Apple Vision Pro: for me, epic failure

[DiTBho]

As usual, not only are the materials and workmanship with which it is built NOT worth the money spent, but there is no attempt to prevent them from ruining.

A bit like the disgusting iPod Shuffle headphones, "cool" as soon as you take them out of the box, then they become rubbish (easy to make dirty, difficult to clean, easy to damage when you try to clean) with daily use and you have to replace them.

[DiTBho]

Apple Newton : Apple iPhone = Apple Lisa : Apple Machintosh
Apple Newton : Apple iPhone = Apple Vision Pro : (x)?

what is (x)? 

Whatever (x) will be, my vibes are, in short, the Apple Vision Pro is here to test the interest for (x)

[ebastler]

Apple Newton : Apple iPhone = Apple Lisa : Apple Machintosh

I don't think the above equation quite pans out.

With the Macintosh, Apple did indeed follow up on the Lisa quickly, and managed to secure at least a part of the "personal computer for non-techies" market. In contrast, Apple lost the PDA market entirely to other players, who came out with much simpler/lighter/cheaper (and less capable) products. That lasted for well over a decade, until the iPhone came back into that market via the "iPod + phone + web device" back door.

[DiTBho]

... after a few days of "wow effect", Ania is already thinking of reselling the device for 4400 USD.
+400 USD to cover part of the fly return ticket, 2 days in hotel, etc.

-

I would say "expected" 

Why? well, because frankly it will take at least another 5-10 years to develop lightweight frame "glasses".
I don't know if  "all in one" like the Vision Pro, or with a "dumb video terminal" which receives a framebuffer (compressed H265?) from a processor hidden perhaps in a bag, or in the backpack together with the batteries.

Otherwise there is also the question of batteries! They must take up less space, be light and be able to store a lot of energy.
The lenses of the (X) glasses must be of the same type used on military aircraft, semi-transparent, high contrast, high resolution, able to project images.

All impossible things with current technology, just as it was impossible to develop an "Apple iPhone" in the days of the "Apple Newton" 

[DiTBho]

With the Macintosh, Apple did indeed follow up on the Lisa quickly, and managed to secure at least a part of the "personal computer for non-techies" market.

In my opinion, the Macintosh differs from Lisa in a number of tricks with which they made it economical: from ~10K USD to ~3K USD

Starting from the removal of the MMU, to the flat-filesystem, whereas between Newtown and iPhone there was basically not enough CPU power, because the StrongARMs of the time were not able to handle the "native-handwriting"(1) recognition algorithms, which was supposed to be *THE* killer feature.

(there is even an Simpson episode, making fun of it)

The point is that either they are technological reasons for the state of the art of the technology available, which is not enough, or they are cost reasons, that is, there would be the technology to do it, but it would cost so much that it would only be of interest to a few.

I didn't specify the nature of the ":" operator, so either reason works in the equations.



(1) vs user forced to learn "Graphiti", developed by Palm, for PalmOS-devices.
I remember, it took more than two months just to learn and train to write with the stylus in the way Graphiti required, but in the end it was a stretch that made the device economical (300USD (Palm) vs 2000USD (Newtown))

[DiTBho]

So, last news

Zuck (Zuckerberg) made a video, where like a Youtuber, rejects the Apple Vision Pro - Overall, Quest is better for the vast majority of things that people use mixed reality for now - and then, he takes aim at rival Apple over Vision Pro headset.

_O_M_G_ 

[ebastler]

Company boss says his product is better than the competitor's.
In other news, dog bytes man.

 

[DiTBho]

The last Zuck (Zuckerberg)'s video is interesting at least from the communication technique he used.

-

Already packaged and shipped, it's on its way for a new home, on Wednesday, however, Ania sold her Apple Vision Pro for 4600 euros.
- WOW the first few days you use it, but after that it's useless - was her last comment.
She meant "useless" as an immersive device for writing software code, because frankly it doesn't add any productivity points.

[Marco]

It's sad that for AR these devices are almost completely useless, because they simply won't let any third parties develop AR software in any meaningful way.

[SiliconWizard]

Yeah, anyway, augmented? I think these things should be called Diminished Reality instead.

[Neutrion]

Apple is a bit late here, the Samsung APEX is well ahead of them in every (the most important) aspect.
The problem is with Apple that their CEO and engineers are not visionary enough for theese modern days.



I would really love to see people searching for the vision pro would also check this great Samsung product!

[Neutrion]

VR/AR goggles like this in public might be in the "nope, too far" category for society.

You underestimate the stupidity of people.

In any case I think apple placed some really high tech gear on the market here, especially the tracking software appears to be really good in the first reviews. Have you seen or tried what it has to complete against?
Obviously they chose their way of doing it, and current ar is a niche (hololens) or a toy (meta quest).
I think this will motivate competitors to try and match or exceed what apple is doing here and vr/ar/spatial computing will go mainstream. This is a good thing.

Why is this a good thing?