Hacker News Reader

Comment by RistrettoMike | Hacker News Reader

On mobile, so I can’t properly view/appreciate the detail-shots, but this is exactly the kind of post I’ve been waiting to see written covering the Quest Pro.

I tried the Quest 2 last year mostly out of curiosity for the use cases that Meta themselves would go on to push as the primary focuses of the Quest Pro; VR productivity and virtual monitors. I was left drastically underwhelmed at the time with the resolution and viewing experience from the Quest 2 (among other things), and after hearing that the Pro wouldn’t have much of an upgrade in that department I was really curious what actual productivity focused power users would think of it.

This blog/series of posts looks to be just that, and I’ve added it to my feed reader for the rest of the series!

View on HN

If you’re interested in virtual monitors, and willing to be a bit ahem bleeding edge, try the NReal Air. They’re no replacement for a high quality 34” curved monitor but come kinda close to a nice 25” 1080p monitor IME.

They suffer the same issues as other VR solutions (focusing on fine text can be hard, it shakes on your head, etc). But unlike the Quest, you can set it to “Aircast” mode which basically replaces an VR/AR experience and turns the headset into a true “head mounted monitor” - which is different than their special software. I tried it with their virtual monitor software, and it’s unusable. If you move your head, it refreshes the monitor you’re viewing at like 2fps so it’s super jerky and not smooth.

It’s not good enough to replace a real stationary monitor for me yet, but it’s probably good enough for someone constantly on the go, or for airplane usage (extra privacy). They’re also far more comfortable than a Quest since they don’t have batteries or a processor built in.

I want to add that I think they shake more than the quest because you can’t strap it in tightly like you can with a quest and a hard strap

Self promote: https://primitive.io is a VR enabled collaborative immersive development environment where we have optimized code readability in every respect

Java? :(

Your comment is the first time I heard about these glasses. The $379 price tag seems quite reasonable and I was really thinking about buying a pair. After looking a bit closer at the specs I think I will wait for a 90hz+ version.

But else, they seem great. It's cool that they draw power from the connected device, one battery less to have to worry about.

Maybe to explain why I want more than 60hz - I wouldn't buy them to be productive, but for gaming. I've been gaming with 120hz for quite a few years now, and don't really want to half my framerate. Even when gaming in VR I'm experiencing between 60 and 90fps.

I guess gaming is the only thing which prevents me from buying these glasses, for work 60hz is enough and most movies are 24fps anyways...

> Your comment is the first time I heard about these glasses.

They had a huge media blitz recently on YouTube. They got a bunch of YouTubers to talk about how great they were paired with the Steam Deck. Apparently they extend the battery life too because the built-in screen uses more energy than the glasses.

I don’t do much gaming where specs matter (mostly co-op of casual games), and I’ve never used them for gaming. I imagine I wouldn’t mind them too much depending on the game. I bet a game like factorio would struggle since there’s a lot of UI elements that are small and it’d be hard to distinguish with the glasses instead of a big high-res monitor. Other games would probably be fine though (again except for frame rate).

> how great they were paired with the Steam Deck

Didn't even think about this use-case...Sounds fun during a plane flight, holding the Steam Deck in your lap and just resting your head the way you fell comfortable. Probably a bit jarring for the other passengers :) But also to just lay on your couch or even in bed.

> I bet a game like factorio would struggle since there’s a lot of UI elements that are small

Bet, yeah. Probably great for first-person, third-person and racing games. Games which rely heavily on UIs and menus are probably not that fun. I don't know how sharp the screens on these glasses are, but I couldn't imagine playing Factorio on a HTC Vive. Granted, the Vive is old and screens have gotten better, but it's the only reference I have.

> They’re no replacement for a high quality 34” curved monitor but come kinda close to a nice 25” 1080p monitor IME.

So, this is something I think I'm pretty much missing here. Acceptable 25" 1080p monitors are pretty cheap these days; why would a potential user not just get some of those?

VR might or might not be useful for some things (I'm pretty much unconvinced so far) but the "virtual monitor" use case is just baffling to me. Actual monitors exist.

Actual monitors are a pain to carry around when travelling so if a VR monitor could become portable that could help me carry my setup wherever I go.

I enjoy using my quest pro on the couch or in bed - it is a great way to watch shows on Netflix or play stationary games like Tetris or Cubism. Forget about 25", it is more like a full projector-size movie on my wall!

> the "virtual monitor" use case is just baffling to me. Actual monitors exist.

First of all, it works with phones, tablets, game consoles, computers, etc. Anything with a display output, so keep that in mind. The use-case isn’t just big desktop computers or even stationary devices.

1. Travel, you can use this on an airplane, which is nice for frequent travels, or if you want to watch a movie on a bigger screen on a plane. It also works in hospital beds, or anywhere else you may want to enjoy a screen but not bring monitors or TVs.

2. Ergonomics, you can lay down and use the glasses a lot easier than a mounted monitor overhead (and a lot less risky). This is useful both for finding ergonomic positions for general life, and also for people who may be disabled, or otherwise have some bodily issue that forces them to lay in bed (in hospital, elderly, etc).

3. It’s simply a bigger screen. It fills your vision, it’s a lot bigger than a 25” display, even if thats roughly the equivalent quality. If you want to Eg. Watch a movie or play games, it’s a better experience. I’ve heard YouTubers like it for their Steam Deck.

4. It’s a lot smaller than a monitor. If you live alone in a studio, this could save you space on having a dedicated desk and desk equipment. You can just work at your table, and it packs away to a backpack when you want to eat.

5. You could even walk and wear it as a HUD - theres a company that makes live translation software for the headset, where you can read “subtitles” of people talking.

>I tried the Quest 2 last year mostly out of curiosity for the use cases that Meta themselves would go on to push as the primary focuses of the Quest Pro; VR productivity and virtual monitors. I was left drastically underwhelmed at the time with the resolution and viewing experience from the Quest 2

That's not really a fair assessment of the Quest 2. The Quest 2 is just a budget (400 Euros) gaming console, and for that it works great.

A 400 dollar gaming console with a theoretical resolution of 1,832 × 1,920 per eye, is obviously not gonna perform well if you use it to emulate high resolution virtual monitors meant to sit further away from your eyes, further decreasing the perceived resolution, so you can read text and perform productivity tasks. Of course it will suck at that, but it was never meant to do that.

That's like complaining your Toyota Aygo sucks at offroading or track racing.

Isn't the Quest 2 the newest headset they offer? Why wouldn't it be fair to try that out and see if it worked, and come to the conclusion that it was underwhelming?

Quest pro

The Quest Pro is "newly" available now (as of late Oct 22 it appears), but the GP said they had tried last year... I guess now that we're in 2023, that could mean some time in 2022, though. I took their comment to mean that they tried out the 2 in anticipation of the release of the Pro, some time in the more distant past.

No, the Quest 2 has been out since 2020. The Quest Pro is the latest.

It's unfair because the Quest 2 is mainly a console and was never marketed as a productivity AR device. That's like trying to do your job on a PS5 and claim it's underwhelming, or take your Ferrari off-roading and claim it's underwhelming or trying ML workloads on a Gameboy and claim it's underwhelming.

You are are of course free to try those scenarios and have your opinion that the devices are underwhelming, but nobody can take your point seriously.

> after hearing that the Pro wouldn’t have much of an upgrade in that department

Not sure where you heard that, the Quest Pro absolutely offers a massive upgrade in the viewing experience, specifically for the case of virtual monitors. It's mostly in the lenses but it's an absolutely huge difference.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com