Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Thoughts on the upcoming Apple Vision Pro?
I don't expect it to see well, even as a niche product or devkits. I do expect modest success for a future general consumer device that cracks the ~1000 barrier, even if it makes some compromises.
The price obviously kills most of my interest, as does the reluctance to embrace its VR capabilities, or provide peripherals that do more than hand tracking (as impressive and useful as that is). Turns out that despite being a VR evangelist since the Oculus CK1 days, my Quest 2 mostly collects dust, I'm simply too lazy to play much in VR, when I'm not concerned about tripping over and dying because of my inquisitive dogs. At this point, I'm holding out for a real BCI that just reads my intent and converts into actions, no need to move any actual muscles or use peripherals, how quaint. Sadly this seems like it's at least 2 or 3 years out, it's a bit awkward that full-immersion VR might well show up after the Singularity is unfolding, but I don't set the timetables for our cyberpunk weirdtopia.
The price is ridiculous. You can get a Bigscreen Beyond, the eyetracking kit, and a pair of decent controllers (and a battery pack) for half that. People are willing to pay an Apple premium, but we're not in 2008 anymore; Apple can't take over a field with a handful of patents anymore, and the custom silicon isn't got an in yet. It's bad enough that it seems like it's partly there to make a ~1200-1500 USD non-pro model more palatable.
Even beyond the price, I've got the same problem for Apple as for Facebook (or Google): I don't trust the company running it to treat the hardware or software as a product, rather than the consumer. Even beyond the philosophical issues with that stance, there's the simpler and more pragmatic one where these companies have been not only willing but eager to blow up equipment and communities once the juice is no longer worth the squeeze. Apple may not be as fast to the punch as Google, but when it happens they tend to scorch the earth.
(I also wish they'd figure out some solution for eye-tracking that didn't involve IR illumination. But I'm just being paranoid for eye safety, there.)
That said, there are a lot of more social-focused cases favoring just eye-and-hand tracking. I could see a consumer-focused niche market existing, and at enough scale to justify the custom silicon (especially if it overlaps with Apple's long-term plans for their laptop market). These business cases are rough, but in many ways Apple is better-positioned to exploit them than Meta or dedicated VR hardware companies. Same for some focuses that Apple's probably better-built for, like the endless digital display.
For actual VR gamers, though, there's very little to recommend it; even the one bit that it seems to have the hardware to solve -- getting too immersed in VR and tripping over animals/smacking someone with a controller/weirding out others in the same room -- I don't think Apple really has the knowledge or interest in handling.
I wouldn't worry about IR lighting. I do not recall any evidence or claims that it causes damage to vision, unless we're talking the enormous intensities needed to cause thermal burns. If staring at a campfire doesn't cause people to go blind, a Vision Pro won't, though that might explain the mediocre battery life haha.
While hand tracking is great, especially for UI interactions, I consider it inadequate for games, where dedicated buttons or peripherals of some kind seem ideal. If not a controller, then at least haptic gloves.
What is especially frustrating to me is that, as far as I'm aware, Apple didn't make any effort to ensure compatibility with existing peripherals. I don't think you can use traditional VR controllers with it at all, the closest is pass-through for physical keyboards. It seems like a no-brainer feature, even if they didn't see the need for lighthouse tracking.
The problem is a combination of strong IR (or UV) light, without simultaneous bright visible-spectrum light. The human eye absorbs energy across a much wider spectrum than it can actually see, while the mechanisms that control pupil dilation are tied to visible-spectrum light only, and this can allow a lot of energy into the eye from a source that's not that bright compared to daylight. This is a big issue for DIY kits, where it's hard to source reliable and consistent parts and implement reliable behaviors, but I'm just a little paranoid that a lot of the literature on this matter may not able to measure low-level harm.
Yeah. Or have an additional in-house controller option. It's not a huge surprise given Apple's weird emphasis on One Interface To Rule Them All, but it definitely puts a variety of capabilities and a lot of software titles off the table.
The source you linked to strongly recommends not crossing that threshold.
However, I would assume that Apple's headsets are bright enough that they cause a pronounced pupillary response, and that their engineers are competent enough to stay within the same limit. After all, they've worked with IR and infrared LIDAR for ages, they know what they're doing.
I see it as very unlikely that it would cause even noticeable harm.
Sadly, Apple does love itself a walled garden, and telling users it's their way or the highway. Oculus, even after the Meta acquisition, has been far more tolerant of tinkering.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link