173
submitted 1 year ago by simple@lemm.ee to c/technology@lemmy.world

I honestly doubt this will take off, but it'll be interesting as a tech demo for what AR/VR can be at the highest end.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] JiveTurkey@lemmy.world 42 points 1 year ago

The anti-consumer apple BS aside. The lack of PC support or support for any real GPU that has a chance at running Games in full resolution, makes this dean on arrival for most people using VR.

[-] thehatfox@lemmy.world 36 points 1 year ago

Apple is pushing productivity as the main application for Vision Pro, to the point they don't even call it VR but spatial computing instead. I don't think gaming is really for a focus for them at the moment, instead they want to try and tap into other markets who aren't using VR currently.

[-] micka190@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

they don’t even call it VR but spatial computing instead.

I was under the impression these were meant to be AR glasses, not VR glasses? Either way, I'm not really sure who their target demographic is supposed to be at that price point.

[-] bdonvr@thelemmy.club 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It can be both, the device isn't transparent at all and the user can control how much of the real world they are seeing at any time. It's all cameras that create the AR effect. Applications can be anything from a floating window in the real world or a full VR immersion.

[-] CaptDust@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I wouldn't consider it AR because it's still a fully virtual environment the user is interacting with, granted it's built convincingly from the camera feeds. If the lens were a clear passthrough into the real world+layering virtual elements over it then I think it falls under AR.

It's mostly semantics though. The line between AR and VR has been fuzzy since we started shoving camera passthrough on devices.

[-] atocci@kbin.social 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Wow, your comment is the first time it's been made clear to me that this thing isn't actually see-through and that's just a screen on the outside. I thought it was essentially a sleeker looking Hololens. I've had the wrong impression of this thing the entire time, and now I'm much less impressed by it.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] MrSpArkle@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago

I mean this thing barely has Mac support, why would it have PC support? It’s basically its own computer you put on your head.

load more comments (11 replies)
[-] garretble@lemmy.world 38 points 1 year ago

Apple Vision Pro will be available starting at $3,499 (U.S.) with 256GB of storage. Pre-orders for Apple Vision Pro will begin on Friday, January 19, at 5 a.m. PST, with availability beginning Friday, February 2.

So 256GB for all those movies and games you'll want to play on that long plane ride they keep showing as a way you'll definitely use these.

I'm in the Apple ecosystem pretty hard, but we'll really just have to see what rich folks do with this thing.

[-] fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago

How many movies do you actually need to store on the device itself? Apple has been all in on streaming stuff so you'd only ever need to actually download stuff when you're planning on going offline.

That said for it's price that's hilariously small storage, but simultaneously peak Apple.

[-] NegativeInf@lemmy.world 28 points 1 year ago

How much bandwidth do planes have?

[-] jdf038@mander.xyz 14 points 1 year ago

Does it matter? Download a few movies for an 8 hour flight. Not a big deal on any device.

Also I still think this product is horrendously overpriced but it'll be interesting to see how it plays out.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] thehatfox@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This is going to be an interesting launch. There's been rumours about low production volumes so availability may get pushed back much further than February. Which will make judging the initial impressions harder when there are so few devices in peoples hands (or on heads).

I'm also a bit surprised by the lack of build up from Apple. There's been no push on whatever third party apps are going to be ready for this. The Apple Watch had two dedicated events in the lead up to launch. Even the press release seems a bit basic, most of the imagery seems to be reused from the first events press materials.

This is the biggest product introduction since the iPhone but it's being handled rather quietly.

[-] garretble@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

I feel like this is the version they'll put in the goodie bags for celebs at the Oscars to let them create a bunch of buzz. And then next year there will be a version that only costs $2000 or something - still expensive but less out of reach for mortal humans.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Sirico@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

So glad Apple is inventing VR

[-] echodot@feddit.uk 10 points 1 year ago

It's a whole new never before seen industry.

[-] echodot@feddit.uk 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's a really interesting product but unless you're a trust fund kid you basically can't afford it.

The apple strategy usually is to make a stupidly expensive product that everyone laughs at (remember the wheels for the tower computer), and then the actual product they expect people to buy.

They seem to have forgotten the second bit, but I'm wondering if something's going to come out in 6 months called just the Apple Vision

[-] Naz@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago

I have the equivalent of a trust fund and I'm not stupid enough to buy this for $3.5K.

Go get yourself a BigScreen VR for $1K, and then a fuckin' full top of the line prebuilt with the remaining $2.5K.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] LanternEverywhere@kbin.social 12 points 1 year ago

Given Apple's track record i wouldn't bet against it succeeding, but... I don't get it. My oculus that cost 350 does 95% of what the apple device does but costs literally 10 times more.

[-] CaptainSpaceman@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago

Its absolutely a ridiculous price tag, but its naive to say oculus is 95% the same

[-] LanternEverywhere@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago

You wanna say 90% the same? Fine, it's 90% the same for 90% less money.

[-] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

It's really not. Apple are going for productivity. Try reading text all day on your Oculus and see how that goes.

[-] Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee 12 points 1 year ago

Does yours have _creepy stalking eyes _ on the front? I thought so. Clearly the killer feature that justifies the extra 2000 bucks

[-] bandwidthcrisis@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

Do your research. This has been possible with Oculus for some time: https://imgur.com/Kfmt88E

[-] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 5 points 1 year ago

I feel like Apple is taking a different approach to VR than other companies, making it a more mobile device than competitors.

[-] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

Really curious what this year will hold for this device. Even more curious to see the price tag and features on Gen 2

[-] ExLisper@linux.community 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I don't really get the point of all this. Sci-Fi movies are trying go convince us for a very long time that interacting with a computer by standing and waving your hands around is the future but for me it just looks tiring. I prefer my keyboard and mouse. We'll see how many people Apple can convince. Maybe they are right and you just have to use it to believe it...

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] xenomor@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

I’ve never been more excited to not buy a product in my life.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

They are lucky that no one decided to compete with them. They have some features that aren't otherwise to market yet. So their price is less obviously bloated. If other headsets had been positioned to directly compete, they would have been able to do so at the 2000$ price range.

Overall, any new company entering the market is good news. VR is finally ready for normal people. Quest 3 basically crossed the line to being worth recommending as a virtual monitor alone, not to mention all it's other capability.

So at this point, more exposure of what VR is now can only be a good thing. All it's missing now is being considered a normal thing to do. The more "normal" companies making VR headsets, the better. As long as their headsets don't suck. Cuz even if I wouldn't want to use it anyway, it getting bad press still affects the rest of VR.

I don't care if it's over priced, as long as it doesn't end up having any glaring issues. People lamenting that it's too expensive are at least still interested, and can be redirected to a more reasonable headset. And even if only influencers end up having the apple headset, as long as they like it, it's a net positive for the whole community.

[-] clearedtoland@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

I’m an early adopter and probably Apple’s target audience. I sure as hell don’t have the cash on hand to buy it and I’d consider financing it but - I have such a bad taste in my mouth from the AR/VR concepts over the years. The Quest was a flop for me. The XReal Air too.

They’re fun, for a bit, then they sit in a corner. I could see it being useful on my work from home days but outside of that, my phone is the most compelling partner to my Mac.

[-] JaymesRS@literature.cafe 9 points 1 year ago

No WiFi. Less space than a Nomad. Lame.

[-] LanternEverywhere@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago

And those people weren't wrong at the time. The iPod wasn't successful in its first few generations. It didn't become successful until several generations later after they changed a bunch of the problems with it. One of the aspects that makes Apple so successful is that they're willing to stick with a new product for many years while they keep working on figuring out what the device needs to become a good product.

[-] MrSpArkle@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 year ago

It was successful immediately because there literally wasn’t any other player in the world that had its capacity and physical size.

Everything else lacked mass market appeal because it couldn’t hold enough songs or couldn’t fit in your pocket.

Not to mention the vast majority of the population didn’t know how to pirate music, and most music stores were shit compare to iTunes(and that is not a great endorsement).

The only huge barrier to adoption was the initial FireWire only model, but I’d be willing to bet even with that restriction they sold more units in the first year than any other model of music player.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] kibiz0r@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

Because the price is always the main topic, I’m gonna drop a link to an AR/VR expert contextualizing the Vision Pro price within the current (well, 7 months ago) market:

Apple Just Beat the “BEST VR Headset In the WORLD”.. and did it cheaper.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] poopkins@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

With dwindling iPhone sales (it's not for a lack of market share, but smartphone purchases are down as people aren't refreshing their phones every year anymore), Apple needs to find the next accessory akin to Apple Watch that will further line their pockets. I mean, the stock price can't just remain stagnant, right?

[-] Klear@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago

This thing is gonna sell so many Quest 3s.

[-] Blackmist@feddit.uk 6 points 1 year ago

So what are the controllers like?

[-] ipipip@iusearchlinux.fyi 6 points 1 year ago

I don’t think there are any, you just use your hands.

[-] Blackmist@feddit.uk 12 points 1 year ago

Oh.

So you can expect at least three revisions of this before they inevitably release one with optional controllers for when you need any amount of precision. And you'll need a Apple Vision Pro 4 to be able to use them.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] whereisdani_r@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

I don't see mass adoption at this price point. What's the point?

I really don't see the productivity sell. I do see it as functional entertainment to get more use out of an 800 square foot apartment in NYC. If my partner and I disagree on something entertainment wise I can throw them on. That's about it..

[-] GreatRam@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

The point of this isn't mass adoption. It's to get developers to start developing for it. I'm sure within a couple of years they'll release a non pro version for like a 1500 and people will be all over it

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] mydude@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

They will perfect this tech over the next few years, then put in mind-treading tech too, and sell it to you for 5 bucks. Don't mind the mind-reading tech, it's only there to make the product better, I promise.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 08 Jan 2024
173 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

70031 readers
3874 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS