- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
It’s a native feature of the device that allows its user to get enormous amounts of attention, in real life and subsequently online, by simply wearing it in public.
Sounds horrible. I guess I’m not someone who seeks attention at any cost like some people, it public is the last situation I’d use this thing in. I would feel like a complete dumbass wearing it at a coffee shop and waving my hands around.
It’s the same problem google glass had. It can be the most information rich and user friendly device in the world but if you look like a dingus wearing it, it will never catch on.
That’s what I thought about the elephant tusk looking AirPods yet here we are.
The Reality Distortion Field sometimes makes things hard to predict when it comes to Apple products.
People on here are wired.
Air pods just look like regular apple headphones just without wires.
They sure as shit look less goofy than my huge pixel buds that stuck an inch out of my ear.
You’re probably thinking of the current gen AirPods rather than the original (comparison).
Lol. So Gen 2 they were finally like “let’s shape this thing more like someone’s ear”. Then Gen 3 “Fuck it, ears are apparently different shapes let’s just go with the tried and true method that’s been around on $5 earphones for a decade”
Only “pros” have human ears. Everyone else must be mutants.
I’m kind of surprised people felt that way about AirPods. I don’t remember that at the time. They seem quite mild to me at this point - people didn’t mind wearing regular earbuds around, why worry if there’s a cord or not?
I thought they looked like uncooked long macaroni.
What if I already look like a dingus?
Then if you wear it you’ll be an even bigger dingus and make other dinguses look less dingusy. It would kinda be a public service of sorts I guess.
The lesser known brother of the Overton window - the Dingerton window.
Yeah, last thing I want is more attention while wearing those things and the chance that people will be able to hear the audio from the pr0n I’d be watching on it.
The masturbating in public might be a dead give away too
Oh shit… I wonder if they see me doing it now? This subway car seems pretty full, but no one’s making eye contact… so I should be cool.
Actually, this makes me wonder if the Vision Pro would register your strokes as inputs while you were trying to do the deed?
Yes. And if you’re connected to the internet you’ll start summoning demons.
Public? No officer, i was masturbating on the moon!
Nono you can send out a signal to everyone else’s Vision Pro to hide what you’re doing with your hands. You’ll be totally in private!
Yep, no chance I’m drawing that much attention to myself.
And it’ll get snatched from you faster than an iphone
I want it like crazy. No chance I’ll wear it in public after I pull the trigger.
I probably would throw it in my backpack on hikes to do some captures of stuff like waterfalls and nice mountain views. They’re really nice and not something you can do with my regular camera.
How does that work? Does it stitch together panoramas?
So I asked, and you can’t do captures to use for the backgrounds with the headset (I’m guessing they use better equipment and maybe some processing), but it does do “spatial photos and video”. That was part of the demo in the store and they’re really impressive. The 15 pro can also capture a 3D video that still looks cool, but has noticeably less depth than the captures with the headset.
I’m not sure the exact technical details, but there are a whole bunch of cameras and other sensors. I’m assuming it uses all of them combined to capture the 3D photos. But there was a lot of depth in the version I saw in the demo.
That’s why I bought one. To record spatial videos. I already tried it and without the straps (which pop off easily) you just pick it up and hold it like a camera, record video with your hands on it like a camcorder, then put it back down. It’s very much like just putting an old school camcorder to your eye for a few seconds. And there is no way in hell I’m wearing it in public except on an airplane maybe
They bought themselves into a beta test/focus group. Apple still doesn’t know what this will be. It might be a Newton MessagePad. Or it might be the iPhone.
Apple is great at polishing and packaging things that already exist. The iPhone was a better Blackberry, the iPod a better MP3 player, the iMac a better all-in-one PC… I have a hard time thinking of stuff they truly pioneered. The Newton maybe? That did not end well for them.
If I had to bet, the Vision Pro will turn out to be a burnt pancake, but long term I have no doubt that something like it — something that augments reality one way or another — will become a thing. And in the meantime Apple has pockets more than deep enough to survive a failed Vision Pro.
The backlash against them trying to innovate is kind of dumb though. They aimed high for a change, and taking risks like this should be lauded not laughed at.
The problem is they didn’t aim high enough. AR/VR lives or dies on software. And for what they launched, it barely has the OS, and apparently that thing, although very polished UX wise, on security it’s a swiss cheese. And few people has the pockets to develop apps for it.
They are still failing, in 2024, to put touch capability into their computers. This isn’t a company that does innovativion well, and it hasn’t been for over 15 years. It’s totally fine to scoff at this attempt.
I really don’t see touchscreens on laptops to be something to judge a company’s innovation on. I work in communications and I can really only think of two coworkers that personally own touchscreen laptops.
I have zero interest in touch screen on my laptop. It is not standard on Windows and has yet to show any really benefits.
There was quite a different reaction to the iPhone when it launched, so I’m pretty confident it’s not the latter.
It’s 100% not anything like the original iPhone. Say what you will, it will never be that.
I just meant as successful. They’ve had several. The original iPod. The iPad. They’ve also had duds. The newton. The HomePod. The Pippin. Ping
Do we really want to live in a world where people are walking around with these things on their face, gesturing around like they are insane?
It’s bad enough to witness how awful public spaces have become since smartphones came out, but this is next level zombie.
It is inevitable to a degree. Obviously this is not the final form and I’m sure the goal is to make a more fashionable solution that fits into their phone/watch/airpods kind of edc strategy. But no doubt we’ll have a future where info is right there if we want it. This thing is the foray into developing that eventual product for Apple. To me it looks real dumb, but a sleeker version in the future that looks like glasses…well shit it might be nice to watch a show while washing dishes idk.
But no doubt we’ll have a future where info is right there if we want it.
But we’re already there. It’s called a smartphone.
The value add of replacing a pocket watch or a cellphone with a device about the same size that also fits in your pocket but also gives you access to all the world’s information in seconds is immense. And that’s why the smartphone revolutionized the world.
The value add of having that information strapped to your face at all times is… just not worth the physical discomfort of having said device strapped to your face.
I say this as a VR user. A device strapped over your face really sucks and you can’t wait to take it off. The only reason to tolerate it is that that’s the only way to trick your senses into thinking you are somewhere else.
I think they meant in the future when the form factor is the same as wearing glasses.
My glasses are on my face every minute of every day, except when showering and sleeping. I’m uncomfortable when they’re not there - and not just because I can’t see, but because I’m so used to it.
That’s probably the future - people being uncomfortable if a screen isn’t in their vision every waking moment, because it’s as physically comfortable and as “normal” as wearing glasses, and more comfortable than looking down at a phone.
It’d be an amazing feat for technology, but similarly as dystopian as having a social media-feeding PC in your pocket, or just any PC if you’re another generation older. Future people will eat it up though, just like we eat up the phones.
Now I’m imagining marketing where the old millennials are staring at their phones, and the young people are complaining about how grandpa never engages with other human beings or makes eye contact - but they’re still scrolling TikTok while talking to him.
It would be ar glasses I’d think, not a headset with a strap. At least that would be my guess as to the end state.
Yea, while it’s way out of my price range and looks a little goofy, this is exactly what I’ve been hoping for as the next step to VR. AR (or whatever Apple wants to call it) is super fascinating, and will be pretty much the main reason for me to get a headset in the first place.
While it may have issues, I’m really excited to see how the market reacts to it, hopefully occulus or another company will try and compete. Feels weird to say, but I’m hoping Apple finds success with it
deleted by creator
If people can behave, I don’t care what they wear or what they watch
About 200,000 years of history proves that we cannot lol
Did you not see the video of the guy wearing his new tim apple ski goggles, in his semi-self driving Tesla cyber truck?
What makes you think people can behave?
I want you to imagine a subway car, where 50% of the people have these on their face.
They are waving their hands around, sometimes accidentally hitting other passengers because of it.
They are too distracted to even catch their stop, so there’s always extra chaos because of it.
Some are using apps that record what they are seeing and makes other passengers “naked” in their headset, which they share online. Privacy is a thing of the past because they can record what they see.
Imagine nobody being able to even have a conversation with other people, or make human connections with strangers, because the person across from them has a digital mask on, and you have no idea if they are even aware of what’s going on around them.
Sure, you can have a great number of people “behaving” in this scenario, but is this something you want society to become? I don’t. It deprives the human experience to an absurd extent.
I’m sorry, but do you just talk to strangers on the subway?
We already have smartphones that everyone is looking at anyway.
Before that we had newspapers.
You are making up an imaginary dystopia to peddle fear for no reason.
Old people usually strike a conversation.
I’m sorry, but do you just talk to strangers on the subway?
I very often greet people, say polite things, perhaps engage in some light conversation with strangers. It’s quite human to have these social interactions.
We already have smartphones that everyone is looking at anyway.
Yes, which is already bad enough. Why make it worse by having them on our faces?
Before that we had newspapers.
True, but newspapers didn’t take people out of the environment they were in - it was simply an object within that environment in which people were still fully able to interact with the outside world uninhibited.
These headsets are designed to remove you from reality, while you are still in it. =
You are making up an imaginary dystopia to peddle fear for no reason.
Nah, I just see where corporate interests are trying to move society, and I’m concerned about the negative impacts it will have.
Sliders on Peacock Season 4 Episode 4, “Virtual Slide”. Worth watching as this episode from 1998 realistically conveys the dystopian potential of VR/AR headsets. The headsets are centrally controlled and wirelessly networked. Topics covered include privacy violations, IP theft, manipulation of reality, social decay, virtual image and body autonomy, nested reality. It’s only taken 26 years to create a convincing reality that allows someone to wear the headset publicly with minimal problems. The fact that Apple hit the target on a 1.0 product is actually frightening. What will another 30 years of development bring?
Do we really want to live in a world where people are walking around with these things on their face, gesturing around like they are insane?
You’ve seen someone talk on radio earbuds when the phone’s in their pocket? It’s the second most creepy thing I’ve ever seen with a phone conversation.
I’ve had people looking at me while they are talking to people on concealed earbuds. It’s embarrassing if you respond to them as if they were actually talking to you. But how would you know who the hell they are talking to? 🤷♂️
I’m old enough to remember the advent of two of the most annoying pieces of electronics ever…
-
The Bluetooth earpiece - which made everyone having a conversation look like they were either talking to themselves or possibly schizophrenic.
-
Those god-awful push to talk walkie talkie type phones from mainly Nextel - which not only made you privy to the both parties conversation but had the freaking awfully loud and obnoxious beep in between switching parties talking. I wanted to strangle anyone using one in a restaurant.
I’m not sure that as a species we are capable of being present in the moment and not searching for that next hit of dopamine from a device with a screen. And Lord knows I’m as guilty as the next person.
-
Wh do you care?
It’s an AR iPad. It’s not that deep.
I would love to walk around with a video playing in a fixed hud while I go around doing chores. I’m constantly finding places to put my phone down every time I move to another station.
I’m not paying $3500 for that, though.
That was the idea of Google glasses but it was too early and tech wasn’t ready. It was gonna give you just enough useful info and get out of the way.
Plus Google haters made “glass-holes” viral.
I’m not sure whether it would work better today.
What seems odd about the glasses is that they’re essentially bodycams, but just unobtrusive enough not to be identified as such from a distance.
Someone walking around with an AR headset makes it very clear they’re wearing a tech device, someone holding up a phone in front of them signals “I might be filming”, but someone wearing slightly unusual glasses won’t catch any attention. And that seems very weird to a lot of people.
I thought Google Glass was a really cool idea. I actually liked Google back then.
To be fair, that product was crazy expensive. It was basically exclusively for wealthy people. If it was cheaper, and easy to develop for, it would have been a huge success.
Look at what Apple has done here by comparison… This bullshit is even more expensive.
I’m working on an open source version of an AR OS that can run on any Android phone, so you (will be) in luck!
Get a pair of Viture glasses then, it’s about $500
The windows don’t come with you, you’d have to look at the corner and pinch to carry it around, then when you let go it anchors wherever you left it
If you weren’t aware https://youtube.com/shorts/zhXLC7n62YQ?si=TSu1p-WixFcbSxb2
It’s not even AR… Didn’t they back down from that? Isn’t it mixed reality or something?
How is augmented reality different from mixed reality? Genuine question. They sound like the same thing.
I believe AR overlays information about the real world where as mixed reality just shows you the real world with a few apps floating about
Yes, AR analyses your world and you and gives you more info about the reality, Mixed Reality just has your screens attend into the world without interacting with it. The only thing I saw that was really AR was the use with a MacBook as a screen.
You’re describing the difference between “passthrough” AR, and “look through” (or “optical”) AR.
AR and MR or more pretty much interchangeable.
I don’t think so. For example with true AR you could look at something like a bus and have it tell you information like the schedule, route, if it’s running on time etc. This is done automatically and without user interaction. What the Vison Pro does is give you floating apps you can interact with
There is nothing about the Vision Pro that prevents that from happening other than they haven’t implemented it.
The
abilityfeature to automatically give you information about arbitrary things you’re looking at isn’t a requirement for “true AR”.I’m not really defending vision pro, it seems pretty limited. But that doesn’t make it “not true AR” and MR doesn’t mean “crappy/inferior AR”
I didn’t see anyone mention this, but while this headset depicts the outside world when you are wearing it, you are viewing a camera feed of that world. True AR would be like google glass where it is a piece of glass with data projected onto it. Apples thing recreates the world around you and then adds in the applications, you are viewing the world through a filter.
It could also just be marketing too because it seems like they are trying really hard to not make this look like some nerd shit.
They are the same thing. I think that they’re confusing it with the difference between “passthrough” AR (you watch an opaque display showing video of the outside world) and “see through” AR (which uses a transparent display that you look through to see the outside world).
Eh. It’s a bit more handwavey than that. It’s whatever you want it to be.
Virtual reality was supposed to be simulated, but “actual still science fiction” levels of simulated. seamless 3d environment, intercepting nerve signals to look and intuitively control an avatar or ready player one had a haptic suit.
AR stems from that and was supposed to be “the real world, but cyber”. Or “VR, but with real world elements”. In the novel “virtual light”, it’s supposed to overlay that “datasturce of cyberspace” on the real world. Even then it was never really clear what purpose cyberspace as a 3d world would have, what data looks like or should look like, and what the advantage of that visualization would be. Or why would rather see that than what the world looks like.
Mixed reality is also that. Imo. It sounds the same to me too.
The whole thing is like hand gesture control. It looked great in minority report, but we had it since one of the 2010s xboxs and it went absolutely nowhere.
That’s because it’s just marketing bullshit.
The worst person you’ve ever met came up with it in a very upscale cube farm over a chai latte, don’t think too hard about it.
I hate Hate HATE that I’m going to say this: the iPad was just a bigger iPhone, yet here we are. It’s the perfect device for consumption and light work, yet people had no idea about what to do with it at first.
I’m more irked about that thing being gigantic and strapped to your face, thought. It’s the next level of social isolation, in a level even higher that the one cause by smartphones, and I’m not ok with that. Companies actually want to hijack and sell your reality back to you.
I think part of the “what do I do with this” factor for the iPad was that Apple (and other companies still to this day) were so hell bent on making everything smaller and more compact that releasing a larger product was marketing whiplash. Not to mention that smartphones were being pitched as this “do everything device” so why would you need anything else?
After you get over that marketing sugarcoating, it becomes pretty obvious what you’d use an iPad for. Internet and media consumption at a larger scale than your phone, easier on your eyes than a phone, but retains at least some of the lightweight smaller form factor that separates it from a regular laptop. Sure you didn’t have the stick it in your pocket advantage of a phone or the full keyboard and computational power of a laptop, but there was this in-between that for a modest fee, you could have the conveniences if you can live with/ignore the sacrifices.
I’m with you. AR and VR has potential, absolutely, but companies are not our friends and they’ll find ways to exploit these things to the detriment of us. They always do.
We all know that these companies aren’t above lying straight to our faces. They’re even undermining the concept of ownership so they can milk us even further.
It’s sad, but I don’t see a reality where this kind of tech being closed off and proprietary will ever end well.
They are people who paid $4000 to be a voluntary QA team.
Is Apple heading down the road of Windows now? Release beta software and use the scream test to debug it?
When iPhone was released App Store didn’t even exist. A smartphone without apps is just a phone and VR glasses without apps are just a 360 degree monitor you wear on your face. I think Apple’s reasoning here is to provide the hardware and see what people do with it.
Can confirm, I had an Apple Newton. Hardware with no purpose is just hardware. So far, this seems like it’s going where every VR headset goes. It’s a solution looking for a problem.
I think Apple’s reasoning here is to provide the hardware and see what people do with it.
for sure, and in the rest of the tech world, we call these devkits, not finished products. Apple is trying to convince rando non-dev apple fanboys to pay $3500 for the privilege of playing with devkits. And in many ways, it’s a dead end, especially on input. what a shit show.
Yeah the iPhone was successful at launch because it was a sleek blackberry and had iPod like capabilities. But it didn’t blow up until the App Store came out. I expect this product to do the same, and in the same way, companies to release competitive products with similar capabilities in a feature war until the newest releases are mostly talking about resolution and processor speed instead of new features
Now?
Apple Vision Pro Owners Are Struggling to Figure Out What They Just Bought
Im struggling to figure out why Apple Vision Pro Owners threw out $3500 on a device without knowing what they can use it for
Apple puts out a product, Apple users buy the product. Nothing to figure out.
If I had so much money that 3500 dollars didn’t matter to me, I’d have one.
From what I’ve seen on it, I’d play with it for a day and forget about it.
Maybe an hour. Seems like it’s pretty cool but there’s nothing on the headset worth buying the headset for, even at half the cost. Even at a third.
They bought Tim Cook a new private jet. I thought they’d have figured by now.
“Just park it next to the others.”
He doesn’t own one already?
That’s why they said a new one. Only peasants have just one private jet.
And here I am without even a private Cessna
Mate I have a private bike
He only has 6, he needs 1 more for Sundays
Why own one when you can own two?
People walking around with them on is basically just their wait of saying “look at my butthole!”
Wait, are they ONLY wearing these? Because otherwise how are you seeing their butthole?
You’re going to tell me they sold 3500$ goggles without the xray specs the first Quest units had accidentally?
If I’m going to drop a rent payment on some bulky Overwatch Tracer goggles then they sure as hell will do x-ray specs.
Wait what? Xray specs?
Yeah. It’s like the emperors new clothes. Only other “acceptable” humans with the same ecosystem buy-in can see their virtual clothes.
Everyone else needs to look at their buttholes.
Remember the Google Glassholes?
For a second on my mind I Imagined a butt dildo with a night vision camera at the top… I am not going to check if that exists.
The people who buy something like this (hopefully) have enough money where $3,500 doesn’t matter or are developers who want to get in early on something that might be big in a few versions.
Everyone else should avoid.
These are the early adopters phase. This always happens with high-end tech. I’m not sure how advanced this set is compared to the competition in order to justify that price.
A 4K USD electronic device that’s what they bought…if they needed its features not sure but… that’s what they bought.
A 4K USD
electronicstatus deviceFTFY
needed its* features
Thanks, its no tits
My phone autocorrects this wrong frequently, like it’s life depends on it. One can assume GP typed the correct thing.
Yeah, but they have it, and in the end, isn’t that what matters?? /s
Honestly, I think they might say the same thing without the /s.
They got a hololens, but like 8 years later, for the same price, and still just as useless.
try a thousand more than the horrorlens lol. Our hololens 1 and 2 devkits were $2400 iirc.
Wtf ever happened to hololens
I was so excited when they announced that and showed Minecraft just hanging out in the living room.
I wouldn’t have used it long.
An overpriced VR headset.
Arnt they all.
I got the original vive which just my beatsaber player but due yo having a wife a job and chit to get done it lives in its protective case and when I do get a min yo use it both controler batteries are dead due to time living in a box
Jesus, reading this made me feel like I wrote this.
I haven’t touched my headset in months
Reading it gave me a headache.
I gave my Index to my son who has the time and physicality to use it. I’m just too old for action gaming now.
I would have loved it if I was 30 years younger. I can do more from a chair with my desktop PC than an Apple Vision Pro can. It’s just another Apple Con.
Translation for those who haven’t just had a stroke -
Aren’t they all?
I’ve got the original Vive, which is just my ‘Beatsaber player’ but due to having a wife, a job, and shit to get done, it lives in its protective case. When i do get a minute to use it both controller batteries are dead due to time living in a box
They are. This said, $1,000 or less can buy you the best VR rig on the market right now. This thing is four times that.
Let’s be honest the min you see a picture of a half eaten apple on a thing just add a 0 to the price tag
If they are, then this vision pro is truly extortion.
VR requires a bit of setup, which is off putting. I dont have the space to have mine out all the time, theres also a shortage of high quality games. Waiting on Valve to push the envelope again.
Vr with passthrough
Most modern headsets have passthrough, its not some new feature. It is the part that Apple focused on though.
Seems like most people are saying “this is dope for media,” and outside of that, it’s a glorified dev kit.
I’d hope you’d know what you were spending this much money on if it wasn’t just for online attention.
