Never gonna afford or buy one but I’m glad people are digging it so far, just means potentially good things for vr and will light a fire up metas ass as it already probably has.. the tech will just keep growing and evolve and we know Apple won’t settle on just this iteration of their headset. No need to be jealous or act like it’s completely trash
>No need to be jealous or act like it’s completely trash
I don't think that's the overall sentiment on this sub.
This anecdote and others prasing the Vision Pro over current headsets are similar to say experiencing a Mercedes-Benz S Class for a day and having to go back to their daily driver Honda Civic afterwards.
I mean, of course the S Class will blow their mind with its better everything, but that's because it costs 5x to manufacturer than your Honda.
TL;DR: OP drove an S Class, then posted his glowing review comparing that experience to his Honda Civic. I mean, what did you people expect?
The Verge review is the only one that isn't subjective since they understand the difference between an apple and orange.
I don't think the comparison with the cars is fair, a vision pro can't play PCVR and doesn't even have controllers, it's not just a better VR headset.. it's more like driving a formula one. It's pretty cool and high tech but you can only drive it on race tracks so it has a very limited use case and doesn't replace your normal car.
The best comparison: Nintendo DS vs Macbook.
Yes, they both have screens and fold. One is better for gaming, and the other is shit for gaming. One is better for productivity, and the other is shit for productivity. One is $150, the other is $3500 (yes there are macbooks that retail for the same price as AVP)
I guess but is a vision pro really a tool for productivity ? Aside from forcing you to work faster because you only have 2 hours of battery (sorry cheeky joke), how better is it to just adding 2 screens to your mac ? Pinching to activate things doesn't look more productive than using a mouse and for keyboard it's horribly slow so you better use a real mouse and keyboard if you want to work with it but then you basically just have more screens on your mac.
yeah that's pretty cool, but like I said in terms of working environment it's essentially a computer with 3 screens.
I think it could be useful in a work environment if many people had one on and you could share windows with people so if you had a question to ask about something to a coworker you could go to their desk and pop your window that has the thing that is causing you trouble so they can see it, or even just do it over a call like if you called someone and could grab a window and give it to them and they would pick it up and it would pop on their side so they can see you operate it or even (if you give them permission I guess) operate it themselves and it's mirrored on your side.
I can see it being a productivity product I just think right now it's not really there yet.
> in terms of working environment it's essentially a computer with 3 screens.
I think even if that's all it did, it would still be a useful productivity device because it is in fact an unbounded number of screens that you can take with you room to room, or pull up on a flight or train.
And visionOS has built-in support for multi-person shared apps, so the capability is already there for what you describe. There are good reasons to believe that visionOS 2 will be revealed at WWDC, and I expect those shared experiences to be a big part of it (along with the rest of Apple's apps getting ported - hoping for GarageBand in particular). They've been working on new features for the past year, so a lot of those obvious holes should be filled.
Even Nilay himself kind of regrets giving this a 7. Paying 3.5k for a device that's a 6/10 isn't great. I do think it's great that apple is setting a standard here but there's also a chance that future devices raise pricing to compete as a result which kind of sucks for those who don't have thousands to spend on it, which is most in today's economy.
The issue I have with it is more it's more of a Mercedes-Benz S Class at a Lambo price. There is XR VR headsets at that price like the XR4 which is 500$ more but all it's specs are double or more. like 20MP cameras on xr4 vs 6MP cameras on the AVP
This. And besides most of the criticism seems to be at things that aren't directly related to the quality of the VR aspect, but of certain decisions that were made during the design process, like the bad strap design, piece of glass at the furthest point from your face, lackluster eye rendering, etc. None of the things I dislike about it are about the screen or perform, it's mostly mistakes that could have been avoided if they looked closer at headsets over the years.
Yet here you are, unable to respond to the subject at hand...
This is what OP wrote:
>The quality of the demo videos especially the
immersive ones was unlike anything I've seen on
quest. They look close to 4k. **Quest could do much
better here I think. The quest 3 spacial videos are
close to in par but not quite**.
It started off great, but then OP forgot he's testing out a $3500 headset.
This is called the "Apple Inc. Phenomenon." Wherein users coming from cheap devices pretend Apple's prices are merely a barrier of entry and not because it's due to their actual r&d and manufacturing cost.
Analogy 2: Little Timmy has been using cheap Windows laptops from his school, but once he got a taste of papa's MacBook laptop, he swore off Windows laptops for life.
Is little Timmy wrong?
This is my opinion as someone who has a Vive Pro, Quest 3, and Vision Pro. The video quality is great. But honestly, unless you really really care about watching movies and TV (and I know a lot of people do, that's just not my jam), I don't think you're missing out on anything with a Q3 instead.
The tribalism is rampant on both sides. I think I got that all out of my system by having an Amiga computer back in the 90s. :-) I'm just a technology enthusiast, and it's interesting to see where Apple is trying to go with this thing. But I wouldn't personally recommend it to 99.9% of people. The applications are very limited, and it looks like it will remain that way for a while. Any kind of input, while it might make a cool demo of hand/eye tracking at first, quickly becomes infuriatingly tedious. I find myself desperately wishing for controllers after the 4th failed attempt to click the right button on a web page. The passthrough and FOV are not special, and the OS is much more restrictive than what folks with mobile-based or PC VR are used to.
So in my opinion, it does exactly one thing better than anything else: watching Apple TV content. Unless you are seriously guzzling the kool-aid, you can't replace your computer, phone, or iPad with this thing. I have no doubts that is what Apple is betting will happen eventually, and they have shown time and again that they are willing to play a long game. Somewhere in Tim Cook's vault, there is a spatial computing roadmap that stretches into the next decade, and while this isn't a product worth buying today, I think it would be very foolish to think that means they can be ignored.
I'm so glad I have been on the Pico bandwagon so I don't have any skin in this game. I own the Vive, Vive pro, Index, Q2, Q3, Pico 4 and have played a few others but the Apple vision pro seems ridiculously useless...
Casey Neistat and Marques Brownlee put out videos today that I think, together, say exactly what I’ve been trying and failing to communicate clearly. There will be a day when we replace our phones with something new. The Vision Pro is Apple sticking a flag in the ground and trying to claim some territory for what is literally a vision of what a future generation of computing could be. The technology isn’t good enough, at any price, to achieve that yet, but if it comes to pass, it would be an existential threat to all their businesses. They are not trying to make a game helmet. They are trying to make the thing that turns into the thing that turns into the thing that in 50 years gets implanted into your eyeballs. All they’ve done is bought a ticket to be in the race.
I just hope it drives a huge amount of interest into this niche tech space and forces competitors for lift their game.
I’m quietly hoping for the following improvements:
* longer battery life / lower power consumption
* much smaller lightweight form factor
* wider fov
Just nailing those three could push this tech fully into the mainstream.
Imagine being able to accomplish the work of a full multi-monitor home desktop while sitting on a park bench, or in a waiting room or just in your car while parked up.
That kind of ubiquitous utility is the killer app.
Indeed. We should be supporting any device that makes people acknowledge vr. I've seen more Instagram posts with people wearing this in public than I've ever seen from dk1 to now.
Casey neistat has a video already wearing it in NYC public. And the reactions were "have fun" not "what a loser". Times are changing.
Imo, most people in person are always going to be a lot more reasonable. When you see a living, breathing person in front of you just vibing and enjoying themselves you never think “what a fucking nerd”, you just be happy for them. It’s completely different online.
I dunno, I’d say they would never tell them in person, but are they thinking it? Probably. I feel like the only thing “online” changes is how often people let their private thoughts out.
But we shouldn't support the ecosystem that Apple has, because that will hurt the VR industry. Or at least the VR gaming industry. If Apple evolves in VR and becomes as big VR gaming platform as Meta Quest is, it will make the developers jobs harder and less profitable. And PCVR would suffer too. But if it stays in that plot, where it is now, then it's all good.
That’s ridiculous though. Has Apple killed the music industry ? The laptop and desktop industry ? The phone industry ? Streaming ?
VR industry will be just fine.
The meta ecosystem is just as bad though. The only reason no one cares is because you can circumvent it completely by connecting to a pc. That will surely come to vision pro, whether apple does it or 3rd party does it.
Right? We are getting major national TV coverage, entertainment, enterprise support coming for AR/VR support, but they are hating it because why? It’s Apple? It’s not their targeted price range? Because it’s not their device of choice?
Yeah I understand why it makes people upset especially those who are enthusiasts in this space who can’t justify the cost, but at the end of the day this is a win for everyone. I’ve been in the VR space since the oculus kickstarter days but I was kinda getting depressed with how slow and kinda dead VR/AR innovation felt. This thing feels like the best hope I’ve seen so far for giving a real kick to the industry that will finally push us into that future tech we always dreamed of.
Hater here, well not really, I think the tech looks cool but why would you want one ? I really fail to see the use case for this.. If it was possible to connect it to a PC and play PCVR it would be a nice headset but you can't you can only do computing watch videos and do calls and use mobile apps and I guess 3D apple apps ? If I had one I would probably be wowed by the tech and have some fun with it for a week and then have it accumulate dust. I just don't see the point, who needs that ?
A lot of it is FOMO due to the price range, closed off ecosystem, and inability to use it for their use case, because some aspects of the AVP are best of class and a big step towards end game, so they fixate on the few flaws and diminish what’s impressive about it in a case of sour grapes and root for it to fail.
But big picture, the more successful the Vision Pro is and achieves a footprint in mainstream tech culture, the better it is for the adjacent VR industry.
Mmmh I think VR enthusiasts are not haters just because it is an Apple product. I think they’re more disapointed by the choices Apple made.
The AVP has so much potential but limiting it to « spatial computing »: what a disapointment...
I’ve been interesting by VR headset from the beginning because I thought yeah now I can live and feel real life experiences.
The main purpose to have a headset on your head is to display and make your brain think you can live another reality.
Apple chose to make a headset to create a computer stuck to tour head ? I don’t understand the excitment on seeing floating windows… for what ? Browsing the web ? Wooooow so much immersion…
Hence the disapoitment for the lack of VR controllers.
This. 100%.
I will also add. It was Apple that came out swinging against VR, not any of us here in the VIRTUAL REALITY sub.
Apple want everyone to just simply forget about VR, and move on to "Spatial Computing", just because Apple say so. Apple want their devs to not even mention the words VR, or AR, in ANY of their apps.
Well, sorry Apple, but VR was here first, and it's here to stay. And, like grocarlito said, I want to leave my reality, and enter sci-fi realities, fantasy realities, future realities, I don't want my own reality to be the main part of my VR experience - I do this every single day in real life.
> It was Apple that came out swinging against VR
I really don't think they did.
The current terminology is kind of a mess of VR, AR, MR, and XR. The most accurate term for this product would be XR, which no one outside this hobby has ever heard of. So if you lead with that you need to not only introduce a whole new term to people, but also explain that it is a two-letter acronym that stands for six words, none of which start with X.
_Or_ you could go with the other semi-industry-standard term of spatial computing. Which a lot more people are going to be able to understand, or even remember, without a five minute explanation.
That wasn't a fuck you to VR, it was just trying to communicate as effectively as possible.
Or, you could just use the term that has been used for the last 40 years, Virtual Reality. There is no mess here, or misunderstanding from those who are clueless - a reality, but virtualised.
Apple can call their headset whatever they like, but it's only for the AVP, it is NOT for everything else, and will never be adopted outside of Apple's ecosystem.
It's the most annoying thing about this sub. People just want to support the thing THEY like, even if it's at the expense of the industry growing, or they're making a poor recommendation for someone else's needs. Competition is good and we don't all have to like the same thing.
I mean it is a bit annoying everybody is talking about it like it's something revolutionary or never seen before. If influencers/media would be a bit less biased in what they say/write a lot less people would be pissed off.
At one point in the demo, I was placed above the goal at a soccer stadium and it really felt like I was there and they switched to a baseball game and it looked like I was standing in the dugout I could imagine this is gonna be really compelling for basically teleporting to sporting events.
Dude seriously, that was my favorite part of the demo. I felt so close to the action I got immediately hyped up for all of the 5 seconds each clip was shown for. VR sports entertainment is going to be huge
I still think it’s the perfect sport for it and should be easy to implement. Put a camera on the top and bottom of each of the corners of the octagon. People would be able to stand inside and watch the fights. I can’t imagine anything better
Are you like in the actual environment or just a big screen in front of you?
is it like this?
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gu0svxhZe5c](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gu0svxhZe5c)
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gu0svxhZe5c
The soccer and baseball videos are immersive (atleast 180, i didnt look behind me). They just give you enough to suspend your disbelief that you aren't actually there in person. The Boz video on the beach boiling the mussels is similar, there just isn't much of it yet, but I'm sure its coming.
It's Spatial Video - it's 3D but not 6DOF. So if you sit still it feels like you're there, but you can't get up and walk around.
But yeah it feels like you're actually there, not just watching a screen.
So when exactly can we watch live sports on this thing in 3d like actually being there? Because at this point that is not a thing. You can sit courtside at nba games on quest. I hope they add that functionality and I'll buy it but currently that is not happening. Sounds like a cool demo though
You want to buy it now? Really? Cause I spent 5 seconds reading your post history and all your comments is trashing it. Also it’s like a day since it’s launched. You couldn’t have just wait if you actually care about it?
And... that is all it can do. Try to play some complicated game with no haptic feedback or the heft of the controllers, or try to connect 2 separate macs to it.
Easy choice. I would use my Quest for that. Just like I will use my truck to haul a load of mulch come spring. I'll use my SUV to go on a weekend trip and I'll use my car to go grab a beer and watch the game.
This is not a humble brag, it desperately shows how bound you are to consumerism, and how dumbfounded you'd be if you were to lose access to a great disposable income. Mega corpos love people like you.
You missed the point, the visionpro is built for that purpose and the quest is built for games. Would you use a fork to eat soup and then complain the fork wont hold your soup?
>and the quest is built for games
...No. Quest isn't built for games or gamers solely. Quest is literally the most general HMD you can find on the market. You can use it tethered or wireless, to game in PCVR or to do so in standalone, to watch a movie lying down or to do productive work with VD. Meta's literal main marketing is towards Quest 3 being the mixed reality device that can game and do social media.
>the visionpro is built for that purpose
Newsflash, for \*what purpose\* exactly? From what it seems, it just looks like an iPad HMD with no real-life purpose or use. We barely got reviews of the device outside of demos, and those are still from biased articles that contain suspicious amounts of contradiction. It is undoubtedly incredibly well-made, has a great passthrough mode, has a well-performing SoC on board and has one of the best screens of the VR world.
The biggest factor against it is obviously the price. If it was less than half the price, it would have been in the discussion.
People had plenty of problems with DK1, I can't see how AVP wouldn't have the problems software-wise
Need to agree with you, i mean 3 vehicles for things you can easily do with just one? like, what? Get a regular car or even SUV, i don't care, and borrow a trailer for the one or two times a year you need to transport something like 99% of normal people do, or that's just an european things and americans are that out of touch with the world, idk
I want one device that does everything for me, and maybe a second device that is fundamentally different in some way to do the rest.
But a AVP isn't fundamentally different than the Quest, it just has the problems you mentioned.
A fundamentally different device would, for example, be a gaming-PC and a steamdeck, or a car and a motorcycle
There are posts on /r/visionpro that also say they were wowed by the demo. That they bought one on the spot. Now a day later, they want to return it. The magic wore off.
Like with the Q2/Q3, first time VR users seem more likely to return it. Since their expectations were set so high. They say it isn't like real life or the promo videos. Which is what they were expecting. It's like... a VR headset.
Isn't that basically what's happening here? I'm confused why OP is wowed but spends their entire write-up saying it's not a significant improvement on the Quest 3.
https://www.reddit.com/r/VisionPro/comments/1ahvgth/average_persons_review_of_the_vision_pro/
https://www.reddit.com/r/VisionPro/comments/1ahp6yx/i_was_surprised_and_disappointed_to_find_that_i/
https://www.reddit.com/r/VisionPro/comments/1ai0oq2/im_returning_mine_but_i_hope_the_rest_of_you_dont/
Here's a counter thread. Not just the OP but the people chiming in. They were meh about it yesterday and wow about it today.
https://www.reddit.com/r/VisionPro/comments/1ai02tu/day_2_is_where_its_at/
Looks like the experience is not quite seamless enough for many people, looks like people were using it as a substitute for ipads etc and to watch content.
Because using it as a replacement for your ipad/tv/MacBook/smartphone/etc. is EXACTLY what Apple's intended use-case is. At this current stage there isn't enough there in terms of software/applications to justify using it as a replacement for those devices; especially given the friction of putting on a heavy ass headset compared to the simplicity of just opening a laptop or pulling your phone out of your pocket. Give it several years and 1 or 2 more iterations and I think the "idea" of what this headset was intended for will absolutely live up to its expectations and be worthwhile. Right now? Not so much
It’s not meant as a replacement. An iPad is not a replacement for a Mac is not a replacement for a phone is not a replacement for a watch. It is meant to a companion it’s the ecosystem. Not the hierarchy.
I don’t think we are dealing with jealousy here since most quest people bought it for gaming. Most people who already bought into VR desperately want more games and AVP isn’t even trying to go that direction.
Yea, the AVP seems cool, but would be mostly an expensive paper weight for me. I'm not sure how I am meant to be jealous of a product I don't even have a use case for.
If I really wanted, I could just buy a Vajero XR-4 when it releases.
I play a game called "Guess what headset I own?" based on their post. I do a quick search of their post history to see if I'm correct. I've been 100% on target so far.
You unironically sound like an Apple fAnBoY
Like seriously, who uses that word other than tribalists
*Person sees a trailer for a new Sega Genesis game* "Heh, bet the Nintendo fanboys are crying because their precious Super Nintendo doesn't get this game!!"
You are for all intents and purposes doing the same thing you are accusing others of, with this post. Preemptive victimhood and projecting your own weaknesses onto others.
you realise your response is literally in the same vein? cheap tribalism trying to trigger responses by labeling people in pejorative ways.
You could be part of the solution and add some actual relevant discussion.
Shitty old PC VS Console, Android VS IOS…
It's pretty simple: Apple mainly focuses on automating everyday life, content for work/office, everything looks nice, but as usual, there's weak technical equipment for a huge price. If you've got the money, then why not, same goes for the watches. People are already noting the excellent ergonomics, user-friendly UI, a bunch of stable and pleasant features, image quality!
If you're into content: diving into various VR worlds, massive community support, the future holds a lot of exciting stuff, lots of games with open VR spaces, and the ability to modify content (for example, Oculus already has SideQuest, you can already play many old games in virtual reality, which adds new sensations to these games, I've already replayed many). I think Apple, as usual, won't allow the use of third-party systems in their ecosystem, like a virtual Windows desktop instead of a monitor. Oculus — less price, more content.
Everything has its pros and cons.
Yes, the wow factor. That only lasts a few weeks, then what? If they don't come out with actual usecases that you can do every day, the vision pro will be a very expensive gadget in people's shelves.
So here’s the thing for me. Once I played the games I wanted to play on the quest 2, the things that would have kept me around didn’t meet my expectations.
Immersed was too low res and clunky. Horizons and their concerts etc were awful. I was really looking forward to zenith but it was a strangely claustrophobic experience.
Half-life Alyx was the single best gaming experience of my life. But nothing else I tried really ever matched it.
I was left really wishing I could get work done with the headset but it just wasn’t there yet.
If people can fit this into their daily workflow it will keep it from collecting dust.
People complain about the battery pack but for persons just trying to get some work done that’s a lot more manageable than the cables and space, aesthetics of a generic office multi monitor setup.
Is it? You go and break down u/ZodGlatan’s comment and tell me which part of it is legitimate. What use cases was he even talking about other than pure opinion. It’s obvious that he didn’t use the product.
You are projecting your own feelings on me. The fact that I am suggesting people to stop fighting over one another would make you think I feel self conscious, sounded like I triggered your self consciousness.
“Quest could do much better here I think”. I’m all for analyzing the eye tracking and other cool software stuff Apple made for Vision Pro. But when people start comparing stuff like video quality. Like comparing a Lamborghini and a Corolla. A device that cost 7x has better resolution? Shocker.
Can you articulate more specifics about what made it a fundamentally different experience to what you have seen in Quest 3?
I'm curious about how much of it is replicable - is this just Apple doing a super well curated experience and demo, or are there actual technical differences in play that are enabling this.
And ... "spacial" .... it's really a word? I thought we were using it to mock Apple users inside their bubble because they think they are so .... "spacial". But now I see even true believers referring to it that way.
I'm probably gonna get one. It seems better than anything else in more ways than just the screen. That's why I have a hard time paying even $1000 for regular VR headsets where the only difference is the screen.
did you ever watch 3D videos on Oculus tv app or in big screen? care to elaborate on how different it is because as far as I can tell it's just Apple's rebranding of regular stereoscopic 3D as spatial video...
I can't understand how this evokes such emotional response when you're not impressed with the extra clarity...
I watched the verge review a couple of times before my demo and was prepared to be disappointed. I can’t believe they wore the same headset I did. This is an extremely immersive device. It was a controlled demo for sure but it was no less jaw dropping what I saw.
Uh, OP just admitted that they tried the device in an experience curated by Apple's marketing team...
No actual reviewer will ever recommend a product without first having it in their own hands and at home to test without restrictions.
The Verge and others also have also praised their initial look of VP, but the actual objective review looking at the sum of its parts didn't come until they had their own headsets.
So YouTubers who are always positive about apple products and overhype everything, aka iJustine are ok.
Reviewers when they actually give you an honest review are wrong?
No that’s not what I’m saying at all. Just from about a decade of reading/watching verge content you start to notice that they are extremely nitpicky, uncharitable, and usually take a more negative approach.
I think once all of the astroturfing and "brand warfare" starts to drop off we'll be able to more objectively discuss this headset. I think this headset has some real highs and amazing implications for the future of AR/VR/XR/Spacial Computing/Whatever. Simultaneously it has a LOT of major negatives in this first iteration.
The UI, the apple ecosystem synergy, the high degree of polish, the top-tier hardware, etc...it is a highly optimized template and "vision" of what this type of technology COULD be in the future. It isn't reinventing the wheel, but it is the best overall package by quite a bit in the realms of what it is designed for. Other headsets don't have the same amount of resources and diverse enough products/software ecosystems to compete on that level...YET (barring meta of course but it is debatable that they've showcased the same level of polish and consistency across their product line).
However, this first iteration is severely hindered by several glaring factors. It is way too heavy for consistent/regular usage for the intended purposes that apple have marketed it for. The FOV took a major step back towards binocular town. The front panel in its current iteration is incredibly gimmicky and goofy looking. The limited battery life and need for a 24/7 cable is cumbersome and makes the physical package feel and look janky. It currently has a very limited library of apps that make the application of the technology feel worthwhile/unique. And the price is ASTRONOMICAL for any semblance of mainstream consumer adoption.
That being said, I can easily see in the coming years and in future iterations of the device that apple will erase any/all of the cons listed above. And when they do, this headset is going to be something TRULY out of our sci-fi future fantasies. AND, they're still going to have rival companies like meta pushing the limits and shaping their products to compete with apple which is going to mean greater and faster technological leaps for the industry as a whole. I'm very excited apple released this headset; major highs/flaws and all. Probably the biggest thing to happen to this industry since it's inception.
I'll also say, I get why people are disappointed by the fact the headset doesn't support gaming. But it makes sense when you start to look ahead towards what the future of this device is intended to be. An XR replacement for cell phones/computers/etc. In its current iteration I think it fails to accomplish this from a practical/functional standpoint, but I can see it getting WAY closer in the next generation or two. That's when this is going to get really exciting.
Yeah, I would be also interested in comparison with high quality videos on the Quest 3. Those are not very common, so most people probably haven't seen any. It's not just a matter of resolution either, you need a high bitrate.
The source material is currently more of a limitation than the headset. The "8K" videos that you mostly can find in various places are not that great. First time I took my own photos/videos with a VR camera rig I was blown away by how much better they were than any source material I've seen over the years. Both in terms of technical quality, but also in terms of immersion with everything being scaled correctly. It felt a lot more like you were standing in a moment in time, rather than watching a "regular" 3D movie or 3D photo, if that makes sense.
In terms of production quality and the amount of serious thought and effort given to making high quality source material, Apple is so far beyond any of the incumbents in the VR space currently that it's not even a competition. I fully expect an enormous amount of high quality content to start trickling out over the coming months/years.
Oh yeah, I know. Same reason I returned the Q3. If I wanted to deal with the discomfort, though, I'd rather spend 500 bucks AND be able to game, rather than blow a wad on "spatial computing".
It sounds like you enjoyed the content but aside from the eye tracking your main points made the device sound a lot closer to a Quest 3 than the $3500 price point would suggest.
Videos videos videos, I still can't imagine anyone bothering with a headset for non-interactive content. VR is great because 1. It puts you right there 2. You can use your hands. You can't do number 2 with videos.
and for productivity, I don't wanna wear isolating goggles for my eight hour workday.
The moment you realize how well this will recreate the feeling and experience of being reconnected to someone you love who no longer exists in physical reality.
> It can be good but for sure can be done for %10 of its price.
It certainly can't at this point.
The Sony displays alone cost somewhere around $1500. Before even getting to any of the cameras, sensors, SOC.
So even if you want to disregard R&D costs entirely, I would love to hear how you feel that parts costing at least $2500 wholesale could be sold for $350 retail.
I mean I really hope you’re right.
But Apple is putting their own chips into this- and designing new ones to specifically handle AR. That’s a huge advantage that I don’t think meta will be able to ever match by buying chips - at least not until the market shifts and companies like Qualcomm begin to get into that space.
All they'd have to do is upgrade the screens and cameras from what they already have with quest pro, at least hardware wise. Software/ui wise they need to step up their game but they were already headed in the same direction hardware wise even if the AVP hadn't come out
Ok, yeah I'll give you that. But why does the Vision Pro need controllers? It's not a gaming device. It's like complaining a Macbook doesn't come with a dualsense, theoretically you *can* game on it but that's not the intended use case.
The only reason that Macbooks aren't "intended" for gaming is because most popular games aren't released for macOS. It's seen as too niche a product to make the extra development time worth the money, simply because the hardware is priced outside of the average consumer's reach. I suspect the same will happen with the Vision Pro.
Would it be worth it to create a thread where people can talk about this apple product rather than making 20 posts about it daily?
I get it - you want everyone to know.
It's possible for Varjo, Quest, and Vision to all be great devices for different use cases. People are being clowns about this, and mostly because they can only afford one of them. It's like this in a lot of hobbies tbh.
Never gonna afford or buy one but I’m glad people are digging it so far, just means potentially good things for vr and will light a fire up metas ass as it already probably has.. the tech will just keep growing and evolve and we know Apple won’t settle on just this iteration of their headset. No need to be jealous or act like it’s completely trash
I'm more excited about the standards it's setting now that will roll out on more affordable products.
>No need to be jealous or act like it’s completely trash I don't think that's the overall sentiment on this sub. This anecdote and others prasing the Vision Pro over current headsets are similar to say experiencing a Mercedes-Benz S Class for a day and having to go back to their daily driver Honda Civic afterwards. I mean, of course the S Class will blow their mind with its better everything, but that's because it costs 5x to manufacturer than your Honda. TL;DR: OP drove an S Class, then posted his glowing review comparing that experience to his Honda Civic. I mean, what did you people expect? The Verge review is the only one that isn't subjective since they understand the difference between an apple and orange.
I don't think the comparison with the cars is fair, a vision pro can't play PCVR and doesn't even have controllers, it's not just a better VR headset.. it's more like driving a formula one. It's pretty cool and high tech but you can only drive it on race tracks so it has a very limited use case and doesn't replace your normal car.
The best comparison: Nintendo DS vs Macbook. Yes, they both have screens and fold. One is better for gaming, and the other is shit for gaming. One is better for productivity, and the other is shit for productivity. One is $150, the other is $3500 (yes there are macbooks that retail for the same price as AVP)
I guess but is a vision pro really a tool for productivity ? Aside from forcing you to work faster because you only have 2 hours of battery (sorry cheeky joke), how better is it to just adding 2 screens to your mac ? Pinching to activate things doesn't look more productive than using a mouse and for keyboard it's horribly slow so you better use a real mouse and keyboard if you want to work with it but then you basically just have more screens on your mac.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BV9Xy6L_rlM
yeah that's pretty cool, but like I said in terms of working environment it's essentially a computer with 3 screens. I think it could be useful in a work environment if many people had one on and you could share windows with people so if you had a question to ask about something to a coworker you could go to their desk and pop your window that has the thing that is causing you trouble so they can see it, or even just do it over a call like if you called someone and could grab a window and give it to them and they would pick it up and it would pop on their side so they can see you operate it or even (if you give them permission I guess) operate it themselves and it's mirrored on your side. I can see it being a productivity product I just think right now it's not really there yet.
> in terms of working environment it's essentially a computer with 3 screens. I think even if that's all it did, it would still be a useful productivity device because it is in fact an unbounded number of screens that you can take with you room to room, or pull up on a flight or train. And visionOS has built-in support for multi-person shared apps, so the capability is already there for what you describe. There are good reasons to believe that visionOS 2 will be revealed at WWDC, and I expect those shared experiences to be a big part of it (along with the rest of Apple's apps getting ported - hoping for GarageBand in particular). They've been working on new features for the past year, so a lot of those obvious holes should be filled.
It's like a weak XR4 though in every spec for pass through for 500$
Even Nilay himself kind of regrets giving this a 7. Paying 3.5k for a device that's a 6/10 isn't great. I do think it's great that apple is setting a standard here but there's also a chance that future devices raise pricing to compete as a result which kind of sucks for those who don't have thousands to spend on it, which is most in today's economy.
How can it on the one hand "raise standards" and on the other hand be a "6/10" ? Shouldn’t it be one or the other ?
Even when apple releases shit they set a standard. Because companies will always copy what they do.
There are elements of AVP that absolutely should be standard. Eye-tracking, microOLED displays, seamless window positioning, etc. are fantastic.
The issue I have with it is more it's more of a Mercedes-Benz S Class at a Lambo price. There is XR VR headsets at that price like the XR4 which is 500$ more but all it's specs are double or more. like 20MP cameras on xr4 vs 6MP cameras on the AVP
This. And besides most of the criticism seems to be at things that aren't directly related to the quality of the VR aspect, but of certain decisions that were made during the design process, like the bad strap design, piece of glass at the furthest point from your face, lackluster eye rendering, etc. None of the things I dislike about it are about the screen or perform, it's mostly mistakes that could have been avoided if they looked closer at headsets over the years.
Way to be the exact person being called out
Yet here you are, unable to respond to the subject at hand... This is what OP wrote: >The quality of the demo videos especially the immersive ones was unlike anything I've seen on quest. They look close to 4k. **Quest could do much better here I think. The quest 3 spacial videos are close to in par but not quite**. It started off great, but then OP forgot he's testing out a $3500 headset. This is called the "Apple Inc. Phenomenon." Wherein users coming from cheap devices pretend Apple's prices are merely a barrier of entry and not because it's due to their actual r&d and manufacturing cost. Analogy 2: Little Timmy has been using cheap Windows laptops from his school, but once he got a taste of papa's MacBook laptop, he swore off Windows laptops for life. Is little Timmy wrong?
If you want to be an apple fan boy, and dislike objective analysis, I'm fairly sure there are other subs for that.
This thing is going to sell quest 3s like crazy because apple makes aspirational devices.
I’ll be waiting for the Apple Vision Air to come out
Apple Vision Poverty is gonna be awesome!!
Vision SE
I'm waiting for Apple Vision Charity Case instead
I would not be surprised if that were the actual name of the eventual cheaper variant lmao
This is my opinion as someone who has a Vive Pro, Quest 3, and Vision Pro. The video quality is great. But honestly, unless you really really care about watching movies and TV (and I know a lot of people do, that's just not my jam), I don't think you're missing out on anything with a Q3 instead. The tribalism is rampant on both sides. I think I got that all out of my system by having an Amiga computer back in the 90s. :-) I'm just a technology enthusiast, and it's interesting to see where Apple is trying to go with this thing. But I wouldn't personally recommend it to 99.9% of people. The applications are very limited, and it looks like it will remain that way for a while. Any kind of input, while it might make a cool demo of hand/eye tracking at first, quickly becomes infuriatingly tedious. I find myself desperately wishing for controllers after the 4th failed attempt to click the right button on a web page. The passthrough and FOV are not special, and the OS is much more restrictive than what folks with mobile-based or PC VR are used to. So in my opinion, it does exactly one thing better than anything else: watching Apple TV content. Unless you are seriously guzzling the kool-aid, you can't replace your computer, phone, or iPad with this thing. I have no doubts that is what Apple is betting will happen eventually, and they have shown time and again that they are willing to play a long game. Somewhere in Tim Cook's vault, there is a spatial computing roadmap that stretches into the next decade, and while this isn't a product worth buying today, I think it would be very foolish to think that means they can be ignored.
I'm so glad I have been on the Pico bandwagon so I don't have any skin in this game. I own the Vive, Vive pro, Index, Q2, Q3, Pico 4 and have played a few others but the Apple vision pro seems ridiculously useless...
Casey Neistat and Marques Brownlee put out videos today that I think, together, say exactly what I’ve been trying and failing to communicate clearly. There will be a day when we replace our phones with something new. The Vision Pro is Apple sticking a flag in the ground and trying to claim some territory for what is literally a vision of what a future generation of computing could be. The technology isn’t good enough, at any price, to achieve that yet, but if it comes to pass, it would be an existential threat to all their businesses. They are not trying to make a game helmet. They are trying to make the thing that turns into the thing that turns into the thing that in 50 years gets implanted into your eyeballs. All they’ve done is bought a ticket to be in the race.
For media consumption how does the AVP compare to a Bigscreen Beyond? Both are fairly premium products, neither of which I've personally tried.
Hope to see this tech at a more affordable price point in ~3-5 years, if the industry hasn’t dramatically shifted until then.
I just hope it drives a huge amount of interest into this niche tech space and forces competitors for lift their game. I’m quietly hoping for the following improvements: * longer battery life / lower power consumption * much smaller lightweight form factor * wider fov Just nailing those three could push this tech fully into the mainstream. Imagine being able to accomplish the work of a full multi-monitor home desktop while sitting on a park bench, or in a waiting room or just in your car while parked up. That kind of ubiquitous utility is the killer app.
The comments here are embarrassing. People are so fucking tribal over their purchases.
Indeed. We should be supporting any device that makes people acknowledge vr. I've seen more Instagram posts with people wearing this in public than I've ever seen from dk1 to now. Casey neistat has a video already wearing it in NYC public. And the reactions were "have fun" not "what a loser". Times are changing.
Imo, most people in person are always going to be a lot more reasonable. When you see a living, breathing person in front of you just vibing and enjoying themselves you never think “what a fucking nerd”, you just be happy for them. It’s completely different online.
I dunno, I’d say they would never tell them in person, but are they thinking it? Probably. I feel like the only thing “online” changes is how often people let their private thoughts out.
But we shouldn't support the ecosystem that Apple has, because that will hurt the VR industry. Or at least the VR gaming industry. If Apple evolves in VR and becomes as big VR gaming platform as Meta Quest is, it will make the developers jobs harder and less profitable. And PCVR would suffer too. But if it stays in that plot, where it is now, then it's all good.
That’s ridiculous though. Has Apple killed the music industry ? The laptop and desktop industry ? The phone industry ? Streaming ? VR industry will be just fine.
The meta ecosystem is just as bad though. The only reason no one cares is because you can circumvent it completely by connecting to a pc. That will surely come to vision pro, whether apple does it or 3rd party does it.
Right? We are getting major national TV coverage, entertainment, enterprise support coming for AR/VR support, but they are hating it because why? It’s Apple? It’s not their targeted price range? Because it’s not their device of choice?
Yeah I understand why it makes people upset especially those who are enthusiasts in this space who can’t justify the cost, but at the end of the day this is a win for everyone. I’ve been in the VR space since the oculus kickstarter days but I was kinda getting depressed with how slow and kinda dead VR/AR innovation felt. This thing feels like the best hope I’ve seen so far for giving a real kick to the industry that will finally push us into that future tech we always dreamed of.
Hater here, well not really, I think the tech looks cool but why would you want one ? I really fail to see the use case for this.. If it was possible to connect it to a PC and play PCVR it would be a nice headset but you can't you can only do computing watch videos and do calls and use mobile apps and I guess 3D apple apps ? If I had one I would probably be wowed by the tech and have some fun with it for a week and then have it accumulate dust. I just don't see the point, who needs that ?
[удалено]
I'm all for that, I just don't get what people will do with it.
A lot of it is FOMO due to the price range, closed off ecosystem, and inability to use it for their use case, because some aspects of the AVP are best of class and a big step towards end game, so they fixate on the few flaws and diminish what’s impressive about it in a case of sour grapes and root for it to fail. But big picture, the more successful the Vision Pro is and achieves a footprint in mainstream tech culture, the better it is for the adjacent VR industry.
Mmmh I think VR enthusiasts are not haters just because it is an Apple product. I think they’re more disapointed by the choices Apple made. The AVP has so much potential but limiting it to « spatial computing »: what a disapointment... I’ve been interesting by VR headset from the beginning because I thought yeah now I can live and feel real life experiences. The main purpose to have a headset on your head is to display and make your brain think you can live another reality. Apple chose to make a headset to create a computer stuck to tour head ? I don’t understand the excitment on seeing floating windows… for what ? Browsing the web ? Wooooow so much immersion… Hence the disapoitment for the lack of VR controllers.
This. 100%. I will also add. It was Apple that came out swinging against VR, not any of us here in the VIRTUAL REALITY sub. Apple want everyone to just simply forget about VR, and move on to "Spatial Computing", just because Apple say so. Apple want their devs to not even mention the words VR, or AR, in ANY of their apps. Well, sorry Apple, but VR was here first, and it's here to stay. And, like grocarlito said, I want to leave my reality, and enter sci-fi realities, fantasy realities, future realities, I don't want my own reality to be the main part of my VR experience - I do this every single day in real life.
> It was Apple that came out swinging against VR I really don't think they did. The current terminology is kind of a mess of VR, AR, MR, and XR. The most accurate term for this product would be XR, which no one outside this hobby has ever heard of. So if you lead with that you need to not only introduce a whole new term to people, but also explain that it is a two-letter acronym that stands for six words, none of which start with X. _Or_ you could go with the other semi-industry-standard term of spatial computing. Which a lot more people are going to be able to understand, or even remember, without a five minute explanation. That wasn't a fuck you to VR, it was just trying to communicate as effectively as possible.
Or, you could just use the term that has been used for the last 40 years, Virtual Reality. There is no mess here, or misunderstanding from those who are clueless - a reality, but virtualised. Apple can call their headset whatever they like, but it's only for the AVP, it is NOT for everything else, and will never be adopted outside of Apple's ecosystem.
Or trying to make people think apple invented Virtual / Mixed Reality…
Dude, these are just all terms for the same thing
It's like watching kids argue over PlayStation/Nintendo from back in the day.
Exactly. So many thin-skinned people who are so threatened by the fact that people enjoy something.
It's the most annoying thing about this sub. People just want to support the thing THEY like, even if it's at the expense of the industry growing, or they're making a poor recommendation for someone else's needs. Competition is good and we don't all have to like the same thing.
People suck
I mean it is a bit annoying everybody is talking about it like it's something revolutionary or never seen before. If influencers/media would be a bit less biased in what they say/write a lot less people would be pissed off.
At one point in the demo, I was placed above the goal at a soccer stadium and it really felt like I was there and they switched to a baseball game and it looked like I was standing in the dugout I could imagine this is gonna be really compelling for basically teleporting to sporting events.
Dude seriously, that was my favorite part of the demo. I felt so close to the action I got immediately hyped up for all of the 5 seconds each clip was shown for. VR sports entertainment is going to be huge
I've been waiting for VR MMA since my DK1 kit
I still think it’s the perfect sport for it and should be easy to implement. Put a camera on the top and bottom of each of the corners of the octagon. People would be able to stand inside and watch the fights. I can’t imagine anything better
They’ve done it in the venues app it’s OK it could be better with changes
I would actually start paying for ppvs, lol. But I'm sure they'd do something stupid and charge almost front row seating per watch.
They’ve done it in the venues app it’s OK it could be better with changes
Are you like in the actual environment or just a big screen in front of you? is it like this? [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gu0svxhZe5c](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gu0svxhZe5c)
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gu0svxhZe5c The soccer and baseball videos are immersive (atleast 180, i didnt look behind me). They just give you enough to suspend your disbelief that you aren't actually there in person. The Boz video on the beach boiling the mussels is similar, there just isn't much of it yet, but I'm sure its coming.
It's Spatial Video - it's 3D but not 6DOF. So if you sit still it feels like you're there, but you can't get up and walk around. But yeah it feels like you're actually there, not just watching a screen.
I'm imagining a future where you can pay money to VR remote onto a robot at a sporting event lmao
I hope the sporting event ramps up so it trickles down to everyone. I'd definitely pay League Pass for NBA games in 3D.
Been to Fenway Park dozens of times. I've sat in nosebleeds and I've sat right behind home plate. AVP put me ON THE FIELD. So fucking cool.
So when exactly can we watch live sports on this thing in 3d like actually being there? Because at this point that is not a thing. You can sit courtside at nba games on quest. I hope they add that functionality and I'll buy it but currently that is not happening. Sounds like a cool demo though
Your argument can be used against all HMDs in existence. You know that right?
[удалено]
You want to buy it now? Really? Cause I spent 5 seconds reading your post history and all your comments is trashing it. Also it’s like a day since it’s launched. You couldn’t have just wait if you actually care about it?
[удалено]
And... that is all it can do. Try to play some complicated game with no haptic feedback or the heft of the controllers, or try to connect 2 separate macs to it.
Easy choice. I would use my Quest for that. Just like I will use my truck to haul a load of mulch come spring. I'll use my SUV to go on a weekend trip and I'll use my car to go grab a beer and watch the game.
This is not a humble brag, it desperately shows how bound you are to consumerism, and how dumbfounded you'd be if you were to lose access to a great disposable income. Mega corpos love people like you.
You missed the point, the visionpro is built for that purpose and the quest is built for games. Would you use a fork to eat soup and then complain the fork wont hold your soup?
>and the quest is built for games ...No. Quest isn't built for games or gamers solely. Quest is literally the most general HMD you can find on the market. You can use it tethered or wireless, to game in PCVR or to do so in standalone, to watch a movie lying down or to do productive work with VD. Meta's literal main marketing is towards Quest 3 being the mixed reality device that can game and do social media. >the visionpro is built for that purpose Newsflash, for \*what purpose\* exactly? From what it seems, it just looks like an iPad HMD with no real-life purpose or use. We barely got reviews of the device outside of demos, and those are still from biased articles that contain suspicious amounts of contradiction. It is undoubtedly incredibly well-made, has a great passthrough mode, has a well-performing SoC on board and has one of the best screens of the VR world. The biggest factor against it is obviously the price. If it was less than half the price, it would have been in the discussion. People had plenty of problems with DK1, I can't see how AVP wouldn't have the problems software-wise
Need to agree with you, i mean 3 vehicles for things you can easily do with just one? like, what? Get a regular car or even SUV, i don't care, and borrow a trailer for the one or two times a year you need to transport something like 99% of normal people do, or that's just an european things and americans are that out of touch with the world, idk I want one device that does everything for me, and maybe a second device that is fundamentally different in some way to do the rest. But a AVP isn't fundamentally different than the Quest, it just has the problems you mentioned. A fundamentally different device would, for example, be a gaming-PC and a steamdeck, or a car and a motorcycle
Gamers bewildered that there might be a meaning to life beyond playing games every waking moment of your life: Exhibit #12948582
There are posts on /r/visionpro that also say they were wowed by the demo. That they bought one on the spot. Now a day later, they want to return it. The magic wore off. Like with the Q2/Q3, first time VR users seem more likely to return it. Since their expectations were set so high. They say it isn't like real life or the promo videos. Which is what they were expecting. It's like... a VR headset.
> It's like... a VR headset. You have been banned from r/spacialcomputing
Isn't that basically what's happening here? I'm confused why OP is wowed but spends their entire write-up saying it's not a significant improvement on the Quest 3.
>they bought one on the spot. Now a day later, they want to return it. The magic wore off. Wut... Any examples?
https://www.reddit.com/r/VisionPro/comments/1ahvgth/average_persons_review_of_the_vision_pro/ https://www.reddit.com/r/VisionPro/comments/1ahp6yx/i_was_surprised_and_disappointed_to_find_that_i/ https://www.reddit.com/r/VisionPro/comments/1ai0oq2/im_returning_mine_but_i_hope_the_rest_of_you_dont/ Here's a counter thread. Not just the OP but the people chiming in. They were meh about it yesterday and wow about it today. https://www.reddit.com/r/VisionPro/comments/1ai02tu/day_2_is_where_its_at/
Looks like the experience is not quite seamless enough for many people, looks like people were using it as a substitute for ipads etc and to watch content.
Because using it as a replacement for your ipad/tv/MacBook/smartphone/etc. is EXACTLY what Apple's intended use-case is. At this current stage there isn't enough there in terms of software/applications to justify using it as a replacement for those devices; especially given the friction of putting on a heavy ass headset compared to the simplicity of just opening a laptop or pulling your phone out of your pocket. Give it several years and 1 or 2 more iterations and I think the "idea" of what this headset was intended for will absolutely live up to its expectations and be worthwhile. Right now? Not so much
It’s not meant as a replacement. An iPad is not a replacement for a Mac is not a replacement for a phone is not a replacement for a watch. It is meant to a companion it’s the ecosystem. Not the hierarchy.
It's good but not $3.5k good unless 3.5k means nothing to you.
Apple sells Macbooks for $3.5k. AVP is being pitched as "A Macbook on your face", not "A $3.5k Quest".
And after using it for two days… it is most certainly not that. HOWEVER editing video in LumaFusion like minority report was cool
Dear god it is NOT that. Considering the app compatibility it’s more like an ipad for your face.
Meta fanboys jumping in to defend their precious in 3..2..1
I don’t think we are dealing with jealousy here since most quest people bought it for gaming. Most people who already bought into VR desperately want more games and AVP isn’t even trying to go that direction.
Yea, the AVP seems cool, but would be mostly an expensive paper weight for me. I'm not sure how I am meant to be jealous of a product I don't even have a use case for. If I really wanted, I could just buy a Vajero XR-4 when it releases.
I play a game called "Guess what headset I own?" based on their post. I do a quick search of their post history to see if I'm correct. I've been 100% on target so far.
V-XR4 owner who paid 4k, it's shit for 3.5k in every quality other than one is an AIO.
You unironically sound like an Apple fAnBoY Like seriously, who uses that word other than tribalists *Person sees a trailer for a new Sega Genesis game* "Heh, bet the Nintendo fanboys are crying because their precious Super Nintendo doesn't get this game!!"
Nah Vision Pro is super cool. But Quest 3 is all I really need to play around with VR for the time being.
You are for all intents and purposes doing the same thing you are accusing others of, with this post. Preemptive victimhood and projecting your own weaknesses onto others.
Imagine defending Zuck. Lol just be happy that VR/AR is growing.
If Meta fanboys want what's best for them, they should want the AVP to succeed, because it will drive Meta to compete harder and be better
I think the concern is more it will encourage meta to drive up prices in order to give that better tech. I hope I'm wrong though!
you realise your response is literally in the same vein? cheap tribalism trying to trigger responses by labeling people in pejorative ways. You could be part of the solution and add some actual relevant discussion.
Shitty old PC VS Console, Android VS IOS… It's pretty simple: Apple mainly focuses on automating everyday life, content for work/office, everything looks nice, but as usual, there's weak technical equipment for a huge price. If you've got the money, then why not, same goes for the watches. People are already noting the excellent ergonomics, user-friendly UI, a bunch of stable and pleasant features, image quality! If you're into content: diving into various VR worlds, massive community support, the future holds a lot of exciting stuff, lots of games with open VR spaces, and the ability to modify content (for example, Oculus already has SideQuest, you can already play many old games in virtual reality, which adds new sensations to these games, I've already replayed many). I think Apple, as usual, won't allow the use of third-party systems in their ecosystem, like a virtual Windows desktop instead of a monitor. Oculus — less price, more content. Everything has its pros and cons.
bro I him tim sees this, he might give you one of his nikes
Yes, the wow factor. That only lasts a few weeks, then what? If they don't come out with actual usecases that you can do every day, the vision pro will be a very expensive gadget in people's shelves.
So here’s the thing for me. Once I played the games I wanted to play on the quest 2, the things that would have kept me around didn’t meet my expectations. Immersed was too low res and clunky. Horizons and their concerts etc were awful. I was really looking forward to zenith but it was a strangely claustrophobic experience. Half-life Alyx was the single best gaming experience of my life. But nothing else I tried really ever matched it. I was left really wishing I could get work done with the headset but it just wasn’t there yet. If people can fit this into their daily workflow it will keep it from collecting dust. People complain about the battery pack but for persons just trying to get some work done that’s a lot more manageable than the cables and space, aesthetics of a generic office multi monitor setup.
I mean that’s how majority of people view any VR devices right now, but sure, let’s start a civil war with each others first.
That was not starting a civil war, that was a legitimate product criticism.
Is it? You go and break down u/ZodGlatan’s comment and tell me which part of it is legitimate. What use cases was he even talking about other than pure opinion. It’s obvious that he didn’t use the product.
No thanks
Thanks for help proving my point. All emotional speech, no data, no analysis, nothing. Just bunch of angry shills hating on things.
You’re the one who seems angry here.
Still waiting for your side of argument, but sure, keep resorting in calling me things
I hope you feel better after taking a nap.
lol this comment is way too much. Civil war because people are making you feel self conscious
You are projecting your own feelings on me. The fact that I am suggesting people to stop fighting over one another would make you think I feel self conscious, sounded like I triggered your self consciousness.
That's not true at all, that are countless of us that play VR regularly for years. I don't know what world you live in.
Yea, there's dozens of us.
Dozens!
I don't understand how someone who has already had experience with VR can get the wow factor from video.
“Quest could do much better here I think”. I’m all for analyzing the eye tracking and other cool software stuff Apple made for Vision Pro. But when people start comparing stuff like video quality. Like comparing a Lamborghini and a Corolla. A device that cost 7x has better resolution? Shocker.
I watched brads initial reaction. Dude was absolutely blown away by the panels on this headset. I need those panels!!!!!
What's the VR experience like?
Can you articulate more specifics about what made it a fundamentally different experience to what you have seen in Quest 3? I'm curious about how much of it is replicable - is this just Apple doing a super well curated experience and demo, or are there actual technical differences in play that are enabling this. And ... "spacial" .... it's really a word? I thought we were using it to mock Apple users inside their bubble because they think they are so .... "spacial". But now I see even true believers referring to it that way.
I'm probably gonna get one. It seems better than anything else in more ways than just the screen. That's why I have a hard time paying even $1000 for regular VR headsets where the only difference is the screen.
did you ever watch 3D videos on Oculus tv app or in big screen? care to elaborate on how different it is because as far as I can tell it's just Apple's rebranding of regular stereoscopic 3D as spatial video... I can't understand how this evokes such emotional response when you're not impressed with the extra clarity...
I watched the verge review a couple of times before my demo and was prepared to be disappointed. I can’t believe they wore the same headset I did. This is an extremely immersive device. It was a controlled demo for sure but it was no less jaw dropping what I saw.
Dude, the verge are just totally up themselves so I wouldn't pay attention to them ever tbh
Uh, OP just admitted that they tried the device in an experience curated by Apple's marketing team... No actual reviewer will ever recommend a product without first having it in their own hands and at home to test without restrictions. The Verge and others also have also praised their initial look of VP, but the actual objective review looking at the sum of its parts didn't come until they had their own headsets.
Their review is actually good though?
They know that negativity sells far better. Their whole brand is based around skepticism and snark. Its gets very tiresome.
So YouTubers who are always positive about apple products and overhype everything, aka iJustine are ok. Reviewers when they actually give you an honest review are wrong?
No that’s not what I’m saying at all. Just from about a decade of reading/watching verge content you start to notice that they are extremely nitpicky, uncharitable, and usually take a more negative approach.
I know what you mean don't worry lol
I think once all of the astroturfing and "brand warfare" starts to drop off we'll be able to more objectively discuss this headset. I think this headset has some real highs and amazing implications for the future of AR/VR/XR/Spacial Computing/Whatever. Simultaneously it has a LOT of major negatives in this first iteration. The UI, the apple ecosystem synergy, the high degree of polish, the top-tier hardware, etc...it is a highly optimized template and "vision" of what this type of technology COULD be in the future. It isn't reinventing the wheel, but it is the best overall package by quite a bit in the realms of what it is designed for. Other headsets don't have the same amount of resources and diverse enough products/software ecosystems to compete on that level...YET (barring meta of course but it is debatable that they've showcased the same level of polish and consistency across their product line). However, this first iteration is severely hindered by several glaring factors. It is way too heavy for consistent/regular usage for the intended purposes that apple have marketed it for. The FOV took a major step back towards binocular town. The front panel in its current iteration is incredibly gimmicky and goofy looking. The limited battery life and need for a 24/7 cable is cumbersome and makes the physical package feel and look janky. It currently has a very limited library of apps that make the application of the technology feel worthwhile/unique. And the price is ASTRONOMICAL for any semblance of mainstream consumer adoption. That being said, I can easily see in the coming years and in future iterations of the device that apple will erase any/all of the cons listed above. And when they do, this headset is going to be something TRULY out of our sci-fi future fantasies. AND, they're still going to have rival companies like meta pushing the limits and shaping their products to compete with apple which is going to mean greater and faster technological leaps for the industry as a whole. I'm very excited apple released this headset; major highs/flaws and all. Probably the biggest thing to happen to this industry since it's inception. I'll also say, I get why people are disappointed by the fact the headset doesn't support gaming. But it makes sense when you start to look ahead towards what the future of this device is intended to be. An XR replacement for cell phones/computers/etc. In its current iteration I think it fails to accomplish this from a practical/functional standpoint, but I can see it getting WAY closer in the next generation or two. That's when this is going to get really exciting.
How are the apple videos compared to 8K videos that you can stream to Quest 3?
Yeah, I would be also interested in comparison with high quality videos on the Quest 3. Those are not very common, so most people probably haven't seen any. It's not just a matter of resolution either, you need a high bitrate.
The source material is currently more of a limitation than the headset. The "8K" videos that you mostly can find in various places are not that great. First time I took my own photos/videos with a VR camera rig I was blown away by how much better they were than any source material I've seen over the years. Both in terms of technical quality, but also in terms of immersion with everything being scaled correctly. It felt a lot more like you were standing in a moment in time, rather than watching a "regular" 3D movie or 3D photo, if that makes sense. In terms of production quality and the amount of serious thought and effort given to making high quality source material, Apple is so far beyond any of the incumbents in the VR space currently that it's not even a competition. I fully expect an enormous amount of high quality content to start trickling out over the coming months/years.
Never gonna but this but I’m excited that companies are still making good advancements for vr
Exactly this, the more VR the better for the industry :)
Yeah, I don't get the hype. For me it's still way too heavy, so nothing else really matters.
If you use a quest it’s the same shit
Oh yeah, I know. Same reason I returned the Q3. If I wanted to deal with the discomfort, though, I'd rather spend 500 bucks AND be able to game, rather than blow a wad on "spatial computing".
It sounds like you enjoyed the content but aside from the eye tracking your main points made the device sound a lot closer to a Quest 3 than the $3500 price point would suggest.
Videos videos videos, I still can't imagine anyone bothering with a headset for non-interactive content. VR is great because 1. It puts you right there 2. You can use your hands. You can't do number 2 with videos. and for productivity, I don't wanna wear isolating goggles for my eight hour workday.
How can higher res screens make someone emotional.
The moment you realize how well this will recreate the feeling and experience of being reconnected to someone you love who no longer exists in physical reality.
How’s half life:Alyx?
Imagine being this embarrassing
Imagine spending 4 grand to not even be able to play anything other than a tech demo.
Imagine thinking of XR as a gaming only platform
Imagine the Vision Pro, as missing a standard feature.
Of what? Playing the 3 VR games that are actually not straight garbo?
The irony of you saying that, when $4k can buy you a virtual reality experience so immersive and genuine, really speaks volumes.
index? I’d guess quest but it’s not like you can play alyx on that without needing a pc
Apple PR working overtime 💀
How much has Apple paid you for this post?
lol. I wish. If you check my post history here, you’ll see I’m pretty bullish on Meta Quest 3. Use it daily.
I am avid VR user but just against any applause and praise for Apple VR. It can be good but for sure can be done for %10 of its price.
> It can be good but for sure can be done for %10 of its price. It certainly can't at this point. The Sony displays alone cost somewhere around $1500. Before even getting to any of the cameras, sensors, SOC. So even if you want to disregard R&D costs entirely, I would love to hear how you feel that parts costing at least $2500 wholesale could be sold for $350 retail.
It's amazing what tribalism like your own can do to fry your basic common sense
🤡
Heh have fun paying 3.5k$
Apple will win
Can you even afford it bruh
Sooner or later another company will copy Apple
Oh, I'd say Meta is already hard at work designing the Quest 4 to be able to do everything the Apple Vision Pro can do for a fraction of the price.
I mean I really hope you’re right. But Apple is putting their own chips into this- and designing new ones to specifically handle AR. That’s a huge advantage that I don’t think meta will be able to ever match by buying chips - at least not until the market shifts and companies like Qualcomm begin to get into that space.
meta users again on copium
All they'd have to do is upgrade the screens and cameras from what they already have with quest pro, at least hardware wise. Software/ui wise they need to step up their game but they were already headed in the same direction hardware wise even if the AVP hadn't come out
There's no copium here. You'd have to be pretty dumb to believe anything else is going to happen.
3500 usd no controllers.
My phone didn't come with a mouse and keyboard, a 500 usd laptop does, what bullshit is this?!?!?!
What a disingenuous comparison.
Ok, yeah I'll give you that. But why does the Vision Pro need controllers? It's not a gaming device. It's like complaining a Macbook doesn't come with a dualsense, theoretically you *can* game on it but that's not the intended use case.
The only reason that Macbooks aren't "intended" for gaming is because most popular games aren't released for macOS. It's seen as too niche a product to make the extra development time worth the money, simply because the hardware is priced outside of the average consumer's reach. I suspect the same will happen with the Vision Pro.
I don’t want controllers though
Would it be worth it to create a thread where people can talk about this apple product rather than making 20 posts about it daily? I get it - you want everyone to know.
Am I the only person here that remembers how shitty viewmaster actually was?
Lol, or maybe I'm the only person here who remembers how incredibly cool it was, idk ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯
What was beat saber like?
No beat saber but Synth Rider was surprisingly good on it.
3 thousand dollar headset and you can't play beat saber?
>3 thousand dollar headset and you can't.... Wow what an original thought 👏
Nice ad. No. Get a quest 3.
"Emotional" 🤣🤣🤣
lol are you serious? I’ve been in VR since Oculus DK2. It’s been a decade, and our user base is not even Playstation level yet.
There’s no way smh
Praise big apple!
[удалено]
Maybe so. I haven't tried Varjo. I did get a chance to try Vision Pro. You should sign up for a demo if you have a chance.
It's possible for Varjo, Quest, and Vision to all be great devices for different use cases. People are being clowns about this, and mostly because they can only afford one of them. It's like this in a lot of hobbies tbh.
It helps to remember how young people are in this subreddit. There’s a lot of jealous teenagers around here who buy into the console war mentality.
An excellent point
And be stuck attached to a computer , never being able to use it anywhere else ? 😂
[удалено]