic by Apple, as it is a $1T company; it must have a lot of protectionism.
Also - this paves the way to Mac Laptops (and desktops) without displays, which to me is the big win here.
I don't mind the price (assuming it's a good product), I'm comfortable wearing a VR headset for hours at a time (not a quest 2 though, those are uncomfortable), and I'd love to have a larger display no matter where I'm working.
However, I have to concede that Apple has a history of entering a market only when they think they got it right. And often enough, they do get it right, so I'm also hopeful that a lot of these concerns won't be big issues.
I'm definitely excited to try it out.
I can imagine many use cases where I pop it on for a minute to check something and then take it off again. But none of them are something that would make me spend my own money on this. Someone else's money, maybe.
- External battery is something I've been hoping to see popularized for for a while. It would be nice if they could also put the compute module in there too (if they aren't already) to take even more weight off the head and possibly allow for modular compute units or connection to a PC.
- Iris scan is a natural way to handle authentication in a headset with eye tracking, I hope that becomes the standard in the future.
- I'm really intrigued by the choice to not have controllers, and what that will mean for their interface design. I see they copied the "click" gesture from Quest and some aspects of Quest's windowing system, but there seems to be some genuinely innovative stuff there too in regards to other hand gestures and eye tracking.
- I'm hopeful Apple's entrance into the market will set a standard for the level of polish and responsiveness that others will have to work to match
- I haven't heard much details about the new OS, but there's plenty of room for innovation there as well especially in regards to OS-level performance optimizations and API design.
Also the architecture of strapping a computer to your face instead of having a powerful desktop PC stream the screen wirelessly to your face seems like a bad call. Poor battery life, little power, and that wired battery pouch thing does not inspire confidence.
Apple really are the kings of making incredibly advanced technology seem, for lack of a better word, magical. They showed the headset has a really fancy two axis motorized system for lining up the lenses with the user's eyes -- something literally no other headset has tackled -- but didn't elaborate on it. The assumption is it's just what's required to deliver a good experience, not something to be used as a selling point in and of itself.
It's a steep price to pay for 2 hours (at a time, unless you're plugged in) of something you could already do more or less well enough with what you already had.
