Hacker News Reader

I can respect that it's probably worth trying, or even worth buying if you have a particular case for it and a rather large income, but I guess what is lost on me about the AVP (and by extension iPads, more expensive phones) is that they just seem to be a way to extract multiple thousands of dollars for essentially the same entertainment we've already been doing quite well for a very long time.

Like how much should watching stuff be worth to people!? Am I crazy? I don't even dislike movies, but $3500 usd might be what I already spend on all forms of entertainment + 2 years worth of food, and maybe all of my transportation for half a year or more, combined. I'd just kind of hope for something more substantial y'know?

For that price or maybe a little more you could buy a 4k projector and a nice screen that would make watching a movie a whole lot nicer

> $3500 usd might be what I already spend on all forms of entertainment + 2 years worth of food

Where do you live? I live in Romania and even my mom who makes around 1000e a month spends like 400e on food, so she spends around 5k euros a year on food

It is easy to spend EUR 400 for the monthly food, or even much more, if you buy industrially-processed food and various kinds of food that are tasty, but which are expensive and unnecessary.

Nevertheless, not only in Romania, but probably in most countries of the European Union, a human can spend for food only between EUR 100 and EUR 150 per month, while still eating very healthy food, with the condition of cooking at home and buying only raw ingredients. Even the industrially-made bread is at least 3 to 4 times more expensive than the bread made at home. For other kinds of food, the price ratio between buying and making at home is even greater.

> a human can spend for food only between EUR 100 and EUR 150 per month

Try that in Croatia, you'll soon be dead or at least severely malnourished.

I spend way more than 100/week in food for two people. To spend less than a quarter of that I would have to scale down or remove fruit, vegetables, meat or fish from the menu. Probably would have to eat pasta and rice with some sauces all the time which isn't healthy at all. And I'm in Portugal, not the most expensive place in Europe by a long shot.

We are family of 2 adults and 1 child. We spend very easily 400 (and more) per month. We don't buy any processed food. We cook at home. 90% of time. Some weekends we go out for a single lunch or dinner. We live in Czech republic. We rarely buy "bio" (or "organic" depending on where you live) food.

Good luck doing that in Portugal, 100 € will be food for one week.

So at most 5 euros per day you say? maybe only if you eat lentils or something idk.

2 eggs = .8 euro

250ml milk = .8 euro

300g chicken breast = 2 euro

1 large tomato = .8 euro

150g cheap cold cuts = 1 euro

I'm already at 5.4 euro and that's not even 2000 calories, add butter, olive oil, other vegetables, bread and you easily reach 8-9 euro per day and I bet Romania is at least 20% cheaper than most EU countries

So please englighten us, give me a menu that's 2k calories, has some animal protein in it and costs less than 5 euros

Buy frozen vegetables, salmon (20€/kg), bio eggs and milk at 1.25 to 2€/L. Add some bread from the baker, whole grain noodles, oats for breakfast and maybe get cheese every once in a while. Vegetable oil, nut oil and whole nuts complete what you need. Spices are bought in bunch and mixed up at home. For some greens you can have mint and herbs on any windowsill for <2€.

I don't eat out, never eat processed food, cook all myself and have a hard time (germany) hitting 150€ a month, so 5€ a day is totally doable. Don't get me wrong, it's hard to know what you can buy, but Stiftung Warentest is your friend and a book about medical nutrition at university level will make sure you don't buy from advertisement.

Is food in your country/area that expensive? I live in an expensive city in the middle of Europe and get most of those things for half the price in a normal supermarket. If I optimize for sales and seasons, I even get cheaper prices, while still have a divers healthy diet. Even more so if I buy in bulk and prepare in advance. But to be fair, it would demand more time and knowledge, which is not for everyone.

150/mo? Even if I buy from my neighbors (who grow only for themselves but have overage) I cannot do that. Growing myself, yes. I live in a tiny village in portugal.

that's 145 USD/month for me. It's not impossible, but you're not eating out ever and are basically on little more than a rice and beans diet at that point.

2 years was actually a bit of a reach now that I think of it, but Canada, living relatively frugally, buying for typically just me, and I could do ~300cad a month + ~$100/month for transport would bring me up to the $4850CAD before sales tax. Tax would add another $500 and that would probably cover me for most entertainment, vacations excluded, games included, climbing included, movies included, just estimating though.

And where/what to watch when your best source is youtube + torrents

- All entertainment (what does this mean? for what period?)

- 2 years worth of food

- 6 months worth of transportation

For 3.5k? Either you're Amish (with an HN handle), or you're dril and you need advice from someone who is good at the economy [0].

[0] https://x.com/dril/status/384408932061417472

Ya in retrospect 2 years was a stretch, but 1 year seems feasible. I elaborated on entertainment in another comment, basically anything I'd spend on non-hobbyist watching or listening in real life or digital, video games, over a year. I could probably include concerts, but that's something I'd let myself spend more on if finances permitted. Some food expenses would fit between those categories. Vacations excluded.

>Apple goes too far with the greed here not letting us set up separate profiles

Apple really has one of the worst workflows around user accounts, I have to think it is because of some legacy reasons that means it would be a big project to fix (based on other companies I've worked at that lousy user accounts and couldn't fix)

If they have it in tvOS is it that far away from having it in ipadOS?

In with an annoying "acutally".. I wish I wasn't but I just filed some feedback with Apple today (really this morning) on how the "profiles" on Apple TV are a misnomer. They're not real.

Here's our experience for what it's worth and why I say misnomer.

I setup an Apple TV in a parent's apartment. It turns out that when they re-arrange the icons, even if they're in their profile, they rearrange the icons on the "default" profile - which is mine.

So I came home to an Apple TV with the apps all moved around.

Digging into it, it seems that while there is the cover of "user profiles" on Apple TV, they simple aren't useful. Logged in apps stay logged in across all profiles. So it's not like a browser profile where you can have two different logins to say Jellyfin or Plex or Youtube or Disney+.

As such, the profiles are indeed a misnomer when compared to what any reasonable user would expect of changing "profiles."

In other words, a sham!

Ref from reddit confirming as much: https://old.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/qeatju/the_way_that_...

Ref from Apple that buries the lede: https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/tv/atvb0753b37d/tvos

Here's the salient bit from that apple page:

When each member in a household has an Apple Account, you can create unique user profiles for each person, with Up Next lists, system language preferences, paired AirPods settings, music, Game Center data, and content recommendations personalized for the currently active user.

Note how little profiles actually do. You can't use your own logins to any services, or have a home screen that is yours with your apps. It's still just a one-user device sadly.

Thanks and very informative! I had never used them but the saw it in the (worsening) UX.

>I won't tolerate anything less than optimal latency in my work tools.

for $3500 I don't expect any primary shortcoming, especially for something I'd use professionally. There's a lot of substitute hardware I could buy to get the same experience at that point, so I see no need to compromsise just becasue it's a shiny new toy.

Shortcomings aren't the worst thing when you're an early adopter. I see that as an opportunity to build the #1 terminal emulator for the platform. Make myself a little money on the side. The Vision Pro could easily pay for itself. That's what I'd be doing if I weren't so busy with other things.

An attractive idea, but You need to invest so much in the apple ecosystem before you even get to start developing for Apple. I'd want to at least tinker with the idea before I fully commit.

What do you mean by this? Why can't I just use Xcode to build my app and ask Apple for a signing key and wait for approval to publish it to their app store?

"You" can. I don't own any apple hardware, though. So I'd need to invest some $4500 of investment just to start.

I guess that's more of a "me" problem.

Well this is why the rich get richer.

> I didn't realize when I first put one on that it was a fully synthetic display until I tried reading the 10pt text on my computer monitor.

Can you elaborate on this? I've not looked at it since it came out. Does this mean that you can look at your computer monitors while using it, or that it's replacing your computer monitors because it has a high enough resolution?

Every other display I've tried has far too low pixel density to be used for serious work, which is rather unfortunate.

When compared to a monitor in front of you (at the distance the physical monitor is), Apple Vision Pro is actually pretty low resolution. They say it has high resolution 4k or 8k displays, but all those pixels are "wasted" on your entire field of view. The actual 'monitors' or windows are a subset of that, and so will be drawn with less physical pixels than a real monitor.

Sounds about right. I'd love to see 32k displays in my life. The same type of people who said that you don't need more than 24Hz for displays are now saying you don't need more than 4k and they are just as right then as they are now.

No thanks, so far no VR headset has sorted out the problem of having little screens so close to the eyes, for people with light sensitive vision needing to wear light redution glasses when working with regular screens.

> one of the most impressive pieces of technology that I almost never use

> someone else who like me also loves it and uses it all the time

Wait, do you almost never use it or do you use it all the time?

he loves it, almost never uses it, while she also loves it, but she also uses it all the time.

(pronouns chosen to make it easy to distinguish two people, with no knowledge of anybody's sex or gender, but since sex and gender shouldn't matter, it shouldn't matter)