this post was submitted on 02 Feb 2024
96 points (82.9% liked)

Technology

34913 readers
149 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] RaoulDook@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Why in the world do you think this is supposed to be a mobile product? Just because it can run on a battery doesn't mean they intend for consumers to wear it around town.

My impression is that it's for use in the home and/or office. I wouldn't walk around town with anything worth thousands of dollars out on display and I think most people are similarly minded.

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 3 points 9 months ago (2 children)

What purpose does it serve in an office that your MacBook doesn't?

[–] jemorgan@lemm.ee 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

What purpose does a MacBook serve that an office from the 1980’s wasn’t equipped to handle?

AR devices in an office serve the same purpose as existing tools, but there are ways that they can improve efficiency, which is all the justification office tech needs. Shit, my monitor costs 2/3 the price of the Vision Pro, and an ideal piece of AR hardware would be immeasurably better. Meetings in virtual space would negate how much meetings suck remotely. Having unlimited screen real estate would make a huge difference in my line of work. Also, being able to use any area in my home or out of it with as much screen real estate as I want would be huge.

I’m not saying that the Vision Pro does all of those things, but it does some of them, and I’m 100% okay with it being the thing that introduces the benefit of AR to those without imagination.

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Shit, my monitor costs 2/3 the price of the Vision Pro

Two professional 27" 4k dell monitors cost ~$800 combined. You overpaid like a mf if you spend $2000 on a monitor.

and an ideal piece of AR hardware would be immeasurably better

Let me know when someone announces one.

Meetings in virtual space would negate how much meetings suck remotely

Lol, citation needed.

Having unlimited screen real estate would make a huge difference in my line of work.

Agreed, as long as using those screens didn't require wearing a pair of ski goggles that will die after 2 hours.

Also, being able to use any area in my home or out of it with as much screen real estate as I want would be huge.

An understandable point... I would argue that it's a much better practice for your mental health to have a dedicated space that you work to create a clear mental separation between home and work but it may work if that space is virtual.

and I’m 100% okay with it being the thing that introduces the benefit of AR to those without imagination.

Those benefits don't take imagination they just take having seen a sci Fi movie in the past 20 years.

[–] jemorgan@lemm.ee 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Two professional 27" 4k dell monitors cost ~$800 combined. You overpaid like a mf if you spend $2000 on a monitor.

Sorry, but you don’t understand the needs of the market that we’re talking about if you think that a pair of ~$400 dell monitors is equivalent to a high-end display. The difference between $800 and $2500 amounts to a few days’ worth of production for my workstation, which is very easily worth the huge difference in color accuracy, screen real estate, and not having a bezel run down the middle of your workspace over the 3-5 years that it’s used.

blah blah blah

I already said that I’m talking about the Vision Pro as a first step in the direction of a fully-realized AR workstation. As it currently stands, it’s got some really cool tech that’s going to be a lot of fun for the guinea pig early adopters that fund the development of the tech I’m personally interested in.

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

blah blah blah I'm an Apple fan boi who will project whatever sci fi utopia I have in my head onto an over priced Quest Pro if it has an Apple Logo.

[–] jemorgan@lemm.ee 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Dude the last thing I needed for my “talking to an idiot online” bingo card was “(ignores point) aPpLe fAnBoY”

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Dude the last thing I needed for my “talking to an idiot online” bingo card was “Dude the last thing I needed for my “talking to an idiot online” bingo card was “(ignores point) aPpLe fAnBoY””

[–] RaoulDook@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Hell if I know, I don't even know what all it can do. There are probably dozens of things it can do that all kinds of laptops can't do though.

I don't use 3D modeling for my work but I can see how a 3D stereoscopic display could be highly useful for scientific research, as those have been part of the high end Nvidia Quadro GPU feature set intended for scientific research for many years already. Those would be coupled with a 3D monitor, and that kit of 3D monitor and Quadro GPU probably already cost more than the Apple Vision does.

Basically I assume it can do all the 3D VR and AR stuff that laptops can't do in general. Whoever needs that for their office work might buy it, but I don't need one.

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I used to be a professional 3D modeller at an architecture firm, we bought the Oculus Rift, we bought HoloLens, we bought almost every single VR headset that came on the market, and you know what they got used for? Basically nothing. Some marketing stuff and occasionally we would use them to walk a client through a design, though 99% of the time this was just done on a normal monitor or TV.

It's not easier or faster to 3D model in 3D than it is in 2D, since the human brain can't enter 3 different dimensional constraints at the same time. The only real benefit of VR is that it's better conveying a sense of scale and presence. But that's at the cost of having to wear a sweaty bulky headset with limited battery life or a long cord, having to pay for an even more powerful computer than normal to be able to render everything, waiting for CAD companies to rewrite their software and come up with usable 3D interfaces, and not being able to share the experience with anyone and see the same stuff like you do on a monitor.

Even In a business like architecture that you would think would be ideally suited to this, there's still almost no real benefit compared to a traditional monitor setup. Quite frankly the biggest real world benefit is just that if you're in an open plan office you could shut out your coworkers, but again, at the expense of wearing ski goggles and headphones all day.