Apple

17278 readers

206 users here now

Welcome

to the largest Apple community on Lemmy. This is the place where we talk about everything Apple, from iOS to the exciting upcoming Apple Vision Pro. Feel free to join the discussion!

Rules:

No NSFW Content
No Hate Speech or Personal Attacks
No Ads / Spamming
Self promotion is only allowed in the pinned monthly thread

Lemmy Code of Conduct

Communities of Interest:

Apple Hardware
Apple TV
Apple Watch
iPad
iPhone
Mac
Vintage Apple

Apple Software
iOS
iPadOS
macOS
tvOS
watchOS
Shortcuts
Xcode

Community banner courtesy of u/Antsomnia.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Hands-on: I’ve tried Apple’s Vision Pro and these are the five things to be most excited about - iMore (www.imore.com)

submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

46 comments fedilink hide all child comments

No matter if you feel the price tag is too high, or feel it’s a gimmick that won’t appeal to many, the Vision Pro will usher in a new era of apps and products.

To me, this is similar to when the iPhone was getting ready to be released. Many said it was expensive, had no keyboard, was too big and wide to be comfortably held, and would never sell. That all started to change once people got their hands on the device.

I feel that the Vision Pro will have the same effect, but this is one device you’ll truly need to test out and experience. Based on those that have been fortunate enough to actually use it, it’s not a gimmick.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

These goggles are not replacing or upgrading anything.

Um. Yes they are. Meta Quest, Microsoft HoloLens, etc.

Sure - those might be products you don't currently use... but I'd argue that's likely because they're not very good. A lot of people didn't use smartphones either before the modern smartphones became a thing.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Yeah I’m sorry to tell you that it’s just not a big thing. Is it cool? Sure. But I don’t need it, won’t buy it, and probably wouldn’t even if it was affordable (which it isn’t).

I’m not going to argue with you about this, so we’ll just have to wait and see who’s more “correct”.

Cheers.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Yeah. I don’t think any of this has been proven out. There is a lot of wait and see still to come in the world of VR/AR.

I’m really curious what the tipping point will end up being. It does not feel like Apple Vision Pro is locked in to be that thing. But it will position Apple well if something does come along that is the tipping point.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (2 children)

That’s a fair take.

As for your other comment in here somewhere… did Suckerberg not spend billions on his metaverse? It’s not that there isn’t money being put into it, it’s just that the interest isn’t there. VR has been a “thing” for decades already, it isn’t new.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

The metaverse is a whole other ball of wax. Thats virtual social environments.

VRChat is thriving. They hit a new 100k concurrent users record over new years.

Apple is also specifically not worrying about “the metaverse” or “SocialVR” either. Yes, they have video calls. And group calls. But, they don’t have full on Memoji Land Social VR Or anything like it.

SocialVR/VRChat is actually the most popular use for people who are VR enthusiasts. AFAIK.

It’s yet to be seen if VRChat, or similar will make it to Vision Pro. The lack of vr controllers may be an awkward situation there.

Oh, and to your point about Metaverse failing. That’s a hard one to crack unless you are open to allowing everything to be totally free form like VRChat. Making a safe metaverse with clean public spaces that people also want to use is difficult.

Oh, and for me, “Metaverse” is only framed as SocialVR. Not the expansive all-inclusive omni thing definition. The whole word has been muddied.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

He spent billions on a platform for which the primary audience (techie people) is not interested because his privacy and data position is a non-starter.

Most big tech like this takes off because techy people buy it and then show their friends. They help them buy and set up their own version of it to start until these companies eventually make it simple enough for non-techies. That’s how the game works.

Zuck made it completely unpalatable for those early adopters and he tied it to Facebook, a platform that young people despise. It was never going anywhere to begin with.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

A big part of the reason it's not a big thing is because of how fucking disgustingly bad the hardware is.

You can ignore the fact that you can see pixels on other headsets a lot of the time, but pretty much only for games. You can't for very many of the use cases Apple has been showing. They kill text clarity, and they (and latency, and smashing the color space) kill passthrough.

Apple waited until they could make something over the bare minimum threshold for actually using it for things that aren't games.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

But what need or use does it fulfill? Other than being a neat piece of technology, what use does the average person have for it?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

There are plenty of people with several physical monitors, because having information immediately accessible in a concrete location is simply easier and more efficient than toggling virtual work spaces on one desktop. Our brains work in 3D physical space. Presenting information and work spaces the same way has loads of value before the actual objects are also 3D.