The irony of seeing a guy with big goggles on his face gawking at his children and recording them while the narrator says something like "get closer to those memories that matter most."
You will not get closer to your family by hiding behind a big funny pair of goggles.
The immersive home-theater possibilities on the other hand, now we're talking. Plane rides could potentially become tolerable.
That being said, I still think watching movies is a group experience that's largely lost with a "single player" device. I love watching with my family and making popcorn and laughing and cuddling. It seems impossible or awkward when we would all have to have our own pair of goggles.
Apple: People are getting myopia from their screens being too close to their eyes.
Also Apple: We’re strapping two 4K displays to your eyeballs with our new Apple Vision Pro AR headset.
In all seriousness, this looks pretty awesome, and certainly paints a positive picture for AR in the future. It's pretty crazy how ahead Apple is to Meta considering Zuck pivoted their entire company around the space a few years ago. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple gets this headset to iPhone prices in 3-4 years. I imagine this will be around $3,000 now (price not announced as of my post), so it will just be an enthusiast tool for now, but mass adoption is certainly possible down the line.
For some reasons, VR headsets are known to improve myopia and crossed eyes. I don't know for cataracts but myopia don't seem to be a huge issue wrt VR uses.
As a layperson, that would be unsurprising if myopia is being caused due to short focal distances. It's not like your eyes are actually focusing on something an inch or two in front of them. As far as they're concerned, they're looking at something potentially several feet (or miles!) away.
Yeah honestly I'm surprised and disheartened that Apple went this direction. This feels dystopian and less humane in many ways – an accelerant of the physical isolation that we've seen technology create. The shots of people at home alone talking to an empty room, the dad playing his daughters with the headset on, the woman grabbing a drink from her fridge.
My hope is that this is a calculated step towards a more integrated form factor that will enrich our sense of connection and engagement with the physical world.
But if you feel anxiety you can download a 9.99 per month Mindfulness app, plug it to your 3.999 RSP headset, your 149.99 Bluetooth headphones and pretend you are in a Goop-approved Buddhist meditation landscape (in—app purchase at 9.99)
Those three shots in particular are a perfect execution of product marketing, designed to overload your critical thinking - “this is normal. Accept it. Embrace it”
The first time you see it it’s weird as fuck. The second and more times, not so much. A but like AirPods but much more extreme.
Whether this works out for them remains to be seen.
I know a few people that have improved or eliminated their myopia through more use of VR.
VR apps typically use far focal distance so even though the screens are close to your eyes, your eye muscles/lenses are typically held at far/infinity focal length.
The optics in VR headsets trick your eyes into focusing further away than the displays physically sit, the effective focal plane is usually around 1.5 meters away.
It's super interesting to see Apple's strategy played out here. It feels like so many of their announcements today are part of a strategy to essentially become "the OS for your life".
Apple's nudging people into using all their devices for every aspect of their life. Compare this with the idea of creating a metaverse where you can interact with other people. It's harder to get people to jump into a metaverse cold, whereas if you're already an iPhone user, it's easier to use the halo effect to drag you in.
It showed someone participating in a group video call. But it only showed what the other people (who were not wearing headsets) look like. What does the Vision Pro user look like? Does it just use animoji or something?
EDIT: sounds like they render a realistic animated image of you, if I caught that correctly?
I'm suspecting they'll ask users to enroll/login with camera for IPD correction, then make a figurative Live2D model using that picture, interior camera and lip sync.
Edit: and yep, your head is modeled and a doppelganger of you will show in calls.
I wonder how this will work without the ability to capture full facial expressions. Can they extrapolate from the features they can see, to fill in the gaps of what they can't see? Or will tone of voice be sufficient to let people know when you're happy or upset?
This could be the next generation of "tone gets lost in text".
From what they showed, it will be a reallistic-looking 3D avatar of yourself. It's quite into uncanny valley territory but it will likely improve over time. What they demoed looks a bit like a blurry deepfake.
I've always thought the killer feature to get people to start using AR/VR wasn't games or social experiences, but just a bigger screen for web browsing, Excel, dashboards and a bunch of other boring software.
Honestly, I'm not sure how Vision Pro product stacks up to what Apple says, but the marketing shows that Apple has clearly figured this out.
> I was initially a skeptic of widespread adoption of VR. I'm not sure that it's going to be the next smartphone. However, if it gets more comfortable and the price point goes down, I could see it being a replacement for traditional desktop monitors. Instead of paying $1k for a 27-inch display you get as many large screens as you want. That seems probable to me.
>
> I know that sounds awfully boring and mundane, but that probably comes way before other applications. After all the original iPhone was just an iPod you could make calls with.
I have often wondered why none of the other VR/AR companies really keyed in on this. While it it not as sexy as 'immersive video games' I can tell you that I would have been on the AR/VR train a long time ago if they were offering me the ability to use the goggles as a huge chunk of screen real estate. I can imagine a lot of people in mac-friendly open office spaces hopping onto this as soon as it is available.
Edit: OK, just saw the Disney pitch for Vision Pro. They are going to sell a ton of these things to every sports fanatic in the world.
It's the same with all the other VR headsets -- I know so many people who bought them and then months later they just sit there used only very sporadically.
Seems there are couple paths. Some goes full "sugaring" relationships in VRC, others go for stereo 3DoF porn, most loves them as interior decorations and few uses for other use-cases as industrial design and/or gaming.
I have previously owned a PS VR (the first iteration) and sold it after a couple months because it had only seen any action in the first couple weeks.
I now own a PS VR2. It's a lot less of a faff, but still far from ideal. I've had it for a couple months though, and my usage is actually increasing. I look forward to having some time to play, which due to work and other interests, happens only a few times a week. It takes some time and work to be fully set up and ready to play, and time to get off it, clean everything up, put it in charge, etc (there are 3 devices that need charging: 2 controllers and headphones.
What Apple seem to have done (or at least claim to) is to solve all or most of the issues with current VR tech, such as:
* Motion sickness due to low refresh rates and lag
* Resolution and front-door or mura effects
* Complete disconnection from the outside world unless you take the whole setup off (which takes some time to put in)
* Awkwardness of using your hands since they're attached to controllers and you can't see them (mostly)
* The choice between being tethered or having a heavy thing attached to your skull
* The need for yet another thing in order to get decent sound - I use a pair of over-ear headphones.
So, they combined: VR/AR/MR headset, GPU, CPU, controllers, headphones/sound system into one neat package. On top of that, as much as the breakout battery might not be ideal, it solves the weight vs tether vs operating time issue relatively neatly.
The price is really the main problem but given the amount of tech in this product it's understandable.
If it could fully replace a Macbook (run full blown macOS on it, connect to external display for off-headset work), there would be a lot more people jumping on it.
Use-case is the missing ingredient - we will have to see what comes of it. It reminds me a big of google glass -- impressive product without a reason to need it. Yes comparing glass and Vision Pro isn't fair but there are parallels.
Yes but once they shrink it down to regular sized glasses and all the innovations innovators will create for AR sunglasses (I.e. playing real ping pong or tennis with a friend & the glasses keeps/shows the score) then such glasses will be the next iPhone.
I would buy one if it scanned the environment and augmented it with realtime information. Like "this person is trying to scam you". "This product is cheaper online, order it it?" "I listened to your meeting, would you mind i propose a solution?". "Your current pattern of behaviour indicates x, might i propose you do x to prevent any further complications".
I remember when I got my first Windows Mobile device and I was showing civilians and the most common response was "why do you want to get email on your phone?"
When the iPhone came out, I heard the same thing - people couldn't figure out why they'd want the Internet with them in their pocket.
I also am not sure if there's a great use case for Vision Pro today - it looks like fun, at least, price tag aside! - but Apple have repeatedly demonstrated both long-term commitment to their products along with a grand vision. I look forward to seeing how it evolves.
I struggle to understand what some people were expecting. If it’s nothing more than putting screens in 3d space, it’s already worth it for me. I can sit on the couch, type on my MacBook, and look at multiple displays around me using the Vision Pro. As a bonus, I can still see what’s going on around me so nobody can come in and scare the shit out of me. Win win. I’ll take this content viewing device any day over a weird metaverse/avatar future that nobody wants.
The actual focal distance is somewhere around six feet on most headsets. If you're more nearsighted than that then yes you will need lenses, or to wear your glasses while using it.
The "EyeSight" feature has weird implications for how Apple thinks this thing should be used. I'm not really sure I love the idea of making it "easier" for someone to leave the goggles on while interacting with me.
> I'm not really sure I love the idea of making it "easier" for someone to leave the goggles on while interacting with me.
I think the big thing here is being able to go up and talk to someone real quick. If Im working and someone just wants to talk for 10 seconds, its much easier to just look over at them instead of slipping the whole headset off.
That's fair, but on the other hand I can imagine situations where it would be okay. Like maybe one person is working on something and another person is advising their interactions within the AR. It'd be nice to be able to interact a bit while still leaving the person mostly in the virtual world.
I'm thinking about an interaction kind of like the scene in Minority Report where one character is controlling the displays while the other is giving information and interacting with them, but it's not always a face-to-face interaction (https://youtu.be/7SFeCgoep1c). In that sort of situation, this kind of feature seems useful.
I don't think it's so weird, part of the usability issue with headsets has always been having to take them off to interact with meatspace stuff. For me at least, a big part of that was it being really awkward to talk to someone next to you from inside the headset, even if you see them in passthrough fine, since you can't make eye contact. Not sure if this will be perfect or have a "my eyes are up here" effect, but it doesn't seem like a strange idea.
I'm sure it will be a very slick and uncanny effect in action. But I think the lack of eye contact is a key part of maintaining some of the social friction to using these kinds of things all the time (which is, just in my personal opinion, a good thing.)
+1. Later on in the presentation they show a father taking pictures of his kids in 3d. Playing with your kids while wearing AR goggles is just beyond dystopian.
Same here. The fact that a usually "tasteful" company like Apple decided to demonstrate VR intruding into our life in this way, makes me somewhat worried about the future.
By comparison I suddenly find something like the Valve Index and the emphasis on gaming, much more benign.
I mean to be fair, in that video he was recording a video using the headset. In that context, I don't think it's _that_ different from a parent pressing their eye into a camcorder or holding up a smart phone.
It does have similar vibes, but personally I wouldn't have the same negative reaction if the same functionality was added to the iphone. There's just something inauthentic with the digitally projected eyes.
Agree. Here's hoping future iPhone/iPad models can capture Spatial Video, I'd much rather do that. That use case felt like one of the few "well, this is the way it works for now, ship it" moments.
I agree with all the mentions of dystopia, and have often considered the "Metaverse" to very much embody such. Then I get to thinking and realize the Gen A'ers will soon enough exclaim "Okay, Millennial" when we shout of these things being dystopian.
In contrast, for me this seems like the "killer feature" that differentiates it from the current generation of headsets. I've always been completely uninterested in anything AR/VR and a big reason for that is that these headsets make you feel so "cut off". The ability to see someone's eyes while they are wearing the headset reduces that feeling of isolation.
I agree that it will always be weird to just keep the headset on during an entire conversation or to just walk around with them all the time. But if someone is doing work or watching a movie or something with these on, and just needs to turn their head to talk to you for a minute, it's a nice feature to have.
_Gargoyles represent the embarrassing side of the Central Intelligence Corporation. Instead of using laptops, they wear their computers on their bodies, broken up into separate modules that hang on the waist, on the back, on the headset. They serve as human surveillance devices, recording everything that happens around them. Nothing looks stupider; these getups are the modern-day equivalent of the slide-rule scabbard or the calculator pouch on the belt, marking the user as belonging to a class that is at once above and far below human society. They are a boon to Hiro because they embody the worst stereotype of the CIC stringer. They draw all the attention. The payoff for this self-imposed ostracism is that you can be in the Metaverse all the time, and gather intelligence all the time_
I really see it as an evolution of the problem with cell phone cameras. People will pay good money to sit at a concert, recording the concert on their phone (in crappy quality), rather than to actually live and experience the moment.
It'll be interesting to see how this affects the market for high-end TVs and audio systems. A very large TV is $2k, an audio system is another couple thousand (including wiring/install).
If one of these costs $3k, it becomes a pretty reasonable decision for a single person who's investing in a setup. Of course, if you want to have people over to watch a movie/game, that complicates things. I wonder if there will be a rental market for these, or how long it will take for enough people to have them that they would bring their own.
Our projector + Sonos setup feels obsolete on a going-forward basis. My guess is that in 5 years we'll use it only when 4+ people are watching something, and even then we'll be tempted to complain about how much less immersive it is, thanks to the hedonic treadmill effect.
Don't forget about the screen. The bigger issue is that many people don't have room for a projector setup. Also, there's no effective way to rent a sound system as good as this.
One complicating factor is that it sounds like you have to get these fitted/personalized for your vision or glasses. That would be a buzzkill. Same for battery life, if everyone is reaching for a power adaptor during the third quarter of the Super Bowl.
For sure, my comment was in the context of single people, for whom the case is the most compelling IMO. I have a family and imagine that I'll get one in the next 24-36 months, my wife will eventually get one, and our kids will beg us to use them. I do think the hedonic treadmill will be real here, and the experience of watching TV will seem lackluster by comparison.
One demographic that will continue to prefer regular TVs is the Netflix-and-chill crowd, which would be concerned about knocking visors when going in for a kiss...
I'm not too worried about the battery. Supposedly it's a 2 hr life, and I figure most of the time I'd be sitting down using it anyway. Presumably it'll be USB-C powered, so I could just plug into one of my power banks when it's time to charge, instead of investing in a second Apple battery.
This is the first inverse of Apple. It's the first device that doesn't live with you on the journey... everything from "the throw it out the window macintosh," iPod, iPhone, Air, iPad... you name it, was about going with you where you went. It's striking...
I'm curious to see how the display resolution will look. Previously, when I tried a VR headset, I could easily spot the pixels.
Apple is renowned for their Retina displays, so it would be strange if they opted for a low resolution.
Curious if this will give a viable mobile workstation. If I can get the experience of a 4k ~32 inch monitor while traveling I'd consider buying it just for that. They seem to be promoting that..... getting nervous about price though.
I would expect that glasses won't be necessary for most nearsighted users and farsighted users would probably have some kind of internal diopter adjustment.
That is not the case with existing VR headsets. I'd be very surprised if apple has changed something to make that no longer the case.
Without glasses, i can only really make out text if its inches from my face. With my quest 2 though, i cannot see anything in the headset without my glasses. The objects in the headset act as if they are several feet away. I cant see objects several feet away without my glasses.
edit: later in the presentation they announce they are partnering with a company that makes corrective lens inserts. Similar solutions exist for other existing VR headsets already.
I think the misunderstanding comes from the fact that the display is physically close to the face, despite them "focused at infinity" and users having to focus give or take ~10m/30ft out.
They announced additional corrective lenses you can attach, which is the approach I use with my Index headset to supply my -5.5 and -6 prescription. The ones for the Index and other headsets are aftermarket though.
I have prescription lenses for my Oculus Quest 2. I'm sure something similar will be available for this. Ya, its another $60-90, but at $3k, it would be dumb not to invest in those.
This is clearly an early product launch which isn't ready for the mainstream yet. And I'm assuming it's going to be super expensive. But I'm pretty impressed. Unlike pretty much any other VR headset I've seen, I can actually imagine myself using this and deriving value from it.
This is the weird thing, they nowhere said this. Everyone expected they announce some limited for-development scheme like Google with Lens back then, but this is a full product launch.
I am massively looking forward to revisit this thread 5 years from now and find out which of the know-it-all comments have aged like milk or, conversely if it bombs, what the initial reaction was to Apple's hardest modern failure.
It's so hard to convey the experience this stuff without actually using it. Sure it looks awesome in these fake renders of what passthrough looks like, but IRL how does it look?
I have wondered how the temptation to share this sort of data with advertisers, movie platforms, etc. would work. Obviously there would be tremendous value in being able to guarantee that someone saw an advertisement, or to see when people are getting bored during a movie. But I wouldn't use any device that shares eye-tracking data.
If masses don’t accept this, AR VR might be set back by 5-10 more years. Just getting people to try modern XR out is hard enough, and retention is just as hard
I can see why the Jony Ive camp kept pushing for a thinner form factor.
Given the manufacturing rumors, I doubt I can get one without paying a scalper
If you can plug it in while using it 2 hours battery life might not be much of a problem.
Or if you can swap out the battery pack.
I'm more concerned with the sound design for flights. Those speakers aren't in your ears, they're probably audible to people beside you. (though if you're doing something without sound that's fine).
Any one know how the finger gesture control works? I wonder how accurate it would be. That UI seems to be a big advancement compare to other VR devices.
Oh dear, this looks even worse than imagined, with that massive tethered wire at the back.
Maybe the next version would be much better, cheaper and wireless. But not now.
EDIT: Come on admit it. You would not seriously buy this first version until it looks less clunky and more natural. Eventually it will look as natural as glasses.
Don't fall for Apple's mixed reality distortion field again, please.
If having a tethered battery reduces the weight of the headset, then I imagine it may be preferable that way. The weight of the Quest can make it uncomfortable to wear for long periods.
When Bob Iger came on stage I did a full facepalm. When they started buttering me up before announcing the price, I knew it was over.
At $3,499, this is a toy for rich people, not a new computing platform. It almost feels redundant next to an iPhone, which is really not the selling point you want for something that costs more than 3x as much.
The irony of seeing a guy with big goggles on his face gawking at his children and recording them while the narrator says something like "get closer to those memories that matter most."
You will not get closer to your family by hiding behind a big funny pair of goggles.
The immersive home-theater possibilities on the other hand, now we're talking. Plane rides could potentially become tolerable.
That being said, I still think watching movies is a group experience that's largely lost with a "single player" device. I love watching with my family and making popcorn and laughing and cuddling. It seems impossible or awkward when we would all have to have our own pair of goggles.
Not if they're big and cozy; you can all clink your earmuffs together while being choked out by the battery-pack cable!
I can't wait for the third or forth generation of this product.
If the children had headsets too they could render everybody as if they had no headsets.
Whether this is a good or a bad thing I do not know.
Apple: People are getting myopia from their screens being too close to their eyes.
Also Apple: We’re strapping two 4K displays to your eyeballs with our new Apple Vision Pro AR headset.
In all seriousness, this looks pretty awesome, and certainly paints a positive picture for AR in the future. It's pretty crazy how ahead Apple is to Meta considering Zuck pivoted their entire company around the space a few years ago. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple gets this headset to iPhone prices in 3-4 years. I imagine this will be around $3,000 now (price not announced as of my post), so it will just be an enthusiast tool for now, but mass adoption is certainly possible down the line.
For some reasons, VR headsets are known to improve myopia and crossed eyes. I don't know for cataracts but myopia don't seem to be a huge issue wrt VR uses.
That's surprising. Does anyone have a source for this? I'd love to learn more.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5701049/
http://n3.sinaimg.cn/sina_vr/647a35e2/20170612/YingWenBaoGao...
As a layperson, that would be unsurprising if myopia is being caused due to short focal distances. It's not like your eyes are actually focusing on something an inch or two in front of them. As far as they're concerned, they're looking at something potentially several feet (or miles!) away.
Yeah honestly I'm surprised and disheartened that Apple went this direction. This feels dystopian and less humane in many ways – an accelerant of the physical isolation that we've seen technology create. The shots of people at home alone talking to an empty room, the dad playing his daughters with the headset on, the woman grabbing a drink from her fridge.
My hope is that this is a calculated step towards a more integrated form factor that will enrich our sense of connection and engagement with the physical world.
But if you feel anxiety you can download a 9.99 per month Mindfulness app, plug it to your 3.999 RSP headset, your 149.99 Bluetooth headphones and pretend you are in a Goop-approved Buddhist meditation landscape (in—app purchase at 9.99)
Just like the actual Buddhist monks!
You'll also get the blue bubbles while the Meta Quest peasants will get green bubbles, making sure they get anxiety, not you.
Those three shots in particular are a perfect execution of product marketing, designed to overload your critical thinking - “this is normal. Accept it. Embrace it”
The first time you see it it’s weird as fuck. The second and more times, not so much. A but like AirPods but much more extreme.
Whether this works out for them remains to be seen.
I know a few people that have improved or eliminated their myopia through more use of VR.
VR apps typically use far focal distance so even though the screens are close to your eyes, your eye muscles/lenses are typically held at far/infinity focal length.
Don't forget the part about not spending enough time outside, exacerbating myopia.
And now you can bring the beautiful outdoors inside, so you never have to leave your couch again!
The optics in VR headsets trick your eyes into focusing further away than the displays physically sit, the effective focal plane is usually around 1.5 meters away.
https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/1371485209603022853
It's super interesting to see Apple's strategy played out here. It feels like so many of their announcements today are part of a strategy to essentially become "the OS for your life".
Apple's nudging people into using all their devices for every aspect of their life. Compare this with the idea of creating a metaverse where you can interact with other people. It's harder to get people to jump into a metaverse cold, whereas if you're already an iPhone user, it's easier to use the halo effect to drag you in.
It showed someone participating in a group video call. But it only showed what the other people (who were not wearing headsets) look like. What does the Vision Pro user look like? Does it just use animoji or something?
EDIT: sounds like they render a realistic animated image of you, if I caught that correctly?
They've got a interior facing camera, they could make you a pair of floating eyeballs!
Kidding, but also not, I imagine they make use of that camera for this somehow.
I'm suspecting they'll ask users to enroll/login with camera for IPD correction, then make a figurative Live2D model using that picture, interior camera and lip sync.
Edit: and yep, your head is modeled and a doppelganger of you will show in calls.
They're talking about this now. Sounds basically like this, except 3d. They also have lips (using downwards facing cameras I guess).
I wonder how this will work without the ability to capture full facial expressions. Can they extrapolate from the features they can see, to fill in the gaps of what they can't see? Or will tone of voice be sufficient to let people know when you're happy or upset?
This could be the next generation of "tone gets lost in text".
From what they showed, it will be a reallistic-looking 3D avatar of yourself. It's quite into uncanny valley territory but it will likely improve over time. What they demoed looks a bit like a blurry deepfake.
Suspiciously accurate! As they just explained on the stream, this is exactly how it will work.
I thought that was funny as well. I suppose this is where the new "poster" feature comes in? They'll just see pre-recorded looped video of you?
Your edit is correct. I was just going to reply. Your stream seems to be ahead of mine :(
Probably because I'm just down the road from Cupertino. That's how the internet works, right?
Here in Hillsborough. Your stream seemed to be a lot more than 5ms ahead.
I think I was in a 4 or 5k stream. Whatever apples page delivers when on a 5k monitor I guess.
You use the front LIDAR to scan the depth map of your face while the actual cameras take pictures.
Then they construct a virtual avatar out of that.
I've always thought the killer feature to get people to start using AR/VR wasn't games or social experiences, but just a bigger screen for web browsing, Excel, dashboards and a bunch of other boring software.
Honestly, I'm not sure how Vision Pro product stacks up to what Apple says, but the marketing shows that Apple has clearly figured this out.
> I was initially a skeptic of widespread adoption of VR. I'm not sure that it's going to be the next smartphone. However, if it gets more comfortable and the price point goes down, I could see it being a replacement for traditional desktop monitors. Instead of paying $1k for a 27-inch display you get as many large screens as you want. That seems probable to me.
>
> I know that sounds awfully boring and mundane, but that probably comes way before other applications. After all the original iPhone was just an iPod you could make calls with.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33358495
I have often wondered why none of the other VR/AR companies really keyed in on this. While it it not as sexy as 'immersive video games' I can tell you that I would have been on the AR/VR train a long time ago if they were offering me the ability to use the goggles as a huge chunk of screen real estate. I can imagine a lot of people in mac-friendly open office spaces hopping onto this as soon as it is available.
Edit: OK, just saw the Disney pitch for Vision Pro. They are going to sell a ton of these things to every sports fanatic in the world.
Probably because it’s not just the screen/goggles, but the whole ecosystem, i.e. the OS (input, touch, scrolling, mouse, widgets, …)
Imagine building this on Windows. It won’t suck less, it’s just suck in 3D.
I'm not sure that will be available this generation, that was a big "imagine" scenario from my understanding.
From what I understand the other headsets aren't suitable for code. With 23M pixels, I hope this one can cut it
Not a big company, but someone is trying this angle:
https://simulavr.com/
This is really a product looking for a solution. I am very skeptical that the people who buy this will be using it a year after they get it.
Wearing the headset while your kids are playing seems like something out of a dystopian scifi movie.
And using it to watch movies might work while lying in bed but sitting on the couch seems like the next 3D tvs.
It's the same with all the other VR headsets -- I know so many people who bought them and then months later they just sit there used only very sporadically.
Or do they just not want to talk about how much porn they watch?
Seems there are couple paths. Some goes full "sugaring" relationships in VRC, others go for stereo 3DoF porn, most loves them as interior decorations and few uses for other use-cases as industrial design and/or gaming.
VR headsets in general are a faff.
I have previously owned a PS VR (the first iteration) and sold it after a couple months because it had only seen any action in the first couple weeks.
I now own a PS VR2. It's a lot less of a faff, but still far from ideal. I've had it for a couple months though, and my usage is actually increasing. I look forward to having some time to play, which due to work and other interests, happens only a few times a week. It takes some time and work to be fully set up and ready to play, and time to get off it, clean everything up, put it in charge, etc (there are 3 devices that need charging: 2 controllers and headphones.
What Apple seem to have done (or at least claim to) is to solve all or most of the issues with current VR tech, such as:
* Motion sickness due to low refresh rates and lag
* Resolution and front-door or mura effects
* Complete disconnection from the outside world unless you take the whole setup off (which takes some time to put in)
* Awkwardness of using your hands since they're attached to controllers and you can't see them (mostly)
* The choice between being tethered or having a heavy thing attached to your skull
* The need for yet another thing in order to get decent sound - I use a pair of over-ear headphones.
So, they combined: VR/AR/MR headset, GPU, CPU, controllers, headphones/sound system into one neat package. On top of that, as much as the breakout battery might not be ideal, it solves the weight vs tether vs operating time issue relatively neatly.
The price is really the main problem but given the amount of tech in this product it's understandable.
If it could fully replace a Macbook (run full blown macOS on it, connect to external display for off-headset work), there would be a lot more people jumping on it.
Use-case is the missing ingredient - we will have to see what comes of it. It reminds me a big of google glass -- impressive product without a reason to need it. Yes comparing glass and Vision Pro isn't fair but there are parallels.
Better than parents using their phones whilst their kids are playing?
Yes but once they shrink it down to regular sized glasses and all the innovations innovators will create for AR sunglasses (I.e. playing real ping pong or tennis with a friend & the glasses keeps/shows the score) then such glasses will be the next iPhone.
I would buy one if it scanned the environment and augmented it with realtime information. Like "this person is trying to scam you". "This product is cheaper online, order it it?" "I listened to your meeting, would you mind i propose a solution?". "Your current pattern of behaviour indicates x, might i propose you do x to prevent any further complications".
I remember when I got my first Windows Mobile device and I was showing civilians and the most common response was "why do you want to get email on your phone?"
When the iPhone came out, I heard the same thing - people couldn't figure out why they'd want the Internet with them in their pocket.
I also am not sure if there's a great use case for Vision Pro today - it looks like fun, at least, price tag aside! - but Apple have repeatedly demonstrated both long-term commitment to their products along with a grand vision. I look forward to seeing how it evolves.
I struggle to understand what some people were expecting. If it’s nothing more than putting screens in 3d space, it’s already worth it for me. I can sit on the couch, type on my MacBook, and look at multiple displays around me using the Vision Pro. As a bonus, I can still see what’s going on around me so nobody can come in and scare the shit out of me. Win win. I’ll take this content viewing device any day over a weird metaverse/avatar future that nobody wants.
Try reality, that's cool too.
In what reality can I have three displays mounted around my couch?
Yeah if this just works it’s exactly what I want.
I'm curious about how it would work for people like me who are nearsighted. Do you get alternate lenses? Or do they correct the picture in software?
They just covered this in the stream. It has lens inserts.
They provide lenses. But I believe you would have to buy them separate.
The actual focal distance is somewhere around six feet on most headsets. If you're more nearsighted than that then yes you will need lenses, or to wear your glasses while using it.
I agree, especially if you can get multiple screens on your Mac.
The "EyeSight" feature has weird implications for how Apple thinks this thing should be used. I'm not really sure I love the idea of making it "easier" for someone to leave the goggles on while interacting with me.
> I'm not really sure I love the idea of making it "easier" for someone to leave the goggles on while interacting with me.
I think the big thing here is being able to go up and talk to someone real quick. If Im working and someone just wants to talk for 10 seconds, its much easier to just look over at them instead of slipping the whole headset off.
That's fair, but on the other hand I can imagine situations where it would be okay. Like maybe one person is working on something and another person is advising their interactions within the AR. It'd be nice to be able to interact a bit while still leaving the person mostly in the virtual world.
I'm thinking about an interaction kind of like the scene in Minority Report where one character is controlling the displays while the other is giving information and interacting with them, but it's not always a face-to-face interaction (https://youtu.be/7SFeCgoep1c). In that sort of situation, this kind of feature seems useful.
Another parallel is the 3D video feature - basically the projectors from that movie (that he uses to view a video of his child)
It looks like they are using a lenticular screen to create the "EyeSight" image, that way it looks 3d (ish) to the people around you.
They just specifically mentioned that in the presentation 15 minutes after you suggested it. Good eye.
I don't think it's so weird, part of the usability issue with headsets has always been having to take them off to interact with meatspace stuff. For me at least, a big part of that was it being really awkward to talk to someone next to you from inside the headset, even if you see them in passthrough fine, since you can't make eye contact. Not sure if this will be perfect or have a "my eyes are up here" effect, but it doesn't seem like a strange idea.
I'm sure it will be a very slick and uncanny effect in action. But I think the lack of eye contact is a key part of maintaining some of the social friction to using these kinds of things all the time (which is, just in my personal opinion, a good thing.)
+1. Later on in the presentation they show a father taking pictures of his kids in 3d. Playing with your kids while wearing AR goggles is just beyond dystopian.
This part really made me sad.
Same here. The fact that a usually "tasteful" company like Apple decided to demonstrate VR intruding into our life in this way, makes me somewhat worried about the future.
By comparison I suddenly find something like the Valve Index and the emphasis on gaming, much more benign.
I mean to be fair, in that video he was recording a video using the headset. In that context, I don't think it's _that_ different from a parent pressing their eye into a camcorder or holding up a smart phone.
Isn't it easier to look away, or pull your head out, if it's a smart phone?
It does have similar vibes, but personally I wouldn't have the same negative reaction if the same functionality was added to the iphone. There's just something inauthentic with the digitally projected eyes.
That image seemed very creepy.
Agree. Here's hoping future iPhone/iPad models can capture Spatial Video, I'd much rather do that. That use case felt like one of the few "well, this is the way it works for now, ship it" moments.
I agree with all the mentions of dystopia, and have often considered the "Metaverse" to very much embody such. Then I get to thinking and realize the Gen A'ers will soon enough exclaim "Okay, Millennial" when we shout of these things being dystopian.
In contrast, for me this seems like the "killer feature" that differentiates it from the current generation of headsets. I've always been completely uninterested in anything AR/VR and a big reason for that is that these headsets make you feel so "cut off". The ability to see someone's eyes while they are wearing the headset reduces that feeling of isolation.
I agree that it will always be weird to just keep the headset on during an entire conversation or to just walk around with them all the time. But if someone is doing work or watching a movie or something with these on, and just needs to turn their head to talk to you for a minute, it's a nice feature to have.
_Gargoyles represent the embarrassing side of the Central Intelligence Corporation. Instead of using laptops, they wear their computers on their bodies, broken up into separate modules that hang on the waist, on the back, on the headset. They serve as human surveillance devices, recording everything that happens around them. Nothing looks stupider; these getups are the modern-day equivalent of the slide-rule scabbard or the calculator pouch on the belt, marking the user as belonging to a class that is at once above and far below human society. They are a boon to Hiro because they embody the worst stereotype of the CIC stringer. They draw all the attention. The payoff for this self-imposed ostracism is that you can be in the Metaverse all the time, and gather intelligence all the time_
from Snow Crash by Neal Stephenson
This is scary as hell, especially the part where they showcased taking 3D video of your kids while they're playing outside.
Yeah, spend time outside with your children with an AR headset strapped to your face, while a screen on the outside of it conveys your emotions.
The future is scary and sad.
I really see it as an evolution of the problem with cell phone cameras. People will pay good money to sit at a concert, recording the concert on their phone (in crappy quality), rather than to actually live and experience the moment.
It'll be interesting to see how this affects the market for high-end TVs and audio systems. A very large TV is $2k, an audio system is another couple thousand (including wiring/install).
If one of these costs $3k, it becomes a pretty reasonable decision for a single person who's investing in a setup. Of course, if you want to have people over to watch a movie/game, that complicates things. I wonder if there will be a rental market for these, or how long it will take for enough people to have them that they would bring their own.
Our projector + Sonos setup feels obsolete on a going-forward basis. My guess is that in 5 years we'll use it only when 4+ people are watching something, and even then we'll be tempted to complain about how much less immersive it is, thanks to the hedonic treadmill effect.
> I wonder if there will be a rental market for these
It would be cheaper to rent 1 projector than 5 VR headsets.
Don't forget about the screen. The bigger issue is that many people don't have room for a projector setup. Also, there's no effective way to rent a sound system as good as this.
One complicating factor is that it sounds like you have to get these fitted/personalized for your vision or glasses. That would be a buzzkill. Same for battery life, if everyone is reaching for a power adaptor during the third quarter of the Super Bowl.
> Of course, if you want to have people over to watch a movie/game, that complicates things.
Or sit down with your family and watch something. That's still a thing people do, right?
For sure, my comment was in the context of single people, for whom the case is the most compelling IMO. I have a family and imagine that I'll get one in the next 24-36 months, my wife will eventually get one, and our kids will beg us to use them. I do think the hedonic treadmill will be real here, and the experience of watching TV will seem lackluster by comparison.
One demographic that will continue to prefer regular TVs is the Netflix-and-chill crowd, which would be concerned about knocking visors when going in for a kiss...
13 minutes later they made this exact comparison right before announcing pricing. At $3500.
That's not including the price of the custom myopic glasses, don't know about the battery.
I'm not too worried about the battery. Supposedly it's a 2 hr life, and I figure most of the time I'd be sitting down using it anyway. Presumably it'll be USB-C powered, so I could just plug into one of my power banks when it's time to charge, instead of investing in a second Apple battery.
I think it's telling none of the presenters actually had the goggles on when talking about it.
This is the first inverse of Apple. It's the first device that doesn't live with you on the journey... everything from "the throw it out the window macintosh," iPod, iPhone, Air, iPad... you name it, was about going with you where you went. It's striking...
This is a shift of epic proportions.
The battery pack cable seems really un-Apple to me as well, even if it's hard to avoid.
"Film your daughter's birthday party in 3D!"
Wish they had shown what the dad wearing the headset looked like.
Pretty sure iPhone 15+ will have 3D recording so this is just marketing right now.
I see the facetime part functionality as interesting -- but what do you look like on facetime if you are wearing this?
I'm curious to see how the display resolution will look. Previously, when I tried a VR headset, I could easily spot the pixels. Apple is renowned for their Retina displays, so it would be strange if they opted for a low resolution.
Apple investing a lot of silicon into AI and GPU cores in Apple Silicone for a few years now makes sense given what they are presenting here
Curious if this will give a viable mobile workstation. If I can get the experience of a 4k ~32 inch monitor while traveling I'd consider buying it just for that. They seem to be promoting that..... getting nervous about price though.
I'd be worried about being able to use this for more than 30-60 minutes without getting a splitting headache.
You have to buy separate lenses from zeiss in order to adjust the display if you need glasses???
You have to buy a dongle to connect the new lenses too. /s
You don't need full correction for VR. For me, a -2 seemed enough, which is >5 less than my normal glasses.
Doesn’t look very comfortable to wear for people that use glasses (50% of the population)
I would expect that glasses won't be necessary for most nearsighted users and farsighted users would probably have some kind of internal diopter adjustment.
There are other issues like astigmatism for example.
They just showed inserts for vision correction. They didn't specifically mention astigmatism correction, so not sure if that will be an option.
Yep. Just like how microscopes work where you don't need glasses and can just adjust the focus.
That is not the case with existing VR headsets. I'd be very surprised if apple has changed something to make that no longer the case.
Without glasses, i can only really make out text if its inches from my face. With my quest 2 though, i cannot see anything in the headset without my glasses. The objects in the headset act as if they are several feet away. I cant see objects several feet away without my glasses.
edit: later in the presentation they announce they are partnering with a company that makes corrective lens inserts. Similar solutions exist for other existing VR headsets already.
They just said there will be inserts for vision correction. No real detail about ranges of power yet.
I think the misunderstanding comes from the fact that the display is physically close to the face, despite them "focused at infinity" and users having to focus give or take ~10m/30ft out.
It may not be the case, but it could be the case-- AFAIK this is a solved problem for other use cases.
I know that the PSVR2 can have prescription lenses so it is possible for headsets to deal with this.
I've seen reports they are going to allow for prescription lenses in the headset since it's too thin for glasses.
Welp, they require magnetic glasses that clip onto the screens.
They announced additional corrective lenses you can attach, which is the approach I use with my Index headset to supply my -5.5 and -6 prescription. The ones for the Index and other headsets are aftermarket though.
Looks like they’re using magnetically attached prescription lenses.
I have prescription lenses for my Oculus Quest 2. I'm sure something similar will be available for this. Ya, its another $60-90, but at $3k, it would be dumb not to invest in those.
I mean, if I could pace the room when in a boring ass meeting without having to sit in front of screen - that’d be awesome.
What's stopping you now? Really curious, as I do that a lot already. :D
This is clearly an early product launch which isn't ready for the mainstream yet. And I'm assuming it's going to be super expensive. But I'm pretty impressed. Unlike pretty much any other VR headset I've seen, I can actually imagine myself using this and deriving value from it.
I think the main reason for the product is to create excitement for its future generations, which I think is pretty successful at for the moment :)
This is the weird thing, they nowhere said this. Everyone expected they announce some limited for-development scheme like Google with Lens back then, but this is a full product launch.
I am massively looking forward to revisit this thread 5 years from now and find out which of the know-it-all comments have aged like milk or, conversely if it bombs, what the initial reaction was to Apple's hardest modern failure.
Its a Segway for your face!
It's so hard to convey the experience this stuff without actually using it. Sure it looks awesome in these fake renders of what passthrough looks like, but IRL how does it look?
I'm scared what eye tracking might become with ads. If you look at the ad they know and can count it as a click. I'm still excited about the hardware.
This was specifically addressed in the presentation. Eye tracking will not be shared with apps.
Music production on this is going to be crazy good.
"Where you look stays private"
I have wondered how the temptation to share this sort of data with advertisers, movie platforms, etc. would work. Obviously there would be tremendous value in being able to guarantee that someone saw an advertisement, or to see when people are getting bored during a movie. But I wouldn't use any device that shares eye-tracking data.
Why did Meta preempt this with Quest 3. They safe
It is just another techKNOWlogy between me and another human, between me and reality.
I do not want someone interfering between me and those things.
A one paragraph news article with effectively zero details? Keeping that quality bar nice and high at techcrunch.
It's just now coming on (as of this writing) in the presentation. I'm guessing it's TechCrunch trying to "frist post!!11!" about the headset.
It's a livestream. There is more content being added literally as we speak.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYkq9Rgoj8E
If masses don’t accept this, AR VR might be set back by 5-10 more years. Just getting people to try modern XR out is hard enough, and retention is just as hard
I can see why the Jony Ive camp kept pushing for a thinner form factor.
Given the manufacturing rumors, I doubt I can get one without paying a scalper
Looks like a diving mask - clunky and bulky. It has a cable to something.
Battery is waist mounted with some kind of belt
Just the battery? Once you take the cost of a belt mounted device I'd think they would want to move (hot) compute off your head too.
This seems perfect for entertainment on long-distance flights - where you are confined to a small space and not expected to be social
But it was only 2 hours battery life?
If you can plug it in while using it 2 hours battery life might not be much of a problem.
Or if you can swap out the battery pack.
I'm more concerned with the sound design for flights. Those speakers aren't in your ears, they're probably audible to people beside you. (though if you're doing something without sound that's fine).
Maybe AirPods will be supported, they have some spatial audio as well.
Any one know how the finger gesture control works? I wonder how accurate it would be. That UI seems to be a big advancement compare to other VR devices.
Imagine wearing this fucking thing at your daughter's birthday party just so you can "re-live" it later.
You strap it on the dog.
Just kidding of course - but perhaps there's money being a Vision Pro photographer like you have at weddings.
3D recording will just come to phones but this is obviously not an iPhone event.
Oh dear, this looks even worse than imagined, with that massive tethered wire at the back.
Maybe the next version would be much better, cheaper and wireless. But not now.
EDIT: Come on admit it. You would not seriously buy this first version until it looks less clunky and more natural. Eventually it will look as natural as glasses.
Don't fall for Apple's mixed reality distortion field again, please.
If having a tethered battery reduces the weight of the headset, then I imagine it may be preferable that way. The weight of the Quest can make it uncomfortable to wear for long periods.
When Bob Iger came on stage I did a full facepalm. When they started buttering me up before announcing the price, I knew it was over.
At $3,499, this is a toy for rich people, not a new computing platform. It almost feels redundant next to an iPhone, which is really not the selling point you want for something that costs more than 3x as much.
"""Popular Unity-based apps and games""" aka VRChat.
They've really gone all in on this, very curious to see how it works out.
Once they shrink all its components into regular sized sunglasses then it becomes the next iPhone.
So much innovation to happen here like playing ping pong and the glasses keeping/showing you the score.
But as a headset the populace won't care too much as for over 30 years the populace has rejected headsets.
If Apple is the catalyst that brings back stereo photography I'm happy.
$3500
Pricing "starts at $3499.."
Any speculation on who the first adopters will be?
This is the most un-Apple (?) product announcement I've ever seen
Is this going to be Apple's first big bust in a while?
Rev 1 is going to do ok as developers figure it out, rev 2 is going to completely own the AR/VR space.
The 'persona' is straight out of Infinite Jest.
Imagine having to buy 4 of these for your whole family?
Imagine being a "family" that spends time in these...
big scuba mask vibes
As a CPAP user using a nasal mask but would not wear this for too long.
are there any hard technical details yet? it seems like there are a lot of cameras on (and in) this thing.
12 cameras.
I was really hoping for an apple version of something like the nreal air. Looks like a pass for me on the new apple ski goggles unfortunately.
2 hours of use on battery. Hmm.
So it's a Hololens VR with front and back cameras with a front LCD gimmick for displaying emojis...
A new entrant in the "No wireless? Less space than a Nomad? Lame." race...
This will definitely used for pornography.
Not from the App Store, it won't.