Apple debuts VR headset: “Vision Pro”

[OMF 3,677]

People laughing at the price : this is intended for professionals mostly. Businesses can afford the sticker price. I’m expecting cheaper models after the first run or two.

[MonsterPaws 2,745]

12 hours ago, Simon said:

 

I asked about INNOVATION. Where is it? If you can answer @weedthen I'll be happy to answer you

Apple is pretending like they invented VR. They really enjoyed "Being the first" and "Innovating change" while showing off 3D films that an Oculus CV1 from 2016 can do.

Look of course the processor is amazing, the resolution is good but for fkc sake it's 3500$. It should dance, cook and do or4l. There isn't anything new that other VR/AR company wouldn't do in the last 5 years.

The eyetracking gimmick is in PSVR2. You can play on Oculus Quest 2 or soon 3. There are HoloLens from MS. 

This is not a portable device. Battery appears to be the Achille's heel. That allows for very little mobility. This is far from a "capture the moments" device as is more akin to the a PC/Tablet/Home Theater replacement at home. It will need to be smaller with about 3x the battery life to be a proper portable. It makes 0 sense. Your paying for when you use it. Which might be- watching a tv show, working on an air plane, and maybe taking some videos. You can do all of that on your phone. But it’s cooler, for $2500 more. Apple is out of their damn minds making this thing cost this much. At that price, the amount of people who will be able to afford it (or even utilize it properly) will be so small there will be almost no reason to mass-produce it. Hope they're baiting just to lower the price later.

I only asked about INNOVATION and I didn't get any answer from you guys  

Innovation isn't just about being first it's about being the first to do something well.

We've seen this Apple hate-train trope over and over again it's so tiring.

The iPhone wasn't the first touchscreen phone, but it was the first to use capacitive touchscreens entirely for input and completely revolutionized the smartphone industry. Just look up phones before the iPhone was introduced vs after.

The Apple Watch wasn't the first smart watch, but it was the first to combine health, sports, and communication features in a compact and stylish (kinda) design. Look up smart watches before the Apple Watch and after. Hell, even now the Apple Watch doesn't have convincing competition. It took Google 10 years to finally create their own from the ground up.

The iPad wasn't the first tablet, but again it was the first to make it attractive to average users. Old tablets used to almost always use a stylus. The iPad was revolutionary in that it made things simple by using ur finger. And to this day it's the best-selling consumer tablet with very little--real--competition.

To answer your request on why this is innovative, it's because it seems like Apple is brining the best in AR/VR and computing in one package. You're complaining about the price yet mention the HoloLens:

The HoloLens 2 ALSO costs $3500 and is only AR not AR/VR like the Vision Pro and has significantly less processing power. Not to mention it has no apps for even average consumers (the Vision Pro will at least have entertainment apps like Disney+ ready Day 1).

The Magic Leap 2 costs $3000

And the closest device with Apple's specs and features is the Varjo XR-3 which costs nearly $7000 PLUS a $1500 annual subscription. Not to mention you still need a strong PC to even use it.

The only viable consumer option is the Meta Quest 3 and Pro. Both of which have significantly less processing power (compared to the M2) and much lower res screens.

To reiterate: Innovation isn't just about being first it's about being the first to do something well.

And I think Apple is the closest we've gotten so far in the AR/VR space and this isn't even aimed at average consumers (hence the "Pro" naming which is the first time Apple introduced a new product category starting with a Pro line instead of a consumer line of products).

[franminervini 17,057]

[Chromatislaps 34,854]

15 hours ago, weed said:

show me the closest thing on the market right now 

sofar there's no VR headsets with eyetracking and gesture control only... its really impressive

[Petie Estie 5,737]

19 hours ago, Simon said:

 

I asked about INNOVATION. Where is it? If you can answer @weedthen I'll be happy to answer you

Apple is pretending like they invented VR. They really enjoyed "Being the first" and "Innovating change" while showing off 3D films that an Oculus CV1 from 2016 can do.

Look of course the processor is amazing, the resolution is good but for fkc sake it's 3500$. It should dance, cook and do or4l. There isn't anything new that other VR/AR company wouldn't do in the last 5 years.

The eyetracking gimmick is in PSVR2. You can play on Oculus Quest 2 or soon 3. There are HoloLens from MS. 

This is not a portable device. Battery appears to be the Achille's heel. That allows for very little mobility. This is far from a "capture the moments" device as is more akin to the a PC/Tablet/Home Theater replacement at home. It will need to be smaller with about 3x the battery life to be a proper portable. It makes 0 sense. Your paying for when you use it. Which might be- watching a tv show, working on an air plane, and maybe taking some videos. You can do all of that on your phone. But it’s cooler, for $2500 more. Apple is out of their damn minds making this thing cost this much. At that price, the amount of people who will be able to afford it (or even utilize it properly) will be so small there will be almost no reason to mass-produce it. Hope they're baiting just to lower the price later.

I only asked about INNOVATION and I didn't get any answer from you guys  

based on the impressions videos from those that have used it, the gesture and eye tracking navigation actually works well and is intuitive which is....a HUGE leapfrog in that technology. 

Current headsets have trouble just tracking where their physical controllers are. Microsoft was never able to make their Xbox "Kinect" detect fingers well enough to be useful. This headset solves the challenges of both current VR and previous body tracking attempts. and it's a slim device that you wear on your face. That's incredible. 

Also the screens. There isn't a device that exists with screens that are as responsive and high resolution as these. It transforms the experience from a nausea-inducing one where you can see individual pixels to something anyone could probably use and have a quality viewing experience. 

In combination with the screens - the camera pass-through for augmented reality is apparently very high quality. Some current VR headsets still don't even have COLOR pass through video let alone high quality low-latency pass-through.  

This is the first device that allows convincing, intuitive, usable augmented reality by all accounts. 

 

[phantasmas 12,448]

anyone who posts themselves using their VR set online is ending up on my rob list 

[GipJo 2,912]

VR/AR will not be future tech, brain-computer interface is.

[Morphine Prince 109,977]

We love Black Mirror coming to life. 

This is so cool. 

[FATCAT 60,950]

23 hours ago, GipJo said:

VR/AR will not be future tech, brain-computer interface is.

There will definitely be a future where VR/AR dominate before anything as complex as directly connecting our brain to a machine.

[Guest]

It’s giving Black Mirror and it scares me. 

[Flippy 14,624]

My question is… will they be comfortable enough for people with glasses?