Vision Pro has the same effective resolution as Quest 3... Sometimes?
douevenknow.us
douevenknow.us
> And at the end of the day it still has more pixels, which matters because not everything is high-contrast text.
Apple has a weaker software but is getting saved by better hardware. And that's of course not an isolated situation: I'd argue the mac also is getting weaker software wise [0], but the hardware is pulling it ahead of the competition in many respects. The iPad is also the poster child of that trend.
That's the reverse from the PowerPC situation when they had weaker hardware but more dev mindshare and nicer user experience bringing people into the fold even as they couldn't compete on raw performance.
[0] Windows has caught up on the *nix integration and hidpi/energy efficiency front, linux has gotten better support emulation layers (especially Proton), while macos has been fighting devs to make it more iOS like.
My bet based on the success of Meta's RayBan Smartglasses Apple will be releasing their version in the next year or two. If you wear sunglasses and like / do take a good amount of photos/videos daily Meta's Rayban is a great solid and very useful product! I use them daily since buying them in October. This is a mass product like Apple Watch and personally per my use I think the next iPhone.
Vision Pro as of today is not a mass product yet they are trying to work towards getting to that point. Though today it's a mixed bag of features that do not enhance daily life much and or make things we already do easier.. Meta's RayBans do just that and more.
Little to no-one.
The minority of those who bought it are preparing to sell it and the majority of those who bought one already sold it with in the 14 day window.
Unsurprisingly predicted, it comes as to no surprise that the Vision Pro performed worse in sales and they had to cut production due to low demand.
Vision Pro was for the techies, early adopters and Apple fans. Not for the general public as I said before in [0]. Wait until the non-pro version of Apple Vision.
To downvoters: If the Apple Vision Pro was such a glamorous success then why are they cutting shipments for 2024 due to low demand then? [1][2]
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40137447
[1] https://www.theverge.com/2024/4/23/24138487/apple-vision-pro...
[2] https://www.ft.com/content/b6f06bde-17b0-4886-b465-b561212c9...
"The report said Chinese contract manufacturer Luxshare, Apple's only assembler of the device, was preparing to make fewer than 400,000 units of Vision Pro in 2024"
My theory is contingent on two assumptions (again they could be wrong)
1. Tim Cook is looking for a legacy product. His own chance at “one more thing”
2. Apple is currently often behind the innovator. Its goal is to improve and perfect consumer technology; recently rarely leading the charge themselves
I think we are in an interesting “local minimum” of technology. It’s been a while since we have seen a completely groundbreaking product that changes the landscape of the industry. Every tech company is searching for the next product to help grow revenue. LLMs are the current hotness, but previously it was briefly VR thanks to Meta. Apple probably started the process of making the AVP once Zuck pivoted to making Meta a “VR Company”.
Since this was a flash in the pan interest (for anyone other than VR enthusiasts), and Apple had yet to bring a product to market, they had to pivot from entertainment to “productivity” as the main use-case of the device. That’s where “spacial computing” was born. Since Tim Cook was searching for his legacy product, and because the Apple vision pro is legitimately impressive, they decided to move ahead with releasing it despite there being no market fit.
My guess is we never see another version of the AVP and probably never hear about it again. I’m most likely totally wrong, but I wanted to share my prediction.
I imagine it would be very successful if it's marketed as a sports product. See your current heart rate and movement speed without taking your eyes from the track, that kind of stuff.
For the last sentence, at that point why not just interface with the watch and phone themselves if you’re already going to have to look at them to interact
The board made him pick between the Car and the Vision Pro and he picked the AVP because it was closer to market and aligned with his view on Apple's computing platform progression. Too bad for him both of his projects were awful ideas for Apple.
Oh, and to the sycophants, Apple cranking out couple of successful iPhone accessories and services, nice to haves that compliment Steve Job's iPhone, does not make Tim Cook a product leader. It makes him minimally competent as business leader who didn't totally break Job's Apple organization immediately. Watch and Air Pods are accessories, like a keyboard or a monitor. No one celebrates Jobs because he shipped a decent mouse one time.
Preemptively insulting people is not the sort of thing which is done by people who are secure in their own opinion.
You mean like the Apple Watch or AirPods which launched years after he became CEO.
Or how about the Services business which is now 20% of their revenue.
No official numbers from Facebook rather speculation of up to a million have been sold. Also as the majority of those who review meta's raybans share the same positive thoughts /experience of my own. It's just a ton easier to take pics and videos overall and especially when driving (hey Meta take a pic).
They've completely changed vacations for me. No longer do I have to look at <event> through my phone. I can be much more present - I can see it with my actual eyes and just be confident that the memory will be captured. The image/video quality is quite good.
The audio quality is also surprisingly good - I can listen to music while still enjoying the nature around me (in a way I like more than passthrough on the AirPods.)
I don't really care for the AI, but maybe one day they'll give us Llama 3 400b and it'll be good too.
To be honest, you’ve never had to enjoy <event> through the phone. Many people have enjoyed <event> without having a phone, especially prior to the arrival of mobile phones.
And perhaps for the better. To be more in the moment.
Didn't hit me until your comment, but, maybe the other side of that coin is I'm never looking at photos and videos of the past.
* not-CS college dropout > waiter > ipad point of sale startup > sold > Google
The most delightful thing is watching 30 mins in bed before sleep. Just me in front of a gigantic cinema screen floating above me, with my airpods so it’s completely silent.
It almost seems like an accident that the product is notable and gets use.
Your exact same argument was made for the iPad and now it's a $28b/year business.
Don’t fall into the trap of assuming that Apple only makes successful products. They have had poorly selling/discontinued recent product launches like the iPhone mini and HomePod. The VR market as a whole is contracting.
I’ve had to pause, e.g., some shots in Kill Bill and Gravity just to marvel at the stunning visual compositions. Never once did that on my TV.
Oh, here’s something that’s not obvious: the movie screen (and all images) looks matte inside the AVP. This works exceptionally well for films.
This is in fact a huge oversight in my opinion. As usual Apple's prudishness is limiting them from allowing it but unlike the quest there isn't a side load option either. You're limited to web-based offerings only (and strangely enough WebXR support is not great on the AVP). The experience will be hamstrung by not being able to offer a native app.
And let's be honest, this tech is a game changer for porn. There's a platform called sexlikereal for quest that's doing videos and the immersion makes it way more realistic. You can even couple it with synchronised toys. And this is only video, real 3D content would be even more immersive as you could even move around inside the scene.
You can ignore it or not but SexTech is an emerging market especially in Europe where we have a more open minded stance towards such things. The swinger and poly community is ever growing.
It's a shame Apple is selling themselves short by avoiding a category where AR/VR tech has a huge added value.
Moon player can play any VR content including YouTube 360 and VR porn if that is your desire
But movies isn't really the end game. It's much nicer than 2D porn but it's still very limited because you can't influence the action or move around. Having real interactive 3D content would be another big step that isn't currently possible with apple's restrictions.
There's isn't much yet but some is already happening on the pcvr side.
I just lament that this isn't being viewed as having the huge potential I know it has.
There are games and porn. You can use a keyboard and mouse. You can breakout your laptop's windows. OSX integration is not an afterthought.
Remember a few years ago when Apple and Google were racing to add AR capabilities to phones? ARKit and ARCore. In the hands of millions of users and developers and we haven't seen a single killer app since Pokemon Go and that was 8 years ago. We have a Quest and the number one app is still Beat Saber. There just isn't a problem to solve.
2. It’s funny to describe the Vision Pro as a “Mixed bag of features” compared to a pair of sunglasses that randomly has a camera and headphones. If that isn’t a mixed bag I don’t know what is.
For the record I think the ray bans and Vision Pro both suck.
This is the thing I hate about those. It normalises nonconsensual photography.
This is why everyone hated on google glass. Which had a much more noticeable camera than the ray-bans. I have one myself (the glass, I 3D printed a camera cover for it).
>recording people in public places
Honestly at this point if I am in public I just assume someone (or something - cctv's everywhere) is recording me at all times.
And unlike my smartphone that keeps the photos on-device, your Meta ray bans are submitting all your family members to be face scanned by the Meta surveillance capitalism app.
https://www.theverge.com/2021/2/27/22304618/judge-approves-f...
*My* kids and dogs. But ...
>doing things that the phone I already own and have on me all the time can do.
Remember what I said about dogs and my kids stopping what they're doing when a phone is out and focusing on the phone instead? It's not "Don't take my picture." It's "whats that in your hand ooooh gimme."
>your Meta ray bans are submitting all your family members to be face scanned by the Meta surveillance capitalism app
Unless you have a solid evidence of THAT (and not some random link), please do not make unsubstantiated claims.
Anyhow, if you're really curious about how it works : Photos are stored on device and then imported via bluetooth/wifi connection manually or when they're charging. _NOTHING_ gets sent to Meta unless I specifically use the multi-modal Meta AI ("Hey Meta, look and tell me x"). All of this information is out there in several places (including Meta's own documents) as to how this works. It's not very hard to find - easier than making unsubstantiated claims.
You should try to have a normal conversation instead of being argumentative. It tends to help people wanting to talk further. This isn't reddit. :)
It also seems extremely unlikely to me that a camera you wear on your face will be the next smartphone. Technologies which change society to that degree are rare.
I do believe you when you say it's a great product. I like my Wayfarers and have been tempted to pick up a pair that is also a camera I can wear on my face. I've seen the Metas, they don't cut quite as sharp a profile but the effect is unobtrusive and stylish.
I don't get what it has to do with VR headsets though.
Meta has created such Glasses… For 2024… They are version .5… That make taking pictures much easier than getting out your phone for those who wear sunglasses. How many people wear sunglasses how many people take pictures every day with their phone?… I'd say billions
Recently Meta pushed out updates to the glasses where you can ask the glasses.. Hey Meta what am I looking at and it will audibly tell you. Also I can take video calls now where viewer sees what I see.. like me driving.
Overall tho in terms of a good smart glasses UX do I need a bunch of distracting visuals to be seen ...maybe a few here and there & at the right time or when I command such but not an overload especially when driving.
I went from having a big second monitor setup, to just putting the vision on with my mac.
Just don't think I want to spend US$ 3.5k on that but if it ever comes to a price tag around US$ 1-1.5k I'd snatch it easily. Spent more than that on my current screens.
That said, I also used the Quest 2 for much longer than I expected, and it started gathering dust long before I switched the AVP.