No. Especially if it is 100% proprietary.
this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2023
6 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
37717 readers
405 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
strapping goggles to my head to send an email sounds like what my personal hell is going to be like
imo VR is fun for games but beyond that it's too dystopic for my taste lol
Fully agree. I think there are some practical, workforce related, use cases for AR/VR, but the idea of strapping into one for 8+ hours a day... No thanks.
Nop, but a pair of glasses would be fine.
Agreed - I never got a chance to try Google Glass but they at least looked lightweight. If there were an AR device like that then I wouldn't have nearly as much of a problem.
They're far from perfect, but I have the Nreal Air glasses and find them pretty dope. They have sony oled tech so they're surprisingly bright even in a lit room, and the pixel density is great. No screen door effect like VR headsets.
They're the 1st iteration, not very user-friendly for non-techies and absolutely need a lot of work, but the concept is very much there. I mostly use them to play Steam deck games on a "big screen" now, but the accompanying Android app attempts a phone + app-like design like the Vision.
I'm near sighted and wearing glasses all the time. If AR glases are light, good looking and about as powerful as the Apple XR googles, sure i'll wear them if i can afford to buy them.
It’s a cool gadget which I’d love to try but no way would buy. It just doesn’t do anything practical that I can’t already do quicker, easier and more effectively with more traditional devices. it’s far too expensive to justify as a fun gadget.
The article is right, very few people would want to sit with this on their head in the company of other people. It’s a generally a solo experience.
I could see it being extremely useful for those with disabilities though and I suppose if anyone can bring mixed reality devices more to the main stream it’s going to be apple
Hell no. Oculus seemed like a really cool product when I was 17 and in love with "Ready Player One", but now that we've seen the way that Big Tech just treats its users as profit-cattle fed on a diet of ads and angry people, I have no fucking desire to strap one of those things to my head (outside of actually gaming...then it's kinda cool).
The thing is. If you're in a tropical country.
Yes that's it. The sweat, the rashes. The smelly goggles from the dried sweat.
I completely agree with this article. If watching movies in VR was going to be a popular thing, then it would have happened already. It's been possible for a long time. The reason people don't do it is because it's far more convenient to just use a TV. It's not a matter of visual fidelity, it's a matter of comfort. (Also it's a matter of people's preference to be present in the real world, not isolated in a virtual world.)
I mean, no.
I think at most it's somewhat comparable to sitting down at an old fashioned desktop computer. It's your primary focus of attention. When you're not using it, you take it off.
The example of a dad doing a real-time recording of himself playing with his kids is cringy AF.
I'm pretty sure that was keynote-friendly code for "look how detailed the VR porn is going to be."
I may be in the minority here, but I do, and frequently have. There is a sizeable community like that, but we don't seem to really fall into Apple's target market, and it will be interesting to see how orthogonal that willingness is to being a techie shut-in.
For me, the big reason I don't wear it 8-10 hours per day when I'm working like I do when I'm playing is the pixel density. Current VR headsets (except maybe Varjo's) don't do a good job of simulating even one 4k screen, let alone competing with a multi-monitor setup, so they fall short for productivity. Once that's solved (and that's the claim Apple seems to be making here), the case for use as a primary work machine is very compelling. It lets you set up something like this for the cost of a headset and a reclining office chair, and is also somehow portable.
It fails if you use it exactly like you use a laptop, just like a phone does. If you take advantage of the increased flexibility though, it has pretty transformative potential.
That said, that's the perspective of a technologist with no kids who works from home. I wouldn't buy this because its standout features are irrelevant to me, so I'm from a representative sample of the market they're chasing.
I'm inclined to agree with you that it might be a potentially good way to interact with a computer. There's a company called Sightful that makes a "Spacetop" computer, which is basically a laptop with a headset instead of a screen. Mike Elgan actually gave it some pretty positive press lately.
As someone who travels constantly and misses a big monitor on the road, I am inclined to agree that the use case could be compelling.
But... $3,500 is a lot of lettuce for something that could easily be obsolete as fast as my cell phone. And Apple mentioned that the total field of vision is something over 4k, but that's still a lot less than multiple 4k monitors.
Still, I'm willing to be convinced. Especially if a stripped down "viewer only" model comes out without all the bells and whistles. I don't need outward display, or the lidar, or any of that. I just want a big workspace.