• circuitfarmer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    Meh.

    It’s not designed for or good for VR gaming. As an AR device, I find it a bit silly since I can just look at a real screen. It would be a novelty at $100, but at the price Apple wants I kind of think of it like a joke.

    • qwed113@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      For an everyday user I think it’s very far away. The device is very much geared towards developers and establishing Apple’s footing in the AR/VR space (despite Apple’s marketing efforts).

      But have you tried using it? The resolution and crispness of the video content designed for it (there isn’t much of it available right now of course) is jaw-dropping. You legitimately feel like you are transported into a different world. The quality of visuals produced by this headset are so far beyond any VR device I’ve tried (and I’ve tried them all).

      If it gets to the point where you can watch live sporting events with this and there’s more immersive video content created for it on a regular basis, it will be highly compelling.

      I understand the knee-jerk reaction to say “Meh”. It’s still a VR headset. It’s uncomfortable to wear, etc. But I’d suggest holding back those feelings until you try it on

        • qwed113@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          In one of the demos for the Vison Pro, they had cameras set up right behind the net of a soccer game, on the courtside of a basketball game, and on the field of a baseball game. You can’t get that kind of special experience from regular TV footage. The only alternative to it would be to physically go to the game and spend thousands on tickets.

          But I agree with you and you’re obviously not wrong. A big TV has far more advantages in practical use.

  • exanime@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    8 months ago

    I think they are ridiculous… They may bring $500 worth of enhancement or productivity for people under special circumstances…

    Very definitely not worth the ridiculous price tag

  • shrugal@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    I have yet to try it myself, but in principle I think it’s a bit of a solution in search of a problem.

    The tech is impressive, but I can’t shake the feeling that they focussed too hard on the wrong things. It’s not as good for VR gaming as other headsets, and imo an AR/MR device needs to be extremely lightweight, so you can wear it comfortably for at least a few hours. That leaves maybe movies I guess, but even for those some cheaper headsets are usually more than good enough.

    So what exactly is the selling point for this thing? Who and what is it for?! Seems to me like it’s more of a research device than anything else, to get the ball rolling for more in the future.

    • olympicyes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      The only scenario that I could see using one is as a computer on a long flight, particularly if you don’t want people looking over your shoulders or need a “huge” screen. If I commuted a lot and had to work on the road, I’d consider it.

  • Dr. Dabbles@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    8 months ago

    They identify people in public that should probably be robbed. So they’re useful for that I suppose.

  • Eggyhead@kbin.run
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    8 months ago

    I’d really love to have one, but that $3500 is going to have a bigger impact on my life if it stays in my bank account. I might eventually get a quest 3 to live the fantasy a little, though, if they borrow some of Apple’s tricks in a future OS update.

  • fubarx@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    8 months ago

    The immersive media experience is the killer feature right now. The whole browsing websites and pinning work stuff up in space is a novelty that will wear off. Predict everyone will go back to using their physical multi-monitor setups.

    3D videos, apps, and games that take advantage of immersion will push the envelope.

  • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    8 months ago

    The coolest piece of tech I’ve ever experienced by a large margin. The potential is endless.

    But the people actually wearing it in public are crazy.

    • phoneymouse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      The people wearing it in public are mostly attention seekers and YouTubers. There is no use case for walking down the street with it on because it doesn’t work that way. You need to be stationary.

    • Waldowal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      8 months ago

      Are you commenting on 3d headsets in general or specifically Apple’s? Have you used other ones before?

      • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        Yes, I’ve used many others.

        None of them are remotely comparable to the Vision Pro. Everything else with passthrough is terrible with very noticeable lag and awful quality. And the difference in resolution completely changes the utility. Text on other headsets is brutal.

        For gaming any headset is super cool. A full world like Skyrim in VR is mind blowing. But passthrough and real resolution change what you can do.

  • Mistic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    I was interested in VR for a very long time. Recently, I got to actually try it out.

    I primarily view Apple Vision Pro as a proof of concept type of device. Sales being limited both in quantity and territorially indicate that. It has brought 3 major improvements to the table, compared to other headsets:

    1. Quality of passthrough
    2. User interface
    3. Display quality

    When you think about it, however, it’s not that much to make it an obvious choice over other devices.

    Passthough is needed for navigating through space. It does not help with productivity as your vision would be focused on the interface and not the environment. Remember warping on Quest 3? Much less noticeable than on videos for the exact same reason.

    There is no buts with the user interface and display. They are simply great, best that there is.

    Now, for the part that makes Vision Pro from a great productivity device on paper into a “dev kit available to masses” (I like that description, it does feel that way a lot, ty Ghostalmedia)

    Eye strain is a major issue. It is very difficult to use the device for more than a couple of hours without getting tired. This goes for all of the VR headsets out there. I guess you can get used to it over time, though.

    Limited usability. Quest 2/3, Pico 4, Valve Index, they all do things you wish Vision Pro could. Primarily usage of physical controllers. Imagine sculpturing without controllers because I can’t. Hand tracking is just not up to par.

    Battery solution is another issue. Not being able to swap what is otherwise a Power Bank without disabling the device and being unable to use any other battery than Apple’s own is at the very least annoying. Not exactly an issue if you’re too tired by the time it runs out.

    Finally, the VR space itself is unfortunately not mature enough. There’s a lot of work still to be done. Even when talking games, despite some amazing titles like Half-life Alyx, the vast majority where controls wouldn’t make you dizzy are all pretty much like arcade mini-games, where you either teleport from point to point or not move at all. Developers simply have yet to figure out an organic way of user navigating through virtual space. (Doesn’t mean they aren’t fun, though)

    Overall, I believe Vision Pro isn’t really a mass consumer product, but it did do a lot by bringing more attention to VR as a whole, as well as pointing out additional user-cases for the technology. Because of Vision Pro, Meta started paying more attention to details, which ultimately will benefit the consumer (in fact, it already has yeilded results).