Hacker News Reader

Comment by jmye | Hacker News Reader

I think this article hits on the main point that I think has been missed by the early criticism I've read (and it's totally possible I've missed a lot of useful writing on it) - this device isn't supposed to compete with the Quest or any other current VR platform: it's supposed to be the starting point/MVP of competing with your laptop. Looking at in the frame of a gaming device, or the 'metaverse' is missing the point.

And, as the article notes, I think it is an early-adopter device that isn't worth the price tag, and probably doesn't deliver on even 1/10 of what it needs to for mass adoption - but I don't think that Apple intended it to.

View on HN

Yeah the price point is their way of explicitly saying that this is not a finished consumer product. The next few years will be key, as third-party developers build stuff and Apple evolves the OS and hardware.

They could pivot into gaming, that's not a bad bet, especially if they manage to shove an M5 Max or whatever into the headset eventually.

The iPad was also supposed to compete with your laptop, and it has partly succeeded, though nowhere near as much as the most hopeful fans were expecting.

The VisionPro is a far less comfortable, far less portable, more power-hungry version of an iPad, with a few gimmicky 2.5D/3D stuff built in, for $3500. Is it really going to take anyone away from a laptop? Perhaps, but not that many people.

Apple’s game porting toolkit is there because they realize that the primary use of this is gaming. But they have hardly any games yet.

The current “executive toy” vision is, I believe, just a stop-gap measure until they get the hardware cheaper and games ported.

I don’t believe anyone wants to work in 2D with a thing strapped to their face for hours on end. Sure you get a bigger screen but it’s also super uncomfortable, especially this metal and glass conception. It’s only worth it if you are doing something in 3D, like playing a game.

Isn't (at least) the Hololens the starting point?

No? HoloLens is an enterprise product barely advertised for public use. It’s not a new form of UX for general computing, it’s a niche.

The hardware for ambient light AR also sucks, it’s why HoloLens, magic leap and such are not compelling. It’ll be a while before that’s a viable option (and why Apple is committed to pass through currently).

HoloLens pivoted into an enterprise product when it became clear that consumers didn't care for it.

If that pivot happened it was well before Microsoft ever announced the HoloLens. Enterprise-focus was a big part of their marketing from Day One and consumer/games relevance was always an afterthought in their demos/marketing.

I think Microsoft didn't have the confidence that it could be a mass market/consumer device at its price.

(It is interesting that with the Disney section of the keynote, Apple seemed much more directly was flirting with consumer/mass adoption.)

Yeah there definitely was no public pivot - it was never available as a device for the general public or even advertised that way.

I remember some mind blowing Minecraft demos that didn't look enterprise-y to me.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com