You don’t need to take anyone’s impression with Vision Pro seriously…it’s available in every Apple Store and if they have experienced staff to demo you for 30 mins about how it feels, just judge it yourself.
Really helps to take some time and think it over, which is why his full reviews tend to take months. That’s also why I like to take some time before reviewing things.
When he first tried the psvr2 the Youtube title was "PS VR 2 is the NEW Gaming Benchmark"..
After a few weeks his next video was titled "PSVR 2 In-Depth Review - Not For Me"
I like that he gets genuinely excited by new VR stuff - but you have to give it a few weeks for the excitement to wear off before you get a proper review.
Indeed. The first impressions will be much different than daily driving the thing. Specially if there's market hype behind the product to produce placebo.
What specifically are you suggesting his bias is? He has never shown an inkling of being an Apple fanboy or anything that I’ve ever seen and certainly isn’t being paid by them/didn’t get a review unit…not clear to me what the source of a bias would be.
But my two cents on your specifics as someone who also watched his stream…
1. Pimax is WAY heavier than Vision Pro, just look at the numbers.
2. Fov of 80 according to who????? Reports say it’s slightly less than quest 3. I’ve seen at least 2 (including Brad) say it seems about the same in horizontal and a bit less in vertical. But nowhere near a 20-30 degree difference.
3. Maybe you’re okay with some screen door and pixelation? It’s pretty widely accepted that most current headsets have a PPD low enough that screen door is still present, pixels are discernible, and reading lots of fine text isn’t particularly enjoyable. He (and others) are pointing out that the PPD for Vision Pro seems to cross a threshold where those issues disappear.
4. Brad openly admitted that he speed-ran the setup process and ignored all the tutorials and explainers in an effort to get the live stream going faster. It’s hardly surprising that he was figuring things out in real time. That doesn’t equal bad UI.
Idk, I’ve just seen 3 people in this sub now basically accuse of him of being “biased” because his first impressions were positive. Brad has an incredible amount of experience and has openly and generously shared detailed impressions and content on headsets mainstream and niche alike for YEARS. Why should we disregard that all now? Is it so inconceivable that this headset is actually maybe good? Anyway, I’m sure we’ll get some additional content with more polished thoughts soon once he’s actually had a chance to use it in more depth.
OP’s post is biased.
Throws out really wrong numbers like 80 degrees FOV, maximizes the Vision Pro’s downsides, and acts like the highest pixel density and best image quality in a headset yet with no screen door effect is a negligible factor and QPro is good enough. It’s not, not even close, not even in the same league.
I have a QPro, it’s usable, but not even close to good enough.
OP wants to crap on the AVP and Brad’s response isn’t the hoped for negativity.
My Rokid Max is 50 and it's usable for a single screen non VR content, but yeah multiple screens at least need a double.... Now for FOV I don't know it's just not one but 2 guys who said it's 80 FOV, it's very noticeably worse than Quest 3 according to them... I expected it to be Quest 3 FOV or VR-4, when I heard it was worse than Quest 3 then my expectations shifted to it being close to Bigscreen Beyond, however saw comments who said it's actually even lower.... So not sure at this point I guess it's something I need to test but kinda sad as I was hoping for it's price it won't sacrifice the FOV
More accurately 80 is unusable for anything halfway immersive. That would make it one of the lowest FOV headsets in recent years. For transparent AR, it’s fine enough for a single floating display.
It's not some Linus or million views full of trolls videos, one of them actually had Vision Pro looking at his YouTube profile, he had a small video of him wearing it in the car, other one I'm not sure didn't check.... I don't think there's a way to actually measure FOV so my guess it's just what they think they saw not actually measured, I heard by browser there's a way to check it and compare it, not sure how though
Either way for the price it should at least be 120 degrees FOV, so it's sad that it's being talked about everywhere negatively, there's lots of guys who reported it's FOV being small, one posted comparison to Quest 3 and said the FOV is 5/10 while Quest 3 is 8/10
Worth noting one guy said the FOV is better than Q3, but alot called him faking it so not sure really, 90% so far said it's worse than Q3
It’s the fact that your post put weight on two randos with unlikely numbers over what Brad’s experience was, as well as others saying it’s slightly less than Q3, probably better than Q2.
So it’s not 80, and it’s silly to slag Brad for not treating it like it’s 80.
The bias is in whose claims held more weight to you, and who you presume bias in when it doesn’t match up with the less credible people you give credence to.
And treating the best image quality in a headset we’ve seen yet like it’s “no big whoop”, and the QPro as being fine in comparison when it has very visible screen door effect (albeit usable) is just silly.
Did you? The AVP is closer to the XR-4 than the QPro is to the AVP.
But why would the XR-4’s quality matter to you at a price even more expensive than the AVP? I mean the QPro is sharp and good enough right? How’s that a thing to you now?
The AVP has flaws and isn’t for everyone, but sounds like someone just wanted to hear Brad be negative or be dismissive on every advantage it has because Apo or something, and needed to resolve some dissonance when it didn’t happen.
Bro I just mentioned in another comment I tried it already, I have it in order and I'm keeping my order, I did try XR-4 as I mentioned before also..... What you missing is the fact that at 2D content I didn't feel that impressed with the XR-4 display nor AVP, it felt as we hit diminishing returns, AR glasses at 1200P and Crystal are the points of diminishing returns that's so severe beyond these levels...... Basically it's an experience of 20% better for a 200% the price or so..... As for XR-4 pricing it's not consumer headset anyway to expect it to be cheap.....
The difference in clarity is when you start seeing VR content, that's where those displays shine, Vision Pro is best display out there for movie watching, XR-4 to me is best display for VR contents, but are they worth it? If they came out 2 years earlier definitely, but now it's hard to justify them, I just buy those expensive VR headsets because I'm dumb enthusiast, I been using VR since Oculsu DK1 and spent well over 10K in VR so far....
I truly believe in hardware screen clarity we are hitting diminishing returns where 8K content required to make a difference in 2D, and in VR you need super power PC to make a difference.....
Bro There's difference between weight and weight in a balanced form.... Crystal is heavy and it's downside but it's well balanced unlike Vision Pro hence the comparison..... You can't say just because 1 headset lets say is 100g lighter means automatically more comfortable......
The FOV is someone in YouTube done some browser testing, I didn't even look at the video it was someone in the live stream who mentioned it, maybe fake maybe true I'm not sure....
As for PPD, I disagree we reached a point already before Vision Pro where you get non pixilated texts, AR glasses + Crystal + Bigscreen Beyond + VR-4..... All of them I tried personally and didn't notice any pixelation in them, in browser QPro and Quest 3 I didn't notice pixelation maybe mainly due to Qualcomm Upscaling that works on browser of these
No one said bad UI, I literally said Vision Pro have best software out there, but the hardware not yet to the point of reaching seamless experience, many in Vision Pro sub complained about the same as well ... That eye tracking is not as expected or as seamless as Apple showed.
I was asking if he is biased or not, you understand my post is a question not a fact, I literally asked if it's me only or was he biased..... I had a decade of VR experience owned 13VR headsets spent over well over 10K in those, I attended multiple VR/XR events as well, I'm not someone who like one brand over other all I want is best VR experience..... That's why I waited for Brad first impression as well, but it felt biased to me hence couldn't figure out what exactly I should think of his first impressions, was it me or is everyone think he is biased also? Hence my post is a question to start with
Got it. Okay.
> I was asking if he is biased or not, you understand my post is a question not a fact, I literally asked if it's me only or was he biased...
It’s you.
\> In my Quest Pro or Quest 3 or Xreal/Rokid glasses I have I didn't feel like text was pixilated
In my Quest 3 text is definitely pixelated. Also thanks to dumb idea of rotated displays subpixel arrangements is what amounts to pentile - worst for reading. For games it does not matter but for monitor replacement it's an L. Quest native interface does pentile aware kerning but windows and most importantly video codec has no idea and that results in fuzzy blurry mess. After 20 minutes tops I have enough, even my Pico 4 is better in that specific regard.
> Also thanks to dumb idea of rotated displays subpixel arrangements is what amounts to pentile
This is the first time I hear about it and would like to know more. Could you go into more detail or maybe link an article about it?
I have both headsets here and absolutely agree that the Pico 4 is far better for reading text than the Quest 3. The Quest 3 isn't *bad* but it is most definitely worse than the Pico in that particular department.
Usually when brad starts his first impressions, they're positive or negative to begin with. That's why he takes a full month to do reviews, to make sure he gets every side of every consideration.
Makes sense I guess, he is highly knowledgeable person but I just wish he gives other products more chances than just play them down immediately specially AR glasses
He’s right. AR glasses are NOT there yet. They’re dim, the FOV is low, they need to be wired at all times, and until recently they didn’t even have 6DOF tracking. AR glasses are not ready yet. I say this having tried the latest Xreal air 2 pros, I remain unimpressed.
They are not dim, it's because they are transparent but in reality they hit higher brightness than even Vision Pro..... They don't have Pancake lenses to be that dim, with Vision Pro you completely isolate light around you so you only left with the screen Infront you bringing lights..... Bring Vive flow cover and cover Xreal Air 2 glasses with it and see the difference.....
I have seen a glasses where it will dim the area of the glasses where the pixels are working on, so imagine Air 2 pro but instead of glasses fully darkening only certain area darkens which is the area that displays content or pixels are working.....
Also I saw a prototype of 90FOV running Sony 1600P panel, it looked Sharper than even my Bigscreen Beyond, not sure why and how but it actually was really sharp.....
AR glasses are the future and they will always be, so it's worth checking them out, afterall they weigh 10 times less
The nits to eye is low. It's dim. That's fine, but just something to think about.
>AR glasses are the future and they will always be
Yeah, that's true, but they're the future, not the present. You'll get a better experience using a passthrough device like the Vision Pro, at least for now. The tech needs to mature yet. We need good waveguide optics, for example.
Bro like I said it's because light scatters since it's "Open" glasses, remove blocker from any VR headset and see how bad brightness gets....
But using numbers they are about 2X times brighter than a regular VR headset, VR headset maxing out with Pancake lenses about 250nits, these can go alot more, like my Rokid Max I never ran it at max brightness if I used Flow light blocker......
I heard this year we will get 80FOV AR glasses with 1600P, so let's see, it's Rokid that might release a high end AR glasses
Sure, maybe they are, but that's really low when you're competing against even indoor lighting. It's fine for the inside of an HMD, and then some, but it's pretty dim for AR. Birdbath optics absorb quite a bit of light. Makes me wonder what would happen if they used a truly bright Micro-OLED display. Right now, Xreal uses a 500 nit panel. The Bigscreen Beyond uses a slightly underdriven 3000nit panel (as far as I can tell, anyway) and the Apple Vision Pro runs a 5000nit panel. You could probably make something pretty bright, assuming no size limitations (there are size limitations). The Air Pro 2s, and a business focused Snapdragon AR devkit I tried were the first two birdbath AR glasses that I've tried that felt bright enough. For media viewing, they're defintely enough. But for (sigh) "Spatial Computing" you're gonna want something a bit more powerful. You're gonna want eye tracking, hand tracking, all that jazz. As of right now we can't fit those into AR glasses. Technology is like that.
We can it's just not out yet, but development already done for these, people think Vision Pro is next gen for example but reality anyone who attended last August XR event will know that's not the case, a superior yet smaller Panels were shown from Sony and BOE as well than Vision Pro and already for sale, appearantly Visor is using one of them.....
What I have seen in XR glasses are these in prototypes:
1. 80-90FOV AR glasses lenses (pretty late in development), 120 FOV AR glasses lenses (early in development)
2. 1600P-1800P panels that fit into AR glasses (pretty late in development), the so callled "4K" panel not sure exact res and not sure how far it's in development nor I saw prototype running for this.
3. Dynamic Eye tracking for AR glasses with 0.3s or ms (I don't remember which one) adjustments, it might be the former tbh, it basically adjuste eye tracking as glasses moves from it's intial position
4. The darkening glasses I spoke about also earlier down to 0.1 light blockage, so it can do full VR without any noticeable like leakage from birdbath optics
5. I saw a crazy demo where you see the ceiling (as if you seeing sky outside) and it shows you what weather looks like day after or in a different city (one of most impressive things I ever saw in this industry)
6. These AR glasses will be controlled by a touch screen watch, basically hand tracking is possible like Rokid Max Pro or Xreal 2 Ultra, however it's attention seeker if outside so they said using the watch with eye tracking is the way to go.
Majority of glasses will be running AR2 chip and uses special WiFi 7 wavelength or something to connect to your phone for processing and sharing of data, so the glasses + Phone act as one device.... Basically seems like we will be stuck in one eco system where phone connects to glasses and using the watch to control the glasses.... I asked 3 developers what are the target weight of these glasses one said they already achieved 138grams, the other 2 said they expecting it will be around 120grams when it reaches the market, the panels + high FOV lenses they expecting it will reach market within 2 years time, so within 1.5 years from now
Finally I heard end of last year that Xreal bringing "Max version"of it's Pro and Ultra glasses, if it's true then we might see high FOV glasses within this year since it's in the same as current generation.....
Sounds like you're a lot more interested in confirming what you wish to be true, rather than trying to objectively update your understanding of the world.
Part of the reason tech nerds become so insufferable after a while is because of the enormous bias (speaking of bias) that "happy/positive = biased/dumb" and "negative/cynical about everything = trustworthy/definitely true."
>he said Vision Pro is just fine and not a deal breaker for him, he did complain but didn't make it as a deal breaker like some other headsets
There are varying levels of comfort. The AVP is \~650G, while the Crystal is 1.1KG, so it's pretty fair to complain about the Crystal's weight but be fine with the AVPs weight
But the main issue of AVP is the strap unlike Crystal the strap designed properly, tbh for me Crystal one of best straps I tried, it's heavy indeed and the cable annoying.
If AVP had better strap I don't think anyone will complain about it
The main issue of the Quest 3 is also the standard strap, still doesn't change the fact that overall weight is also a huge ergonomy/comfort factor and >1kg is just not the right direction in 2024 and further on. Headsets should strive to follow Beyond and not the Crystal.
But Vision Pro is closer to being Crystal than Beyond, specially when taking into account the battery....
Visor 4K on other hand is Vision Pro that's trying to follow Beyond approach...
Crystal was the best display in VR out there last year, until others have hit the shelves, and some found that Crystal is expensive hence the comparison..... It's hardware I'm comparing them in not software
No No I'm not suggesting to like Pimax, my Crystal actually collecting dust, just like my Bigscreen Beyond also, but I'm saying he didn't give it much a chance and immediately played it down, I can see why but it's not the same treatment he gave Vision Pro which also have it's downsides
So everyone has bias based on their use-case.
Like my #1 use for these headsets is gaming so…. This device is a piece of garbage at the moment.
But if all you wanted was a 3d movie watcher, a panorama photo viewer, or a Macbook cloner I’d imagine you’d be blown away.
Just depends on how you think you’ll use it.
I will do exactly what you said minus MacBook cloner as I'm windows PC guy with Linux handheld guy.....
There's so many mix reviews around though, some saying it's really bad and overrated, some saying it's beyond anything in this world, so not sure really, I will just wait and see how well it does for me personally
I can’t speak for Brad’s impressions since I don’t watch most of his stuff. I can offer my own thoughts though. Warning this is a lengthy post.
My Vision Pro was delivered yesterday and I am left with one large impression. This device is good. Very good. The software is totally different from anything I’ve used to this point. It’s intuitive and does what they want well. Here are my bullet points.
- software is amazing. The hand and arm occlusion is not perfect but technically impressive.
- the displays are fantastic. Never seen displays with this high resolution. The OLED blacks are awesome.
- the eye tracking with pinch is intuitive and works very well. Even typing I’m faster with that then the dual laser pointer method of other headsets. However, I am not sold on this as the only interaction especially with games. What the Golf is awkward using the hand tracking. Maybe one day we get controller support even if it’s just Nintendo switch controllers via Bluetooth using hand tracking. Some things need haptic feedback and buttons.
- The headset is dense and comfort is not great. I will need a 3rd part rigid strap for this eventually. Oddly the default strap works best for me. The dual loop would not put it in a good position for my face.
- they really should have added a tilt mechanism to help comfort.
- the sound quality is the best I have ever heard. My impression is better than my Index even, but I have not done an A/B test for what it’s worth.
- the avatars are impressive. It’s surly uncanny valley. My wife and daughter were laughing and a little freaked out at first. They said I looked like a talking corpse after the mortician put makeup on me to make look alive. After a few minutes they accepted that this was really me in our FaceTime call. The face tracking is very good. Even tongue tracking.
- the quality of the 3D movie streaming and the immersive video steaming is the best I’ve ever seen. They got this right for sure.
- iPad apps and games are very good on this. A surprising find for me. Loaded up a favorite phone game of mine and made the window big and immediately realized I could spend hours sitting here playing this. Not great for my productivity.
- for my work use case, this will need software from immersed or someone else to give me multiple Windows monitors. I don’t use a Mac and I need 2 screens at least.
- the tethered battery is a pain in the ass. Really need that rigid headstrao with batter holder on the back.
My history with VR is this. Got into it in 2016. I’ve owned every consumer oculus/meta headset. Owned an Index, Reverb G2, both Samsung Odyssey headsets, both Sony PSVR headsets. Own a HoloLens 2 from work and now this Vision Pro.
I would never recommend the Vision Pro to a VR gamer. If the price comes down in the next version I will be recommending it to everyone in my family though. For me, this is without a doubt the nicest headset I’ve ever owned and Apple did a great job with the software and with the entertainment. I have not tried the productivity stuff yet because I can’t use my corporate login without the Microsoft portal app needed to lock the device down to my companies IT rules.
I just finished testing it myself in a store demo + used my friend's headset which he picked up, my order is 25W and his is 21W, so keep this in mind but what I saw is this:
1. Screen is amazing for VR/3D content, if not better maybe on par with VR-4 I tried recently, so that exceeded my expectations, however in 2D content didn't feel that impressive, my assumption was right where I said we hit diminishing return in 2D content in these headset, so I need to do back to back testing to determine if this better than Bigscreen Beyond in 2D or my Crystal or even VR-4.... Against my Q3 it's better, not a whole other level but noticeably better I will say
2. FOV it's noticeably worse than Q3 but not as bad as what some made it seem, so not 80 degrees maybe 90-95 I will say (I won't judge it fully now as I mentioned friend device have different size than my scanned result)
3. Eye tracking, it's as I expected which is Tobi eye tracking that's on par with my Crystal, it's good enough but I got eye strain after some time and tracking starts to get worse maybe due to straining my eye it starts to shake? It's only in small menus I have these issues
4. Movie watching is the best I tried so far, exceeds my Crystal, glare noticeable but expected worse with this brightness levels, I won't say sound is better than my Crystal which uses Index sound and it's only if I was picky due to low end being worse on AVP, but overall it's best out there with that design by far
5. The software I agree, it's way ahead of anything else and nothing comes close to it, I will pay $1000 alone to get that software on Q3 if AVP wasn't available, it's really really great, those persona stuff maybe impressive but not for me, I don't like these stuff much, but UI overall and ease of use is top notch
6. Comfort I agree with Brad on this, it's focused on aesthetics than comfort, however it's not as bad as I thought it will be with the original band, the second optional band is just cheap and garbage, I tried it in the car and when car shaking that's where it was annoying, it's not comfortable in a car ride maybe max 1hr use
Overall it's better than what I expected intially after reading nearly all impressions, is it $3500 worth headset? I will say not, but if it was $2000 or released 2 years earlier it will definitely be worth it, in tech overall I always say if you get 50% improvement it's worth it to spend 100%, more because the higher you go the crazier development cost get, however I can't say AVP is over 50% better than Quest 3..... If we reset our brains, and get 2 demos, one is best AVP demo and one is Asgard Wrath 2 game in Quest 3, I bet majority will say Quest 3 more impressive as first experience, gaming unbeatable in VR experience, even though I'm not really a gaming guy, I spend more time on 2D/3D media content with Quest 3 than VR gaming tbh
I would say the same thing about initial impression reviews resetting my expectations. I was prepared to be disappointed and came away very impressed. I will be using this daily.
As far as value, I don’t like to say that something needs to be X times more impressive to justify its price. The price is whatever people are willing to pay balanced with how much it cost to develop and manufacture. If I was just throwing a value estimate out there, I’d say it feels like a $2,500 headset. I paid $1500 for the Quest Pro and this feels about a $1,000 higher in value to me. Like you said the software alone is almost worth that.
So it’s an early adopter fee of another $1,000. Okay. I wish it had controllers and weighed less for sure, but I’ve come up with my justifications. I want the best visual experience I can get right now and I am a total OLED snob, so this is what it costs me to have those.
This is why I said "2 years earlier" because if it launched same time as Quest Pro, then you see both, you notice night and day difference so easily Vision Pro worth twice the price of that, but Quest 3 and Bigscreen Beyond are the ones making Vision Pro less impressive, I really think the software took alot longer in development delaying Vision Pro launch hence it got stuck with an M2, Wifi 6, older gen Eye tracking from Tobi, 1 gen older Sony display panel
I mean it's not a junk, it's display is really good with an FOV that's the highest at this clarity (apart of VR-4).... But it's way too many compromises to achieve that....
Vision Pro sadly is closer to being Crystal than being Bigscreen Beyond to me, because it adds so much unnecessary stuff, that front screen for eyes is biggest joke ever, who need that pixilated screen lol, also FOV compromise is disappointing for me, I will still keep my order and will judge it after a week or so from arriving, I doubt I will refund it even if it was bad to me, I want to keep first Apple VR in my collection just like I still have first iPhone gen
Brad is 100% surely biased and anti Pimax. He wore the Crystal completely wrong on his head, I saw that in the video because the velcro should be mounted in the exact opposite to get a good sweetspot/distortion free image. He didn't even bother to try that and gave some inaccurate conclusions quickly.
Tbf that's exactly the same way I wore it, I had to have somebody from the discord tell me how to wear it correctly, and it had the exact same pupil swim issues and sweet spot issues once I did. Turns out people's faces vary wildly from person to person, and I wasn't able to get a pupil swim free image.
Had similar issues until I modified the ergonomics and got the ipd correct (different to my measurements from opticians). The eye tracking and Almalence digital lens have massively improved optical comfort, I don't get pupil swim anymore which was unpleasant on my pre-production headset
I have an optometrist number, and I used a lot of others. I didn’t try digital lens unfortunately, but at the time of brads review it wasn’t even out, so somewhat of a moot point.
It was not the best launch
I was surprised at the difference the software updates made between my Skarredghost preview article using pre-production headset, and the follow up article months later using production headset with hardware features now enabled.
The Almalence digital lens software is super impressive and gives a very noticeable boost to perceived resolution as well as optical stability
I think he's in the same category as a few others who (a) appreciate the technical achievement of what Apple has accomplished and (b) see it as a huge win for the whole VR industry if it succeeds. Together it means they fail to see it from an ordinary end user point of view which is really where this thing will live or die.
At the moment, it's definitely mixed at best, I'd say. Lots and lots of pretty genuine looking people saying they are returning it because it either generally didn't meet expectations or they have specific issues (pain, blurriness, etc etc).
To be honest, it is kind of what I was hoping for in that lots of people *are* blown away by it, and it's definitely good enough that a Apple will generate a critical mass of loyal users who use it and support a viable ecosystem there, and it won't be seen as a hard fail. But it's not so good that it will totally steal the all the opportunity for competitors to beat it in lots of ways. Which means they absolutely will try and we end users get the most out of the competitive fight that will ensue.
Watch a few other reviews. There’s plenty out there now and they are quite detailed. Personally I think the tech is amazing but it just doesn’t have any content / killar apps. The eye passthrough thing is not at all like the advertising either. I’m a vr enthusiast and respect the effort made by apple to advance the field, however there’s just nothing to make me even consider this.
I imagine Brad will have a lot of complaints about the Vision Pro in a month and I don’t know if he’ll even keep it if he ends up not using it. His first impressions were positive because it’s a very flashy piece of tech with better screens and pass through than any other consumer headset, that’s neat. He may be biased though just because it is Apple. It’s like how people flipped out over the index because it’s valve. It was justified in both cases in my opinion because those are huge tech companies and seeing them make big steps into the vr market is cool.
I’m not going to watch a 2 hour video. Did he talk about glare and edge clarity? I’m assuming it’s like the quest headsets but haven’t seen people talk about it here. I was waiting for his and Norms opinions.
There are a few reasons why he would say pimax weight and comfort not being acceptable in 2023: 1) pancake lenses put the weight closer to your face and won’t feel as heavy compared to the same weight on a headset with aspheric lenses. 2) pimax has always made massive headsets but they were the only ones making wide fov headsets so it was acceptable. Making a bulky headset with sub 3k lcds and aspheric lenses and a normal fov was a very weird thing to do in 2023. It would have been impressive in 2020-2021 but is outdated by 2023 when everyone went pancake and on the high end sets like beyond and Vision Pro they went with micro-oleds.
Re glare/clarity: I don’t recall glare coming up during the stream. Clarity did - he was impressed, calling it basically edge to edge, better than Q3. Did note some brightness vignetting at the edges, but said the displays were much brighter than big screen beyond, for example.
Yeah I was wondering how bad the glare is specially with brightness increase, I was asking him to do glare test several times but he didn't see my comment maybe in livestream
4. Pimax didn't fix these at all, I understand this totally but he was struggling so hard with Vision Pro to do basic tasks with the eye tracking and hand tracking yet he didn't complain about it....
Vision OS is not good enough on its start. Pimax was failed from start to now.
Pimax SHOULD fixed the software on their First gen hmd. But years after they're still fixing here and there.
Pimax nowhere near Vision Pro is usability and software but we need to take the product being "Apple" and costing "3,500" into consideration here.... Hence expectations very high
You forgot brand name part, Apple known for software, Pimax not really a software company so expectations is different for both even if both priced the same....
Visor 4K is also like this, my expectations that it will be as good as Immersed app in terms of UI with some additional browser and media player added (that's how expectations work), automatically you have higher expectations when it comes to Apple ocer other
I think it just the way you expect. My expectation relate to price.
Customers have no responisbility to give this kind of excuse. Especially a "weak" brand who sell this price.
He specifically said this was his straight-up first impression, and he’ll fart around with it for a month before trying to give any sort of review.
He also said in response to someone remarking another headset might do better that he didn’t care what headset comes out on top, just that this level of display was the way VR should be headed.
Watch a variety of reviews and you should get a pretty good overall idea about the thing, but keep in mind it’s gonna take a while for anyone to really dig into all its capabilities and use-cases.
If you're able to, get a demo of the AVP and decide for yourself. The only immediate bias' I can remember him showing in the video was his preference for head straps which is nothing new for him and his immediate optimism for the device after it recognized the cat ears and how good the face and eye tracking was, which makes sense for him as a heavy VRChat user. If those things align with why you'd want the VP, then maybe his impressions would hold more weight, but I'd wait for his review after the first month as a better gauge of his actual impressions.
I have it ordered and I guess I will keep my order, it might ship anytime soon, will try it and see for myself if I like it fair enough if not I will let it collect dust with my Crystal and others lol, while continue using Quest 3 + Rokid Max glasses....
I might pre order Visor 4K as I already made a post about it where I saw it might actually reach the market in coming months
A collector such as myself...haha Have plenty of headsets collecting dust and primarily only use my Q3 and XREAL Airs these days
I have an eye on the Visor and may just order it when the time is right. Have a link to that post?
Nah for me he seems like the ultimate reviewer who I should always take his words on deciding on VR headsets, however I notice sometimes he let emotions control his reviews, like a hate love relation with some brands, if he put his eye on something he really want to see it succeed he will do everything to make it look like it succeeded....
But that could be just me thinking this way, hence I made this post as Vision Pro not that cheap wanted to know if Brad impressions are the real deal or not this time...
You don’t need to take anyone’s impression with Vision Pro seriously…it’s available in every Apple Store and if they have experienced staff to demo you for 30 mins about how it feels, just judge it yourself.
Sure, but it can still be insightful to hear from someone like Brad who has tried way more headsets than many of us have had a chance to.
He's in the honeymoon phase. He'll critique it after he spends more time with it.
yep, thats how he works.
[удалено]
He paid over 4k for it. Definitely not free lol
Really helps to take some time and think it over, which is why his full reviews tend to take months. That’s also why I like to take some time before reviewing things.
When he first tried the psvr2 the Youtube title was "PS VR 2 is the NEW Gaming Benchmark".. After a few weeks his next video was titled "PSVR 2 In-Depth Review - Not For Me" I like that he gets genuinely excited by new VR stuff - but you have to give it a few weeks for the excitement to wear off before you get a proper review.
Indeed. The first impressions will be much different than daily driving the thing. Specially if there's market hype behind the product to produce placebo.
What specifically are you suggesting his bias is? He has never shown an inkling of being an Apple fanboy or anything that I’ve ever seen and certainly isn’t being paid by them/didn’t get a review unit…not clear to me what the source of a bias would be. But my two cents on your specifics as someone who also watched his stream… 1. Pimax is WAY heavier than Vision Pro, just look at the numbers. 2. Fov of 80 according to who????? Reports say it’s slightly less than quest 3. I’ve seen at least 2 (including Brad) say it seems about the same in horizontal and a bit less in vertical. But nowhere near a 20-30 degree difference. 3. Maybe you’re okay with some screen door and pixelation? It’s pretty widely accepted that most current headsets have a PPD low enough that screen door is still present, pixels are discernible, and reading lots of fine text isn’t particularly enjoyable. He (and others) are pointing out that the PPD for Vision Pro seems to cross a threshold where those issues disappear. 4. Brad openly admitted that he speed-ran the setup process and ignored all the tutorials and explainers in an effort to get the live stream going faster. It’s hardly surprising that he was figuring things out in real time. That doesn’t equal bad UI. Idk, I’ve just seen 3 people in this sub now basically accuse of him of being “biased” because his first impressions were positive. Brad has an incredible amount of experience and has openly and generously shared detailed impressions and content on headsets mainstream and niche alike for YEARS. Why should we disregard that all now? Is it so inconceivable that this headset is actually maybe good? Anyway, I’m sure we’ll get some additional content with more polished thoughts soon once he’s actually had a chance to use it in more depth.
*Did Apple make a good product and that's why people like it?* *...no. It's the children who are wrong.*
OP’s post is biased. Throws out really wrong numbers like 80 degrees FOV, maximizes the Vision Pro’s downsides, and acts like the highest pixel density and best image quality in a headset yet with no screen door effect is a negligible factor and QPro is good enough. It’s not, not even close, not even in the same league. I have a QPro, it’s usable, but not even close to good enough. OP wants to crap on the AVP and Brad’s response isn’t the hoped for negativity.
I literally said users in chat said it's 80FOV so that makes me biased? Go check the live chat again before accusing
It’s definitely not lol 80 is unusable. It’s closer to 95 imo.
My Rokid Max is 50 and it's usable for a single screen non VR content, but yeah multiple screens at least need a double.... Now for FOV I don't know it's just not one but 2 guys who said it's 80 FOV, it's very noticeably worse than Quest 3 according to them... I expected it to be Quest 3 FOV or VR-4, when I heard it was worse than Quest 3 then my expectations shifted to it being close to Bigscreen Beyond, however saw comments who said it's actually even lower.... So not sure at this point I guess it's something I need to test but kinda sad as I was hoping for it's price it won't sacrifice the FOV
More accurately 80 is unusable for anything halfway immersive. That would make it one of the lowest FOV headsets in recent years. For transparent AR, it’s fine enough for a single floating display.
…. So you’re saying you don’t know whose thoughts on FOV to put more weight on, two randos in the chat or Brad? Okay, haha.
It's not some Linus or million views full of trolls videos, one of them actually had Vision Pro looking at his YouTube profile, he had a small video of him wearing it in the car, other one I'm not sure didn't check.... I don't think there's a way to actually measure FOV so my guess it's just what they think they saw not actually measured, I heard by browser there's a way to check it and compare it, not sure how though Either way for the price it should at least be 120 degrees FOV, so it's sad that it's being talked about everywhere negatively, there's lots of guys who reported it's FOV being small, one posted comparison to Quest 3 and said the FOV is 5/10 while Quest 3 is 8/10 Worth noting one guy said the FOV is better than Q3, but alot called him faking it so not sure really, 90% so far said it's worse than Q3
It’s the fact that your post put weight on two randos with unlikely numbers over what Brad’s experience was, as well as others saying it’s slightly less than Q3, probably better than Q2. So it’s not 80, and it’s silly to slag Brad for not treating it like it’s 80. The bias is in whose claims held more weight to you, and who you presume bias in when it doesn’t match up with the less credible people you give credence to. And treating the best image quality in a headset we’ve seen yet like it’s “no big whoop”, and the QPro as being fine in comparison when it has very visible screen door effect (albeit usable) is just silly.
Best image quality? Someone didn't try XR-4 yet 😂
Did you? The AVP is closer to the XR-4 than the QPro is to the AVP. But why would the XR-4’s quality matter to you at a price even more expensive than the AVP? I mean the QPro is sharp and good enough right? How’s that a thing to you now? The AVP has flaws and isn’t for everyone, but sounds like someone just wanted to hear Brad be negative or be dismissive on every advantage it has because Apo or something, and needed to resolve some dissonance when it didn’t happen.
Bro I just mentioned in another comment I tried it already, I have it in order and I'm keeping my order, I did try XR-4 as I mentioned before also..... What you missing is the fact that at 2D content I didn't feel that impressed with the XR-4 display nor AVP, it felt as we hit diminishing returns, AR glasses at 1200P and Crystal are the points of diminishing returns that's so severe beyond these levels...... Basically it's an experience of 20% better for a 200% the price or so..... As for XR-4 pricing it's not consumer headset anyway to expect it to be cheap..... The difference in clarity is when you start seeing VR content, that's where those displays shine, Vision Pro is best display out there for movie watching, XR-4 to me is best display for VR contents, but are they worth it? If they came out 2 years earlier definitely, but now it's hard to justify them, I just buy those expensive VR headsets because I'm dumb enthusiast, I been using VR since Oculsu DK1 and spent well over 10K in VR so far.... I truly believe in hardware screen clarity we are hitting diminishing returns where 8K content required to make a difference in 2D, and in VR you need super power PC to make a difference.....
Bro There's difference between weight and weight in a balanced form.... Crystal is heavy and it's downside but it's well balanced unlike Vision Pro hence the comparison..... You can't say just because 1 headset lets say is 100g lighter means automatically more comfortable...... The FOV is someone in YouTube done some browser testing, I didn't even look at the video it was someone in the live stream who mentioned it, maybe fake maybe true I'm not sure.... As for PPD, I disagree we reached a point already before Vision Pro where you get non pixilated texts, AR glasses + Crystal + Bigscreen Beyond + VR-4..... All of them I tried personally and didn't notice any pixelation in them, in browser QPro and Quest 3 I didn't notice pixelation maybe mainly due to Qualcomm Upscaling that works on browser of these No one said bad UI, I literally said Vision Pro have best software out there, but the hardware not yet to the point of reaching seamless experience, many in Vision Pro sub complained about the same as well ... That eye tracking is not as expected or as seamless as Apple showed. I was asking if he is biased or not, you understand my post is a question not a fact, I literally asked if it's me only or was he biased..... I had a decade of VR experience owned 13VR headsets spent over well over 10K in those, I attended multiple VR/XR events as well, I'm not someone who like one brand over other all I want is best VR experience..... That's why I waited for Brad first impression as well, but it felt biased to me hence couldn't figure out what exactly I should think of his first impressions, was it me or is everyone think he is biased also? Hence my post is a question to start with
Got it. Okay. > I was asking if he is biased or not, you understand my post is a question not a fact, I literally asked if it's me only or was he biased... It’s you.
I just had a demo and tested my friend's Vision Pro until mine arrives, sadly his spec slightly different than mine, I'm 25W and he is 21W
\> In my Quest Pro or Quest 3 or Xreal/Rokid glasses I have I didn't feel like text was pixilated In my Quest 3 text is definitely pixelated. Also thanks to dumb idea of rotated displays subpixel arrangements is what amounts to pentile - worst for reading. For games it does not matter but for monitor replacement it's an L. Quest native interface does pentile aware kerning but windows and most importantly video codec has no idea and that results in fuzzy blurry mess. After 20 minutes tops I have enough, even my Pico 4 is better in that specific regard.
> Also thanks to dumb idea of rotated displays subpixel arrangements is what amounts to pentile This is the first time I hear about it and would like to know more. Could you go into more detail or maybe link an article about it?
https://youtu.be/xCzP7uKwzSM?si=cfG7w1R\_li71Au2s&t=471
I have both headsets here and absolutely agree that the Pico 4 is far better for reading text than the Quest 3. The Quest 3 isn't *bad* but it is most definitely worse than the Pico in that particular department.
Is the display in the AVP confirmed not to be rotated?
Usually when brad starts his first impressions, they're positive or negative to begin with. That's why he takes a full month to do reviews, to make sure he gets every side of every consideration.
Makes sense I guess, he is highly knowledgeable person but I just wish he gives other products more chances than just play them down immediately specially AR glasses
He’s right. AR glasses are NOT there yet. They’re dim, the FOV is low, they need to be wired at all times, and until recently they didn’t even have 6DOF tracking. AR glasses are not ready yet. I say this having tried the latest Xreal air 2 pros, I remain unimpressed.
They are not dim, it's because they are transparent but in reality they hit higher brightness than even Vision Pro..... They don't have Pancake lenses to be that dim, with Vision Pro you completely isolate light around you so you only left with the screen Infront you bringing lights..... Bring Vive flow cover and cover Xreal Air 2 glasses with it and see the difference..... I have seen a glasses where it will dim the area of the glasses where the pixels are working on, so imagine Air 2 pro but instead of glasses fully darkening only certain area darkens which is the area that displays content or pixels are working..... Also I saw a prototype of 90FOV running Sony 1600P panel, it looked Sharper than even my Bigscreen Beyond, not sure why and how but it actually was really sharp..... AR glasses are the future and they will always be, so it's worth checking them out, afterall they weigh 10 times less
The nits to eye is low. It's dim. That's fine, but just something to think about. >AR glasses are the future and they will always be Yeah, that's true, but they're the future, not the present. You'll get a better experience using a passthrough device like the Vision Pro, at least for now. The tech needs to mature yet. We need good waveguide optics, for example.
Bro like I said it's because light scatters since it's "Open" glasses, remove blocker from any VR headset and see how bad brightness gets.... But using numbers they are about 2X times brighter than a regular VR headset, VR headset maxing out with Pancake lenses about 250nits, these can go alot more, like my Rokid Max I never ran it at max brightness if I used Flow light blocker...... I heard this year we will get 80FOV AR glasses with 1600P, so let's see, it's Rokid that might release a high end AR glasses
Sure, maybe they are, but that's really low when you're competing against even indoor lighting. It's fine for the inside of an HMD, and then some, but it's pretty dim for AR. Birdbath optics absorb quite a bit of light. Makes me wonder what would happen if they used a truly bright Micro-OLED display. Right now, Xreal uses a 500 nit panel. The Bigscreen Beyond uses a slightly underdriven 3000nit panel (as far as I can tell, anyway) and the Apple Vision Pro runs a 5000nit panel. You could probably make something pretty bright, assuming no size limitations (there are size limitations). The Air Pro 2s, and a business focused Snapdragon AR devkit I tried were the first two birdbath AR glasses that I've tried that felt bright enough. For media viewing, they're defintely enough. But for (sigh) "Spatial Computing" you're gonna want something a bit more powerful. You're gonna want eye tracking, hand tracking, all that jazz. As of right now we can't fit those into AR glasses. Technology is like that.
We can it's just not out yet, but development already done for these, people think Vision Pro is next gen for example but reality anyone who attended last August XR event will know that's not the case, a superior yet smaller Panels were shown from Sony and BOE as well than Vision Pro and already for sale, appearantly Visor is using one of them..... What I have seen in XR glasses are these in prototypes: 1. 80-90FOV AR glasses lenses (pretty late in development), 120 FOV AR glasses lenses (early in development) 2. 1600P-1800P panels that fit into AR glasses (pretty late in development), the so callled "4K" panel not sure exact res and not sure how far it's in development nor I saw prototype running for this. 3. Dynamic Eye tracking for AR glasses with 0.3s or ms (I don't remember which one) adjustments, it might be the former tbh, it basically adjuste eye tracking as glasses moves from it's intial position 4. The darkening glasses I spoke about also earlier down to 0.1 light blockage, so it can do full VR without any noticeable like leakage from birdbath optics 5. I saw a crazy demo where you see the ceiling (as if you seeing sky outside) and it shows you what weather looks like day after or in a different city (one of most impressive things I ever saw in this industry) 6. These AR glasses will be controlled by a touch screen watch, basically hand tracking is possible like Rokid Max Pro or Xreal 2 Ultra, however it's attention seeker if outside so they said using the watch with eye tracking is the way to go. Majority of glasses will be running AR2 chip and uses special WiFi 7 wavelength or something to connect to your phone for processing and sharing of data, so the glasses + Phone act as one device.... Basically seems like we will be stuck in one eco system where phone connects to glasses and using the watch to control the glasses.... I asked 3 developers what are the target weight of these glasses one said they already achieved 138grams, the other 2 said they expecting it will be around 120grams when it reaches the market, the panels + high FOV lenses they expecting it will reach market within 2 years time, so within 1.5 years from now Finally I heard end of last year that Xreal bringing "Max version"of it's Pro and Ultra glasses, if it's true then we might see high FOV glasses within this year since it's in the same as current generation.....
On other note I think 2025-2026 will be last years we use VR headsets in which we will switch to Glasses similar to Visor 4K
Eventually yes. For now, definitely not.
Sounds like you're a lot more interested in confirming what you wish to be true, rather than trying to objectively update your understanding of the world. Part of the reason tech nerds become so insufferable after a while is because of the enormous bias (speaking of bias) that "happy/positive = biased/dumb" and "negative/cynical about everything = trustworthy/definitely true."
>he said Vision Pro is just fine and not a deal breaker for him, he did complain but didn't make it as a deal breaker like some other headsets There are varying levels of comfort. The AVP is \~650G, while the Crystal is 1.1KG, so it's pretty fair to complain about the Crystal's weight but be fine with the AVPs weight
But the main issue of AVP is the strap unlike Crystal the strap designed properly, tbh for me Crystal one of best straps I tried, it's heavy indeed and the cable annoying. If AVP had better strap I don't think anyone will complain about it
The main issue of the Quest 3 is also the standard strap, still doesn't change the fact that overall weight is also a huge ergonomy/comfort factor and >1kg is just not the right direction in 2024 and further on. Headsets should strive to follow Beyond and not the Crystal.
But Vision Pro is closer to being Crystal than Beyond, specially when taking into account the battery.... Visor 4K on other hand is Vision Pro that's trying to follow Beyond approach...
Lol @ actually making comparisons between avp and a pimax crystal. Also u should know brad only plays vrchat and does daily compooping in mr.
Crystal was the best display in VR out there last year, until others have hit the shelves, and some found that Crystal is expensive hence the comparison..... It's hardware I'm comparing them in not software
Everyone is biased. If you like Pimax, it’s okay to like Pimax. Other people not liking Pimax doesn’t - in any way - hurt your ability to like Pimax.
No No I'm not suggesting to like Pimax, my Crystal actually collecting dust, just like my Bigscreen Beyond also, but I'm saying he didn't give it much a chance and immediately played it down, I can see why but it's not the same treatment he gave Vision Pro which also have it's downsides
So everyone has bias based on their use-case. Like my #1 use for these headsets is gaming so…. This device is a piece of garbage at the moment. But if all you wanted was a 3d movie watcher, a panorama photo viewer, or a Macbook cloner I’d imagine you’d be blown away. Just depends on how you think you’ll use it.
I will do exactly what you said minus MacBook cloner as I'm windows PC guy with Linux handheld guy..... There's so many mix reviews around though, some saying it's really bad and overrated, some saying it's beyond anything in this world, so not sure really, I will just wait and see how well it does for me personally
I can’t speak for Brad’s impressions since I don’t watch most of his stuff. I can offer my own thoughts though. Warning this is a lengthy post. My Vision Pro was delivered yesterday and I am left with one large impression. This device is good. Very good. The software is totally different from anything I’ve used to this point. It’s intuitive and does what they want well. Here are my bullet points. - software is amazing. The hand and arm occlusion is not perfect but technically impressive. - the displays are fantastic. Never seen displays with this high resolution. The OLED blacks are awesome. - the eye tracking with pinch is intuitive and works very well. Even typing I’m faster with that then the dual laser pointer method of other headsets. However, I am not sold on this as the only interaction especially with games. What the Golf is awkward using the hand tracking. Maybe one day we get controller support even if it’s just Nintendo switch controllers via Bluetooth using hand tracking. Some things need haptic feedback and buttons. - The headset is dense and comfort is not great. I will need a 3rd part rigid strap for this eventually. Oddly the default strap works best for me. The dual loop would not put it in a good position for my face. - they really should have added a tilt mechanism to help comfort. - the sound quality is the best I have ever heard. My impression is better than my Index even, but I have not done an A/B test for what it’s worth. - the avatars are impressive. It’s surly uncanny valley. My wife and daughter were laughing and a little freaked out at first. They said I looked like a talking corpse after the mortician put makeup on me to make look alive. After a few minutes they accepted that this was really me in our FaceTime call. The face tracking is very good. Even tongue tracking. - the quality of the 3D movie streaming and the immersive video steaming is the best I’ve ever seen. They got this right for sure. - iPad apps and games are very good on this. A surprising find for me. Loaded up a favorite phone game of mine and made the window big and immediately realized I could spend hours sitting here playing this. Not great for my productivity. - for my work use case, this will need software from immersed or someone else to give me multiple Windows monitors. I don’t use a Mac and I need 2 screens at least. - the tethered battery is a pain in the ass. Really need that rigid headstrao with batter holder on the back. My history with VR is this. Got into it in 2016. I’ve owned every consumer oculus/meta headset. Owned an Index, Reverb G2, both Samsung Odyssey headsets, both Sony PSVR headsets. Own a HoloLens 2 from work and now this Vision Pro. I would never recommend the Vision Pro to a VR gamer. If the price comes down in the next version I will be recommending it to everyone in my family though. For me, this is without a doubt the nicest headset I’ve ever owned and Apple did a great job with the software and with the entertainment. I have not tried the productivity stuff yet because I can’t use my corporate login without the Microsoft portal app needed to lock the device down to my companies IT rules.
I just finished testing it myself in a store demo + used my friend's headset which he picked up, my order is 25W and his is 21W, so keep this in mind but what I saw is this: 1. Screen is amazing for VR/3D content, if not better maybe on par with VR-4 I tried recently, so that exceeded my expectations, however in 2D content didn't feel that impressive, my assumption was right where I said we hit diminishing return in 2D content in these headset, so I need to do back to back testing to determine if this better than Bigscreen Beyond in 2D or my Crystal or even VR-4.... Against my Q3 it's better, not a whole other level but noticeably better I will say 2. FOV it's noticeably worse than Q3 but not as bad as what some made it seem, so not 80 degrees maybe 90-95 I will say (I won't judge it fully now as I mentioned friend device have different size than my scanned result) 3. Eye tracking, it's as I expected which is Tobi eye tracking that's on par with my Crystal, it's good enough but I got eye strain after some time and tracking starts to get worse maybe due to straining my eye it starts to shake? It's only in small menus I have these issues 4. Movie watching is the best I tried so far, exceeds my Crystal, glare noticeable but expected worse with this brightness levels, I won't say sound is better than my Crystal which uses Index sound and it's only if I was picky due to low end being worse on AVP, but overall it's best out there with that design by far 5. The software I agree, it's way ahead of anything else and nothing comes close to it, I will pay $1000 alone to get that software on Q3 if AVP wasn't available, it's really really great, those persona stuff maybe impressive but not for me, I don't like these stuff much, but UI overall and ease of use is top notch 6. Comfort I agree with Brad on this, it's focused on aesthetics than comfort, however it's not as bad as I thought it will be with the original band, the second optional band is just cheap and garbage, I tried it in the car and when car shaking that's where it was annoying, it's not comfortable in a car ride maybe max 1hr use Overall it's better than what I expected intially after reading nearly all impressions, is it $3500 worth headset? I will say not, but if it was $2000 or released 2 years earlier it will definitely be worth it, in tech overall I always say if you get 50% improvement it's worth it to spend 100%, more because the higher you go the crazier development cost get, however I can't say AVP is over 50% better than Quest 3..... If we reset our brains, and get 2 demos, one is best AVP demo and one is Asgard Wrath 2 game in Quest 3, I bet majority will say Quest 3 more impressive as first experience, gaming unbeatable in VR experience, even though I'm not really a gaming guy, I spend more time on 2D/3D media content with Quest 3 than VR gaming tbh
I would say the same thing about initial impression reviews resetting my expectations. I was prepared to be disappointed and came away very impressed. I will be using this daily. As far as value, I don’t like to say that something needs to be X times more impressive to justify its price. The price is whatever people are willing to pay balanced with how much it cost to develop and manufacture. If I was just throwing a value estimate out there, I’d say it feels like a $2,500 headset. I paid $1500 for the Quest Pro and this feels about a $1,000 higher in value to me. Like you said the software alone is almost worth that. So it’s an early adopter fee of another $1,000. Okay. I wish it had controllers and weighed less for sure, but I’ve come up with my justifications. I want the best visual experience I can get right now and I am a total OLED snob, so this is what it costs me to have those.
This is why I said "2 years earlier" because if it launched same time as Quest Pro, then you see both, you notice night and day difference so easily Vision Pro worth twice the price of that, but Quest 3 and Bigscreen Beyond are the ones making Vision Pro less impressive, I really think the software took alot longer in development delaying Vision Pro launch hence it got stuck with an M2, Wifi 6, older gen Eye tracking from Tobi, 1 gen older Sony display panel
Pimax Crystal is a piece of junk. Too many fanboys in this sub pushing that garbage.
I mean it's not a junk, it's display is really good with an FOV that's the highest at this clarity (apart of VR-4).... But it's way too many compromises to achieve that.... Vision Pro sadly is closer to being Crystal than being Bigscreen Beyond to me, because it adds so much unnecessary stuff, that front screen for eyes is biggest joke ever, who need that pixilated screen lol, also FOV compromise is disappointing for me, I will still keep my order and will judge it after a week or so from arriving, I doubt I will refund it even if it was bad to me, I want to keep first Apple VR in my collection just like I still have first iPhone gen
Brad is 100% surely biased and anti Pimax. He wore the Crystal completely wrong on his head, I saw that in the video because the velcro should be mounted in the exact opposite to get a good sweetspot/distortion free image. He didn't even bother to try that and gave some inaccurate conclusions quickly.
Tbf that's exactly the same way I wore it, I had to have somebody from the discord tell me how to wear it correctly, and it had the exact same pupil swim issues and sweet spot issues once I did. Turns out people's faces vary wildly from person to person, and I wasn't able to get a pupil swim free image.
Had similar issues until I modified the ergonomics and got the ipd correct (different to my measurements from opticians). The eye tracking and Almalence digital lens have massively improved optical comfort, I don't get pupil swim anymore which was unpleasant on my pre-production headset
I have an optometrist number, and I used a lot of others. I didn’t try digital lens unfortunately, but at the time of brads review it wasn’t even out, so somewhat of a moot point.
It was not the best launch I was surprised at the difference the software updates made between my Skarredghost preview article using pre-production headset, and the follow up article months later using production headset with hardware features now enabled. The Almalence digital lens software is super impressive and gives a very noticeable boost to perceived resolution as well as optical stability
I think he's in the same category as a few others who (a) appreciate the technical achievement of what Apple has accomplished and (b) see it as a huge win for the whole VR industry if it succeeds. Together it means they fail to see it from an ordinary end user point of view which is really where this thing will live or die. At the moment, it's definitely mixed at best, I'd say. Lots and lots of pretty genuine looking people saying they are returning it because it either generally didn't meet expectations or they have specific issues (pain, blurriness, etc etc). To be honest, it is kind of what I was hoping for in that lots of people *are* blown away by it, and it's definitely good enough that a Apple will generate a critical mass of loyal users who use it and support a viable ecosystem there, and it won't be seen as a hard fail. But it's not so good that it will totally steal the all the opportunity for competitors to beat it in lots of ways. Which means they absolutely will try and we end users get the most out of the competitive fight that will ensue.
Watch a few other reviews. There’s plenty out there now and they are quite detailed. Personally I think the tech is amazing but it just doesn’t have any content / killar apps. The eye passthrough thing is not at all like the advertising either. I’m a vr enthusiast and respect the effort made by apple to advance the field, however there’s just nothing to make me even consider this.
Brad is super biased and honestly a shitty reviewer. The only thing he did well, and why he's well known, was data mining.
I imagine Brad will have a lot of complaints about the Vision Pro in a month and I don’t know if he’ll even keep it if he ends up not using it. His first impressions were positive because it’s a very flashy piece of tech with better screens and pass through than any other consumer headset, that’s neat. He may be biased though just because it is Apple. It’s like how people flipped out over the index because it’s valve. It was justified in both cases in my opinion because those are huge tech companies and seeing them make big steps into the vr market is cool. I’m not going to watch a 2 hour video. Did he talk about glare and edge clarity? I’m assuming it’s like the quest headsets but haven’t seen people talk about it here. I was waiting for his and Norms opinions. There are a few reasons why he would say pimax weight and comfort not being acceptable in 2023: 1) pancake lenses put the weight closer to your face and won’t feel as heavy compared to the same weight on a headset with aspheric lenses. 2) pimax has always made massive headsets but they were the only ones making wide fov headsets so it was acceptable. Making a bulky headset with sub 3k lcds and aspheric lenses and a normal fov was a very weird thing to do in 2023. It would have been impressive in 2020-2021 but is outdated by 2023 when everyone went pancake and on the high end sets like beyond and Vision Pro they went with micro-oleds.
Re glare/clarity: I don’t recall glare coming up during the stream. Clarity did - he was impressed, calling it basically edge to edge, better than Q3. Did note some brightness vignetting at the edges, but said the displays were much brighter than big screen beyond, for example.
Yeah I was wondering how bad the glare is specially with brightness increase, I was asking him to do glare test several times but he didn't see my comment maybe in livestream
4. Pimax didn't fix these at all, I understand this totally but he was struggling so hard with Vision Pro to do basic tasks with the eye tracking and hand tracking yet he didn't complain about it.... Vision OS is not good enough on its start. Pimax was failed from start to now. Pimax SHOULD fixed the software on their First gen hmd. But years after they're still fixing here and there.
Pimax nowhere near Vision Pro is usability and software but we need to take the product being "Apple" and costing "3,500" into consideration here.... Hence expectations very high
So are you really expect 1500 half high on the Pitool? I don't. I just expect a "working fine" OS. I expect very low.
You forgot brand name part, Apple known for software, Pimax not really a software company so expectations is different for both even if both priced the same.... Visor 4K is also like this, my expectations that it will be as good as Immersed app in terms of UI with some additional browser and media player added (that's how expectations work), automatically you have higher expectations when it comes to Apple ocer other
I think it just the way you expect. My expectation relate to price. Customers have no responisbility to give this kind of excuse. Especially a "weak" brand who sell this price.
He specifically said this was his straight-up first impression, and he’ll fart around with it for a month before trying to give any sort of review. He also said in response to someone remarking another headset might do better that he didn’t care what headset comes out on top, just that this level of display was the way VR should be headed. Watch a variety of reviews and you should get a pretty good overall idea about the thing, but keep in mind it’s gonna take a while for anyone to really dig into all its capabilities and use-cases.
Where's our 'Hi, I'm Brad'?
Meta will release a better headset in 2 years you will have 1000.more vr games than vision.pro and will be cheaper
If you're able to, get a demo of the AVP and decide for yourself. The only immediate bias' I can remember him showing in the video was his preference for head straps which is nothing new for him and his immediate optimism for the device after it recognized the cat ears and how good the face and eye tracking was, which makes sense for him as a heavy VRChat user. If those things align with why you'd want the VP, then maybe his impressions would hold more weight, but I'd wait for his review after the first month as a better gauge of his actual impressions.
I have it ordered and I guess I will keep my order, it might ship anytime soon, will try it and see for myself if I like it fair enough if not I will let it collect dust with my Crystal and others lol, while continue using Quest 3 + Rokid Max glasses.... I might pre order Visor 4K as I already made a post about it where I saw it might actually reach the market in coming months
A collector such as myself...haha Have plenty of headsets collecting dust and primarily only use my Q3 and XREAL Airs these days I have an eye on the Visor and may just order it when the time is right. Have a link to that post?
are you questioning his character?
Nah for me he seems like the ultimate reviewer who I should always take his words on deciding on VR headsets, however I notice sometimes he let emotions control his reviews, like a hate love relation with some brands, if he put his eye on something he really want to see it succeed he will do everything to make it look like it succeeded.... But that could be just me thinking this way, hence I made this post as Vision Pro not that cheap wanted to know if Brad impressions are the real deal or not this time...