6 ms·

Obvious counter argument is the Vision Pro

by iorrus 2y ago

gwbas1c 2y ago
That's like the Lisa. It needs Steve to make it palatable to everyone.
ggrelet 2y ago
No mention of it in the article, even though they wrote: > But it’s also why Cook’s Apple delivers fewer surprises. The delight is still there, but there’s less amazement. The Vision Pro is literally mind blowing.
- MBCook 2y ago
  But it’s not changing the world. It seems to be doing very poorly, at least partially due to Apple’s policies. The price obviously doesn’t help.
- talldayo 2y ago
  > The Vision Pro is literally mind blowing. Mind-blowingly stupid? I used an Oculus Rift DK2 in 2014; the fact that Apple could brute-force a similar product with no market fit and slightly more "magic" in it hasn't impressed me the slightest. Add in the fact that it's slower than an iPad and costs as much as a used car and the thing is dead-on-arrival. Meta ate Apple's lunch with $500 headsets and Valve dominated the high-end with better controllers and software for years. The only way Apple can create market fit is by inventing a new price segment (read: Stupid Expensive) and leveraging their branding to do the heavy lifting. Apple dodged Khronos standards for years, avoided OpenXR during it's development, and got cut off from SteamVR after Valve gave up engineering support. They have so many loose ends to tie up that it's kinda hilarious anyone thinks Apple is a competitor in this industry, at this point. Vision Pro isn't an iPhone moment, it's a Lisa moment. We'll count ourselves lucky for each one we're not burying in a landfill.
  - pazimzadeh 2y ago
    I think it's apt that you're comparing it to the developer kit, because it is essentially a developer kit. They should have marketed it that way, but I guess they wanted to capitalize on the big spike of initial interest/excess money in the metaverse fans. After using it, I think that the vision pro needs a better optional input device for precise input. I think that hope that they are working on some kind of 'magic wand' that uses the same haptic feedback and gyroscope-type tech that is in the Apple Pencil. Once the weight is reduced and the input UI is fixed, it will be truly useful. > The only way Apple can create market fit is by inventing a new price segment (read: Stupid Expensive) and leveraging their branding to do the heavy lifting Meh, sounds like something steve ballmer would say. The price will drop. By the way, have you actually tried it?
    - talldayo 2y ago
      > By the way, have you actually tried it? Yes (albeit not at an Apple Store). For $3,500 it's not a competitive AR experience. It's not even cutting edge, either. Inside-out hand tracking has been a thing on standalone headsets since the first-gen Oculus Quest. Gaze tracking is more trouble than it's worth, the glowing eyes on the outside are like a cheap Halloween decoration, and the whole assembly feels like it will get bricked from a waist-height drop on the carpet. Have you tried other, modern headsets? Bigscreen Beyond, Pimax Crystal, even the Valve Index? It's a blowout. Apple's price tag doesn't justify the lack of competitive features compared to their alternatives. They can't break into a market of "metaverse fans" because they don't support OpenXR or SteamVR - they are explicitly only targeting Apple fans. As someone who isn't part of the Apple ecosystem anymore, the Vision Pro is a fucking joke. What am I supposed to use it for, a $3,500 dedicated 360-degree porno machine? An overpriced streaming client for desktop VR? I have literally zero applications for it, I wouldn't have a reason to own Apple's headset if it was as cheap as an iPhone. > Once the weight is reduced and the input UI is fixed, it will be truly useful. Do you honestly believe that? After hundreds of failed attempts to make VR useful, you sincerely think Apple will be the one to do it? This will only work if Apple can convince customers to go all-in on their ecosystem. And very clearly they won't; even the US Army doesn't have an interest in the headset where they have been applying Oculus Quest and Hololens operationally. Big businesses might care, but besides telecommunication applications I don't see where they're going to get applied. Consumers don't give a flying fuck, as evidenced by the lackluster sales and basically non-existent userbase entrenchment. > The price will drop. It certainly will. If the iPhone has taught us anything, it's that when prices drop, profit margins rise. The MSRP will only climb, especially as Apple gets more-and-more desperate for stupid and gaudy gimmecks like the eyeball passthrough.
- mingus88 2y ago
  I agree, but I didn’t feel amazed until I actually scheduled a demo and used it There have been so many bad VR headsets. I remember trying Doom on one in the 90s and getting motion sickness immediately. I also wear glasses so it’s never been great to wear anything else. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Vision Pro is just not getting any attention due to the high bar to actually use one. It’s not something you can describe that hasn’t been polluted by prior experiences with VR
- joshstrange 2y ago
  > The Vision Pro is literally mind blowing. For a day or two then the newness wears off quickly. It's an iPad you can strap to your face. If I thought the iPad was a real platform then I might be more interested but unless they make the Mac display thing much better and/or open up the Vision Pro to be a real computing platform then it's just a very expensive iPad and in most cases I'd honestly pick the iPad over it. I _really_ wanted to love mine but it got boring very quickly. It's only good as a content consumption device that has numerous downsides to just watching my TV. My TV is big enough, I couldn't make a much bigger screen in the Vision Pro without having to move my head (defeating the purpose) to see everything. It's cool, it was the sharpest text I'd ever seen in VR (I've also tried the Quest 2 and 3) but the Mac display was fuzzy and huge disappointment. I thought I could justify the cost if I could replace my monitors with it but it sucked as a monitor replacement and I never anticipated how much would be lost in a video chat. It looked like I had botox injections and my face was much less expressive. When you work remote you want every communication advantage that you can get, this added a significant degradation to all video chats. I could go on but I already have in a number of blog posts so I'll stop here. It might blow your mind in a demo but day-to-day use? Yeah, most people barely use theirs anymore and I returned mine. I'm sure there are a number of die-hard fans but it's a tiny number of people (hell, there were only a tiny number of Vision Pro headsets sold and if 50% are still in daily use or even weekly use I'd be shocked).
  - Nevermark 2y ago
    > If I thought the iPad was a real platform then I might be more interested but unless they make the Mac display thing much better and/or open up the Vision Pro to be a real computing platform then it's just a very expensive iPad and in most cases I'd honestly pick the iPad over it. The Mac screen replacement enhancement is the “killer app” for me. Mac screen surrounded by simpler (mostly Safari) windows. I would happily pay $4500, $5500 for a true “Pro” Mac replacement Vision. With an emphasis on maximizing the value of spacial computing for productivity. I can think of dozens of small Vision OS tweaks they could make now that would better facilitate this, even before any hardware updates. Alas, more power for its users is not an Apple priority. “Bicycle for the mind” is a lost mantra. “Media kiosk” is in. Even though they essentially created a new category of VR they show every sign of leaning back into “iOS, iOS, iOS”. Steve Balmer would be proud!

Obvious counter argument is the Vision Pro

by iorrus 2y ago

Obvious counter argument is the Vision Pro

gwbas1c 2y ago

That's like the Lisa. It needs Steve to make it palatable to everyone.

ggrelet 2y ago

No mention of it in the article, even though they wrote: > But it’s also why Cook’s Apple delivers fewer surprises. The delight is still there, but there’s less amazement. The Vision Pro is literally mind blowing.

MBCook 2y ago
But it’s not changing the world. It seems to be doing very poorly, at least partially due to Apple’s policies. The price obviously doesn’t help.
talldayo 2y ago
> The Vision Pro is literally mind blowing. Mind-blowingly stupid? I used an Oculus Rift DK2 in 2014; the fact that Apple could brute-force a similar product with no market fit and slightly more "magic" in it hasn't impressed me the slightest. Add in the fact that it's slower than an iPad and costs as much as a used car and the thing is dead-on-arrival. Meta ate Apple's lunch with $500 headsets and Valve dominated the high-end with better controllers and software for years. The only way Apple can create market fit is by inventing a new price segment (read: Stupid Expensive) and leveraging their branding to do the heavy lifting. Apple dodged Khronos standards for years, avoided OpenXR during it's development, and got cut off from SteamVR after Valve gave up engineering support. They have so many loose ends to tie up that it's kinda hilarious anyone thinks Apple is a competitor in this industry, at this point. Vision Pro isn't an iPhone moment, it's a Lisa moment. We'll count ourselves lucky for each one we're not burying in a landfill.
- pazimzadeh 2y ago
  I think it's apt that you're comparing it to the developer kit, because it is essentially a developer kit. They should have marketed it that way, but I guess they wanted to capitalize on the big spike of initial interest/excess money in the metaverse fans. After using it, I think that the vision pro needs a better optional input device for precise input. I think that hope that they are working on some kind of 'magic wand' that uses the same haptic feedback and gyroscope-type tech that is in the Apple Pencil. Once the weight is reduced and the input UI is fixed, it will be truly useful. > The only way Apple can create market fit is by inventing a new price segment (read: Stupid Expensive) and leveraging their branding to do the heavy lifting Meh, sounds like something steve ballmer would say. The price will drop. By the way, have you actually tried it?
  - talldayo 2y ago
    > By the way, have you actually tried it? Yes (albeit not at an Apple Store). For $3,500 it's not a competitive AR experience. It's not even cutting edge, either. Inside-out hand tracking has been a thing on standalone headsets since the first-gen Oculus Quest. Gaze tracking is more trouble than it's worth, the glowing eyes on the outside are like a cheap Halloween decoration, and the whole assembly feels like it will get bricked from a waist-height drop on the carpet. Have you tried other, modern headsets? Bigscreen Beyond, Pimax Crystal, even the Valve Index? It's a blowout. Apple's price tag doesn't justify the lack of competitive features compared to their alternatives. They can't break into a market of "metaverse fans" because they don't support OpenXR or SteamVR - they are explicitly only targeting Apple fans. As someone who isn't part of the Apple ecosystem anymore, the Vision Pro is a fucking joke. What am I supposed to use it for, a $3,500 dedicated 360-degree porno machine? An overpriced streaming client for desktop VR? I have literally zero applications for it, I wouldn't have a reason to own Apple's headset if it was as cheap as an iPhone. > Once the weight is reduced and the input UI is fixed, it will be truly useful. Do you honestly believe that? After hundreds of failed attempts to make VR useful, you sincerely think Apple will be the one to do it? This will only work if Apple can convince customers to go all-in on their ecosystem. And very clearly they won't; even the US Army doesn't have an interest in the headset where they have been applying Oculus Quest and Hololens operationally. Big businesses might care, but besides telecommunication applications I don't see where they're going to get applied. Consumers don't give a flying fuck, as evidenced by the lackluster sales and basically non-existent userbase entrenchment. > The price will drop. It certainly will. If the iPhone has taught us anything, it's that when prices drop, profit margins rise. The MSRP will only climb, especially as Apple gets more-and-more desperate for stupid and gaudy gimmecks like the eyeball passthrough.
mingus88 2y ago
I agree, but I didn’t feel amazed until I actually scheduled a demo and used it There have been so many bad VR headsets. I remember trying Doom on one in the 90s and getting motion sickness immediately. I also wear glasses so it’s never been great to wear anything else. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Vision Pro is just not getting any attention due to the high bar to actually use one. It’s not something you can describe that hasn’t been polluted by prior experiences with VR
joshstrange 2y ago
> The Vision Pro is literally mind blowing. For a day or two then the newness wears off quickly. It's an iPad you can strap to your face. If I thought the iPad was a real platform then I might be more interested but unless they make the Mac display thing much better and/or open up the Vision Pro to be a real computing platform then it's just a very expensive iPad and in most cases I'd honestly pick the iPad over it. I _really_ wanted to love mine but it got boring very quickly. It's only good as a content consumption device that has numerous downsides to just watching my TV. My TV is big enough, I couldn't make a much bigger screen in the Vision Pro without having to move my head (defeating the purpose) to see everything. It's cool, it was the sharpest text I'd ever seen in VR (I've also tried the Quest 2 and 3) but the Mac display was fuzzy and huge disappointment. I thought I could justify the cost if I could replace my monitors with it but it sucked as a monitor replacement and I never anticipated how much would be lost in a video chat. It looked like I had botox injections and my face was much less expressive. When you work remote you want every communication advantage that you can get, this added a significant degradation to all video chats. I could go on but I already have in a number of blog posts so I'll stop here. It might blow your mind in a demo but day-to-day use? Yeah, most people barely use theirs anymore and I returned mine. I'm sure there are a number of die-hard fans but it's a tiny number of people (hell, there were only a tiny number of Vision Pro headsets sold and if 50% are still in daily use or even weekly use I'd be shocked).
- Nevermark 2y ago
  > If I thought the iPad was a real platform then I might be more interested but unless they make the Mac display thing much better and/or open up the Vision Pro to be a real computing platform then it's just a very expensive iPad and in most cases I'd honestly pick the iPad over it. The Mac screen replacement enhancement is the “killer app” for me. Mac screen surrounded by simpler (mostly Safari) windows. I would happily pay $4500, $5500 for a true “Pro” Mac replacement Vision. With an emphasis on maximizing the value of spacial computing for productivity. I can think of dozens of small Vision OS tweaks they could make now that would better facilitate this, even before any hardware updates. Alas, more power for its users is not an Apple priority. “Bicycle for the mind” is a lost mantra. “Media kiosk” is in. Even though they essentially created a new category of VR they show every sign of leaning back into “iOS, iOS, iOS”. Steve Balmer would be proud!