- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
An overpriced VR headset.
Vr with passthrough
Most modern headsets have passthrough, its not some new feature. It is the part that Apple focused on though.
Arnt they all.
I got the original vive which just my beatsaber player but due yo having a wife a job and chit to get done it lives in its protective case and when I do get a min yo use it both controler batteries are dead due to time living in a box
Jesus, reading this made me feel like I wrote this.
I haven’t touched my headset in months
I gave my Index to my son who has the time and physicality to use it. I’m just too old for action gaming now.
I would have loved it if I was 30 years younger. I can do more from a chair with my desktop PC than an Apple Vision Pro can. It’s just another Apple Con.
Reading it gave me a headache.
It’s why I ended up selling mine
Made a pretty penny on it due to when I sold it
I ended up selling it for $750 with the deluxe audio strap right around the time Halflife Alex came out
If they are, then this vision pro is truly extortion.
VR requires a bit of setup, which is off putting. I dont have the space to have mine out all the time, theres also a shortage of high quality games. Waiting on Valve to push the envelope again.
They are. This said, $1,000 or less can buy you the best VR rig on the market right now. This thing is four times that.
Translation for those who haven’t just had a stroke -
Aren’t they all?
I’ve got the original Vive, which is just my ‘Beatsaber player’ but due to having a wife, a job, and shit to get done, it lives in its protective case. When i do get a minute to use it both controller batteries are dead due to time living in a box
What a shock 🙄
So they bought Expensive Apple Thing because Expensive Apple Thing? I’ve had a decent quality HMD for a couple years. It’s a lot of fun and pretty amazing initially, especially if you have a game or two that really takes advantage of it. However, as a utility, it leaves a lot to be desired. I was really hoping to do CAD with it, there were some modestly priced design programs that looked ok along with some free ones, because that’s a big hobby of mine. It really doesn’t work very well. The toolset for decent CAD is fairly large. A tiny wrist menu isn’t going to cut it, and the ability to precisely manipulate nodes or vertices isn’t there. Same goes for even basic functions like desktops and normal computer functions. Sure, they work, but now you have to constantly be manipulating windows instead of having an extra monitor and kicking back in an office chair.
The AR aspect could be fun, but again you’re either the one creating this content via design software with the aforementioned difficulties, or you’re the one popping the HMD on to view what your home designer says would be a nice new kitchen cabinet set in your home. A useful tool, but not a substitute for a computing and design environment.
I remember reading that it supports mouse and keyboard, but the main input control are hand motions
Not sure what that means. My current HMD supports mouse and keyboard… but seeing as Apples HMD is standalone, I guess you can hook up a keyboard/mouse via buetooth? Mine works through the pc it’s hooked up to. Nice feature, but I wouldn’t call it earth shattering. Both VR headsets I’ve used support hand gestures, but I’ll assume Apple has improved upon detection and depth of vocabulary.
Have you ever included the innovative tablets into you CAD work?
I am unfamiliar with that term, so I assume not.
We should start calling these the “new oculus” or something. The marketing has been insane and neither Meta or Apple would benefit. It would be like when people called every console a Nintendo.
I’m going to the store do you want a Coke?
Cornetto
Huh. And here I am, like some poor person, with no AR headset and $3500 extra in my bank account. I feel like such an idiot.
You’re definitely not like a poor person if you’ve got $3,500 lol
In this economy, most people don’t even have that in their account. I guess that’s part of the status bit… If you have these, who can say your not doing well?
In reality, it just makes them look like the assholes they very likely are.
I know they look slick but, outside of clout chasers and brand fanatics, who spends $3500 on something without knowing why they’re buying it?
They bought Tim Cook a new private jet. I thought they’d have figured by now.
He doesn’t own one already?
He only has 6, he needs 1 more for Sundays
He needs two so he can Van Damme between them.
I was not aware that existed. Why are they driving backwards? I’m more impressed by the skill of the truckers than that split.
For anyone else that is unaware. https://youtu.be/M7FIvfx5J10?si=WUoZYFGqwRvLl6a2
Seems it’s safer, if he fell, there’s not much risk
Why own one when you can own two?
That’s why they said a new one. Only peasants have just one private jet.
And here I am without even a private Cessna
Mate I have a private bike
Alright Mr Moneybags, no need to brags
“Just park it next to the others.”
Do we really want to live in a world where people are walking around with these things on their face, gesturing around like they are insane?
It’s bad enough to witness how awful public spaces have become since smartphones came out, but this is next level zombie.
Do we really want to live in a world where people are walking around with these things on their face, gesturing around like they are insane?
You’ve seen someone talk on radio earbuds when the phone’s in their pocket? It’s the second most creepy thing I’ve ever seen with a phone conversation.
I’ve had people looking at me while they are talking to people on concealed earbuds. It’s embarrassing if you respond to them as if they were actually talking to you. But how would you know who the hell they are talking to? 🤷♂️
Sliders on Peacock Season 4 Episode 4, “Virtual Slide”. Worth watching as this episode from 1998 realistically conveys the dystopian potential of VR/AR headsets. The headsets are centrally controlled and wirelessly networked. Topics covered include privacy violations, IP theft, manipulation of reality, social decay, virtual image and body autonomy, nested reality. It’s only taken 26 years to create a convincing reality that allows someone to wear the headset publicly with minimal problems. The fact that Apple hit the target on a 1.0 product is actually frightening. What will another 30 years of development bring?
If people can behave, I don’t care what they wear or what they watch
I want you to imagine a subway car, where 50% of the people have these on their face.
They are waving their hands around, sometimes accidentally hitting other passengers because of it.
They are too distracted to even catch their stop, so there’s always extra chaos because of it.
Some are using apps that record what they are seeing and makes other passengers “naked” in their headset, which they share online. Privacy is a thing of the past because they can record what they see.
Imagine nobody being able to even have a conversation with other people, or make human connections with strangers, because the person across from them has a digital mask on, and you have no idea if they are even aware of what’s going on around them.
Sure, you can have a great number of people “behaving” in this scenario, but is this something you want society to become? I don’t. It deprives the human experience to an absurd extent.
I’m sorry, but do you just talk to strangers on the subway?
We already have smartphones that everyone is looking at anyway.
Before that we had newspapers.
You are making up an imaginary dystopia to peddle fear for no reason.
I’m sorry, but do you just talk to strangers on the subway?
I very often greet people, say polite things, perhaps engage in some light conversation with strangers. It’s quite human to have these social interactions.
We already have smartphones that everyone is looking at anyway.
Yes, which is already bad enough. Why make it worse by having them on our faces?
Before that we had newspapers.
True, but newspapers didn’t take people out of the environment they were in - it was simply an object within that environment in which people were still fully able to interact with the outside world uninhibited.
These headsets are designed to remove you from reality, while you are still in it. =
You are making up an imaginary dystopia to peddle fear for no reason.
Nah, I just see where corporate interests are trying to move society, and I’m concerned about the negative impacts it will have.
These headsets are designed to remove you from reality, while you are still in it. How does AR/MR do that? Phones are more about that than AR/MR. Or even newspapers, which very rarely are about the thing you are actively doing and can be used as a physical barrier to separate you from other people. Unlike a pair of glasses…
Old people usually strike a conversation.
About 200,000 years of history proves that we cannot lol
Did you not see the video of the guy wearing his new tim apple ski goggles, in his semi-self driving Tesla cyber truck?
What makes you think people can behave?
Those are fake, the apple vision pro bugs ten fuck out when it’s I a moving car, so they couldn’t have been using it. Its all for clout.
Wh do you care?
It is inevitable to a degree. Obviously this is not the final form and I’m sure the goal is to make a more fashionable solution that fits into their phone/watch/airpods kind of edc strategy. But no doubt we’ll have a future where info is right there if we want it. This thing is the foray into developing that eventual product for Apple. To me it looks real dumb, but a sleeker version in the future that looks like glasses…well shit it might be nice to watch a show while washing dishes idk.
I was looking forward to the Google glass. Not because it was Google but because if a heavy hitter drops something more usually follow. To bad it flopped. I would love having something like that instead of my phone. Especially once there’s prescription versions of them.
I just want smart glasses like a smart watch. Show me notifications, let me decline calls, etc. I don’t want all the VR crap, just like 4 lines of text.
I like to Google for questions I have. I would like for at least that much. Im with you on the rest. I don’t need for it to have video or anything like that. Just basic features and text googling.
Given the ability to verbally ask a gpt something now, the goggles would have been a great thing to release in about a year from now.
That’s why they released the pro now, so in a year when they release the $1000 “cheap” ones people will jump at the opportunity to be a part of the “in” crowd. 🤮
But no doubt we’ll have a future where info is right there if we want it.
But we’re already there. It’s called a smartphone.
The value add of replacing a pocket watch or a cellphone with a device about the same size that also fits in your pocket but also gives you access to all the world’s information in seconds is immense. And that’s why the smartphone revolutionized the world.
The value add of having that information strapped to your face at all times is… just not worth the physical discomfort of having said device strapped to your face.
I say this as a VR user. A device strapped over your face really sucks and you can’t wait to take it off. The only reason to tolerate it is that that’s the only way to trick your senses into thinking you are somewhere else.
I think they meant in the future when the form factor is the same as wearing glasses.
My glasses are on my face every minute of every day, except when showering and sleeping. I’m uncomfortable when they’re not there - and not just because I can’t see, but because I’m so used to it.
That’s probably the future - people being uncomfortable if a screen isn’t in their vision every waking moment, because it’s as physically comfortable and as “normal” as wearing glasses, and more comfortable than looking down at a phone.
It’d be an amazing feat for technology, but similarly as dystopian as having a social media-feeding PC in your pocket, or just any PC if you’re another generation older. Future people will eat it up though, just like we eat up the phones.
Now I’m imagining marketing where the old millennials are staring at their phones, and the young people are complaining about how grandpa never engages with other human beings or makes eye contact - but they’re still scrolling TikTok while talking to him.
It would be ar glasses I’d think, not a headset with a strap. At least that would be my guess as to the end state.
Yea, while it’s way out of my price range and looks a little goofy, this is exactly what I’ve been hoping for as the next step to VR. AR (or whatever Apple wants to call it) is super fascinating, and will be pretty much the main reason for me to get a headset in the first place.
While it may have issues, I’m really excited to see how the market reacts to it, hopefully occulus or another company will try and compete. Feels weird to say, but I’m hoping Apple finds success with it
I’m old enough to remember the advent of two of the most annoying pieces of electronics ever…
-
The Bluetooth earpiece - which made everyone having a conversation look like they were either talking to themselves or possibly schizophrenic.
-
Those god-awful push to talk walkie talkie type phones from mainly Nextel - which not only made you privy to the both parties conversation but had the freaking awfully loud and obnoxious beep in between switching parties talking. I wanted to strangle anyone using one in a restaurant.
I’m not sure that as a species we are capable of being present in the moment and not searching for that next hit of dopamine from a device with a screen. And Lord knows I’m as guilty as the next person.
I’ve had the Nextel beep as my SMS tone for almost 20 years now. Phone is usually on vibrate but the tone is there.
… I also have the “science is fun” song from Portal as my ringtone because it starts out with a noise that I can hear above the din and quickly gets really loud if I didn’t hear it. I had it as the Turret “hello?” sequence for a bit but that was super creepy.
-
It’s an uncomfortable way to watch porn.
It’s an AR iPad. It’s not that deep.
I hate Hate HATE that I’m going to say this: the iPad was just a bigger iPhone, yet here we are. It’s the perfect device for consumption and light work, yet people had no idea about what to do with it at first.
I’m more irked about that thing being gigantic and strapped to your face, thought. It’s the next level of social isolation, in a level even higher that the one cause by smartphones, and I’m not ok with that. Companies actually want to hijack and sell your reality back to you.
I would love to walk around with a video playing in a fixed hud while I go around doing chores. I’m constantly finding places to put my phone down every time I move to another station.
I’m not paying $3500 for that, though.
This is like 20€
If you weren’t aware https://youtube.com/shorts/zhXLC7n62YQ?si=TSu1p-WixFcbSxb2
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/shorts/zhXLC7n62YQ?si=TSu1p-WixFcbSxb2
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
That was the idea of Google glasses but it was too early and tech wasn’t ready. It was gonna give you just enough useful info and get out of the way.
Plus Google haters made “glass-holes” viral.
I thought Google Glass was a really cool idea. I actually liked Google back then.
God, I still dream of a device that works like we saw in the OG Glass concept video as opposed to the glorified Google Plus browser we got
I’m not sure whether it would work better today.
What seems odd about the glasses is that they’re essentially bodycams, but just unobtrusive enough not to be identified as such from a distance.
Someone walking around with an AR headset makes it very clear they’re wearing a tech device, someone holding up a phone in front of them signals “I might be filming”, but someone wearing slightly unusual glasses won’t catch any attention. And that seems very weird to a lot of people.
I’m working on an open source version of an AR OS that can run on any Android phone, so you (will be) in luck!
Post it on Lemmy when you get something running, very interested!
Get a pair of Viture glasses then, it’s about $500
It’s not even AR… Didn’t they back down from that? Isn’t it mixed reality or something?
How is augmented reality different from mixed reality? Genuine question. They sound like the same thing.
I didn’t see anyone mention this, but while this headset depicts the outside world when you are wearing it, you are viewing a camera feed of that world. True AR would be like google glass where it is a piece of glass with data projected onto it. Apples thing recreates the world around you and then adds in the applications, you are viewing the world through a filter.
It could also just be marketing too because it seems like they are trying really hard to not make this look like some nerd shit.
I believe AR overlays information about the real world where as mixed reality just shows you the real world with a few apps floating about
Yes, AR analyses your world and you and gives you more info about the reality, Mixed Reality just has your screens attend into the world without interacting with it. The only thing I saw that was really AR was the use with a MacBook as a screen.
You’re describing the difference between “passthrough” AR, and “look through” (or “optical”) AR.
AR and MR or more pretty much interchangeable.
I don’t think so. For example with true AR you could look at something like a bus and have it tell you information like the schedule, route, if it’s running on time etc. This is done automatically and without user interaction. What the Vison Pro does is give you floating apps you can interact with
Virtual reality: everything you see is virtual.
Augmented reality: adds a HUD on top of what you see in reality.
Mixed reality: has virtual objects behind real objects, mixing both real and virtual
We don’t have mixed reality yet. The difference is that AR adds a data overlay on the physical world while MR is more like a hologram that you can interface with and everyone can see the same thing without needing additional goggles or display over the eyes.
We don’t have true MR yet. Apple is marketing the vision pro as spatial computing and it’s a mix between VR and AR.
They are the same thing. I think that they’re confusing it with the difference between “passthrough” AR (you watch an opaque display showing video of the outside world) and “see through” AR (which uses a transparent display that you look through to see the outside world).
Eh. It’s a bit more handwavey than that. It’s whatever you want it to be.
Virtual reality was supposed to be simulated, but “actual still science fiction” levels of simulated. seamless 3d environment, intercepting nerve signals to look and intuitively control an avatar or ready player one had a haptic suit.
AR stems from that and was supposed to be “the real world, but cyber”. Or “VR, but with real world elements”. In the novel “virtual light”, it’s supposed to overlay that “datasturce of cyberspace” on the real world. Even then it was never really clear what purpose cyberspace as a 3d world would have, what data looks like or should look like, and what the advantage of that visualization would be. Or why would rather see that than what the world looks like.
Mixed reality is also that. Imo. It sounds the same to me too.
The whole thing is like hand gesture control. It looked great in minority report, but we had it since one of the 2010s xboxs and it went absolutely nowhere.
That’s because it’s just marketing bullshit.
The worst person you’ve ever met came up with it in a very upscale cube farm over a chai latte, don’t think too hard about it.
“But I was still embarrassed this weekend when I had to stick a straw in my wine glass.” Soda cans are doable; coffee mugs are not. The first must-have Vision Pro accessory is a very long metal straw
Or this works too
I’d hope you’d know what you were spending this much money on if it wasn’t just for online attention.
The current model has it’s problems, but I really think this is the start of a new major product line for Apple. This isn’t going to be relegated to only the rich forever. There are a few problems to over come. It needs to be lighter, it needs to be cheaper, and it needs better battery life. All of those should be somewhat resolved in the next 10 years. When it does, I think the market will explode.
The big selling point? TV. I know over the last few years I have kind of fought with my mom because she is hurting her viewing experience for the sake of aesthetics. The TV is mounted, but has a cabinet in front of it. It is loaded with tons of seasonal decorations. The reason? She can’t stand the site of a cord. So instead, she has figures tall enough to cover part of the screen blocking the view of the TV, all so the cords can be hidden behind the figures. So yes, she loses part of the viewing area, and the remote doesn’t work unless you get up and go to the side of the TV so the IR sensor isn’t blocked, but it LOOKS better!!
The thing is, she isn’t alone. I bought a TV last year. During the time researching it, I would see similar opinions to my mom’s. Peopel would post pictures of their TV setup, asking if the size was OK, or if it should be higher, and the responses would be similar, telling the person to run cables through the wall, or get smaller stands or other complaints. It made me realize that many people care about those kind of things, and it will drive their purchase decisions.
All the Apple Vision Pro has to do is show them that you can have a TV, with no bezel, make it any size and position you want, you get rid of glare from the sun, and it has no visible cables. That alone is enough for people to want to buy it. It isn’t there today, but it will get there in the somewhat near future.
Given that most non-enthusiasts I know would consider 500 € to be way too expensive for a TV, prices will have to come down a lot for that use case. Especially for families where everyone would need one.
Apple is definitely no contender in that market; their prices would have to go down by 90-95 % to interest the mass market and they’re not interested in that kind of thin margin market segment.
Once there is enough demand, some Chinese or Thai OEM - maybe the same one that manufactures these for Apple or Samsung - will sell them for a couple hundred Euro.
The problem is that demand will have to be generated first – something HTC, Google, Microsoft, and Meta have failed at so far.
So far it seems that VR/AR is behaving somewhat similarly to 3DTV: Some enthusiasts are really into it and a market exists but most people aren’t excited enough to spend any extra money on it. They’ll have to find a way around that if they really want mass-market adoption.
The Quest is already pretty cheap. iPhones are not. The standard Vision will be half the price and people will buy it in droves with the right software.
I dunno. People said the same about 3DTV and that never took off even when more affordable models became available.
I don’t think VR/AR has a killer app so far. There are some neat things it can do but nothing that makes people chomp at the bit to get their hands hands on it.
VR gaming is nice but most gamers don’t consider it sufficiently better to a regular monitor to buy a VR rig. For screen replacement it gets worse because the constraints are even harder - smaller budgets, weaker host hardware, lower expectations that are already exceeded by traditional screens.
Apple might pull it off but they have one hell of a battle ahead of them.
I can’t argue with much of that, although I will dispute the 3DTV aspect, no one I knew gave a monkey’s about that and didn’t expect it to take off, mainly as we had experienced it in the cinema and saw little benefit. VR is a totally different kettle of fish in comparison, it reimagines interaction completely, and isn’t sitting in front of a static screen as per ‘3D’. HDTVs took off, then encouraged upgrades with 1080 and now 4K/HDR. Phones went from £30 to £1,000+.
VR makes Beat Saber a console seller (if I regard the Quest as one). Lack of controllers and games makes the Vision concept a difficult sell as it stands.
I find it to be fairly similar. Most people I know either don’t care about VR or bought/borrowed a rig and ended up not using it much. It’s typically seen as kinda nice but not nice enough to really bother with.
In terms of interactivity, most see VR as little better than the Kinect – and that didn’t exactly take the world by storm, robotics labs excluded.
I think most people are actually happy with their regular screens so it’s hard to sell them on something that does more.
I really don’t see these $3500 VR goggles (or any other goggles) being widely—or hell, even narrowly—adopted as a TV replacement. There are frankly an exhausting number of reasons why not. For one, it would only make sense for those who exclusively use their TV alone. That rules out the vast majority of television owners right off the bat.
to live and die on the first generation of a device
