i wouldn’t normally be concerned since any company releasing a VR product with this price tag is obviously going to fail… but it’s apple and somehow through exquisite branding and sleek design they have managed to create something that resonated with “tech reviewers” and rich folk who can afford it.
what’s really concerning is that it’s not marketed as a new VR headset, it’s marketed by apple and these “tech reviewers” as the new iphone, something you take with you everywhere and do your daily tasks in, consume content in etc…
and it’s dystopian. imagine you are watching youtube on this thing and when an ad shows up, you can’t look away, even if you try to they can track your eye movement and just move the window, you can’t mute it, you certainly cannot install adblock on it, you are forced to watch the ad until it satisfies apple or you just give up and take out the headset.
this is why i think all these tech giants (google meta apple etc) were/are interested in the “metaverse”. it holds both your vision and your hearing hostage, you cannot do anything else when using it but to just use the thing. a 100% efficiency attention machine, completely blocking you from the outside world.
i’m not concerned about this iteration as much as people are not hyped about this iteration. just like how people are hyped about the next apple vision, i’m more worried about the next iterations with somewhat lower price tag and better software availability. i hope it flops and i know it probably won’t achieve any sort of mainstream adoption even if it’s deemed a success because it probably can’t get less bulky and look less dorky, but the possibility is still worrying. what are your thoughts?
You must log in or register to comment.
It’s really easy to avoid if you don’t use them.
Check out what these stupid chuds have to say about it: https://www.youtube.com/live/gseav7sgpks?feature=shared
If I didn’t know better, I’d swear they were doing a bit.
I’ve never seen a less critical tech review; never seen investment advice that was less trustworthy, more of a conflict of interest; these douchebags are willingly blind to the glaring cons of this technology. They have massive portfolios of AAPL and just go on and on about how great it is. I’d say shameful but we’ve been here before with Tesla and they were able to lie their way to the top. The Henry Kissinger of tech stocks.
“I’m wondering if you are the type of person who wants to keep it on all day”
NO ONE will want the embarrassment of keeping this on their face all day. This is like the Segway.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://www.piped.video/live/gseav7sgpks?feature=shared
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
This is like the Segway
looks at “hover” boards and e-unicycles The Segway is a bad example here, because it was really just ahead of its time.
Ahahaha i forgot about how segway revolutionized the way to get hit by a car
The attention economy already has people hostage and blocked off from the outside world. No goggles required.
To play devil’s advocate: If we’re gonna have a tech-centric society, I can see where being able to make eye contact with people nearby and keep your hands free could make for a more wholesome experience than staring down at your phone for 80% of your waking life. And for people who are remote, being able to feel like you’re occupying the same space and breathing and laughing together could be a solution for our extreme isolation.
But on the other hand, these are all problems that capitalism and big tech created in the first place, so…
I mean, you can just take it off?
Also, regarding the adoption of the headset, I think it’s absolutely crazy to say that it probably won’t get less bulky. Tech is constantly getting smaller and that will be the number one priority with the headset.
If they can make the price and comfort level right, then I do think it becomes a mainstream product. Not saying people wear it 24/7, but that most households would have one, and it would become somewhat important for WFH and remote meetings.
I’m not a fanboy for Apple, but personally I just think it is the tech of the (relatively) near future.
it won’t get less bulky compared to phones. the headset will still need lenses, a display which itself needs to be a certain distance away from your eyes, a board for processing, a separate battery pack, audio, wifi, straps, space for some airflow so it doesn’t overheat and damage the display etc etc. small form factors have come a long way and it can probably get thinner, but i don’t think apple vision pro is that far off from the physical limit of how much smaller it can get.
Never seen pancake lenses, huh?
Disagree strongly. If there’s one sure thing in the tech world, it is the fact that electronics get smaller and smaller with each generation.
Hmm, we’ll have to agree to disagree there. They can 100% decrease the size of the processing bits and reduce weight.
I just think it’s very shortsighted to look at such an early version of the product and say “it won’t change much”. Especially when however many years ago you could have said that what we’ve got right now isn’t possible.
Oh, tech will just stop evolving after this point? Okay, I guess now is the time it stops. Right now.
I will continue not using it. I was interested in Oculus until they sold to FB and then I nope’d right out of that. I really did think VR was neat, but various things kept me from pulling the trigger. If it becomes the only way to use chunks of the internet, I just won’t use them; I grew up still in the analog world (though we did have BBS and very early dial-up in the '80s), and I could go back to it. I’d honestly miss educational content more than anything else, but I can get books. In my lifetime, that strategy would probably still work fine.
I have so much to say about this, I hardly know where to start. A few brief points:
Yes, this product direction is problematic in many many ways. There is a reason why science fiction has been speculating about these types of devices for decades and nearly always portraying the technology as an escape mechanism for a horrifying dystopian reality.
We’ve experienced several really big technology revolutions in just a few decades (pc, internet, social, mobile). All have brought wonderful improvements to life, but all have had profound, and unanticipated side effects. In all instances, we would have benefited as a society by interrogating consequences more completely at the beginning, rather than just letting market forces alone to drive them into mass adoption.
The good news is that none of this is really new. This appears to be a pretty good implementation of a UI model that consumers have been largely rejecting for over 30 years. There are absolutely very useful, very good uses for these UIs, but these are niche markets overall all.
In many ways, XR (a catch all term for both VR and AR) is a retro futuristic idea. This is a vision of the future as seen 40 years ago. Really innovative human computer interfacing doesn’t look like this anymore. Actually useful innovation involves things like agents, voice ui’s and so on (think Jarvis from the MCU).
The question is, can Apple’s marketing prowess and effectively infinite budget push a largely unpleasant, unneeded, and expensive product into mass adoption? I am hopeful that they can’t. I am hopeful that reality isn’t sci-fi dystopian enough to create a wide market for this. If they can, it may say more about how dystopian our real reality has become. That’s the really worrisome part to me.
Excuse me but ‘voice UI’ is a hell of a lot more retro futuristic than XR. That shit has been around in sci-fi for 60+ years easy and in real life for decades at this point and is still absolutely horrible to use for just about anything more complex than setting a timer and adding things to a list.
Let me clarify. My complaint about the retro-futuristic nature of XR is not the age of the idea. The problem is that this approach has been speculated about and productized in various ways for decades. Through all of that, it has never amounted to more than niche applications, has been rejected by wider markets repeatedly, and failed to inspire much more imagined usefulness beyond being an escape vehicle from some kind of real-world hellscape. Despite all of that, entities like apple insist on trying again, and again, and again. I am convinced that Tim Cook sees this as the future because of the residue of his childhood musing about the future. I know for a fact that Zuckerberg is motivated by exactly that.
Now let’s compare that to audio UIs. These have also been around for a long time. In that time, they have only become more pervasive, useful and inspirational (see again my reference to Jarvis). Additionally, I’m not just talking about the audio part of that interface. I’m talking about the agents that can act independently, and spontaneously to help humans do what the want to do. We are making tremendous progress on that front, but Apple is (in terms of this product line) mired in the past.
“pervasive, useful and inspirational”
Please provide some examples because I’ve obviously missed a lot of actually good Voice / Audio based UIs. All I’ve seen are incessant attempts to market something as the future that in reality at best is mildly helpful, normally annoying and forces you to resort to other interfaces, like your phone, and at worst are glaring privacy and security issues.
Every friend I have that buy into stuff like the Google “smart” speakers, Amazon Alexa etc are initially wowed and then it’s relegated to playing music and some small task, nothing like they revolution they envisioned and in general just plain worse than a normal GUI.
What’s even worse is that I feel it’s regressing. Google Assistant in particular is worse now than 2 years ago, I blame this on too many features being added and they make it hard for the assistant to make a good guess of which tool/feature to use. I guess that is why they cleaned some out recently.
And if you think I’m just some one shitting on stuff that I personally don’t enjoy then please know I’ve tinkered with this stuff extensively. I built my own personal voice based assistant that I integrated with Home Assistant to control lights, lock the door and check the humidity in the lizard terrarium. It’s a tricky problem and in the end I came to the realization that even if I got it “perfect” for me it still wouldn’t ever be all that useful. One thing I did that very few do is build a more conversational usage model. Typical interaction:
Me: Snips? Snips: Yes? Me: Can you turn the lights to 50% Snips: Absolutely, all lights or just one room? Me: Just the livingroom Snips: Done, anything else?
Thing is that it will always work poorly in a situation with multiple people around talking. It will always be a bit awkward talking to something incorporeal. And it will always be a computer there in the other end. Conversation and the medium of voice was built and designed for human interaction and a computer can’t provide that. A conversation is so extremely based on context and it becomes hard and forced to always be mindful to provide the full context. And while you can add tech to help, like say presence sensors to note that you are in the living room and thus ask “just in the living room, all lights or some other room?” Or just assume, its still not going to give us a speaking partner like Jarvis for a very, very long time. And even then I wonder what the point would be? By the time we have AI at that level, being able to do proper inference to deduce context and intent, we’re going to have neural interfaces and that is VASTLY more efficient and interesting. To have access to information directly in your thoughts and to control and interact with your environment in a completely seemless manner. I just don’t see Voice UI as more than a stepping stone with very little intrinsic value outside academia and challenging conventions in the UI space.
Notch said it wasn’t ready… Predicted a flop
Still might be. It’s a $3500 device. Just because it’s getting press doesn’t mean it’s going to be successful.
Some people call VR dystopian, but it’s got great potential too.
During COVID while I was living alone and we were under lockdown…
I used a Quest to watch movies in a virtual theater with a bunch of people from around the world. I remember being in a theater watching an absolutely ridiculous Nicolas Cage movie laughing my ass off with a bunch of dudes from Australia. Another time I watched a cricket game with some people who explained the rules to me and kinda gave me some play by play on what was happening.
I’ve also attended a few support group meetings in VR for coping with loss that had quite a lot of attendants. The meeting was run by a licensed group therapist and we took turns sharing and then reflecting on each others stories. It was frankly amazing.
I also played mini golf with friends of mine as well as had a couple meetings over a round of mini golf with the other guy on my design team during lockdown. Honestly the best virtual meetings I ever had.
All of the above were very social and very positive experience. I didn’t feel far away from people, I felt connected to them.
Same way a smartphone can be a useful tool that enhances your life or a screen you stare at for hours consuming bullshit TikTok videos. You’re in control of what you make of it. You can also stick to a dumb phone and not participate at all.
Not to take away from your experience because I’m sure it was genuinely wonderful, but all I can picture for that support group is a bunch of absurd VRchat avatars sitting in a circle for a therapy session.
How many of them have fursonas?
deleted by creator
There is nothing wrong with 10 Ugandan Knuckles who just need to find closure
There were no insane avatars, everyone looked pretty normal. Sorry to burst your bubble.
I’ve never used those. How does it work, you see a picture of the people or is it real video of them?
This was in Altspace VR which unfortunately got axed by Microsoft IIRC, but on there you kinda looked like a less shitty version of one of those Nintendo avatars customized however you wanted.
The craziest anybody looked on there would be to have like rainbow or blue hair or something along those lines. It was pretty tame compared to like the furry anime cat sex doll looking things some people run around in VR Chat with. It also wasn’t overrun with screaming children which I think is VR Chat’s biggest overall problem.
Anyway, that support group thing I think has since moved to another platform, I forget which.
I love spaceship games (think Elite: Dangerous and the like), and motorsport games. Anything where you’re set in a cockpit is a perfect candidate for VR. All I wanted was a headset that would act analagous to a dumb monitor - simply provide vision and audio and head tracking (with “simply” being a relative term - the challenges overcome and technology produced to date is, admittedly, amazing).
But no. What we have are a bunch of privacy-invading face huggers. I shouldn’t need to sign in to anything to use a piece of hardware that should require zero internet access (which is why anything Razer is also on my do not buy list).
So am I concerned about the Apple Vision Pro? Couldn’t give a shit to be honest. I’m not their customer.
Please let me know if you ever find one. Best I have seen are the ones without head tracking or laggy tracking.
Doesn’t valve provide login-free setup and use of SteamVR for the index and the like? Granted, you’ll need a beefy PC for it, and probably some kind of storefront for most games. But at least no Facebook login strapped to your head.
It does! It can be played fully offline, doesn’t require an account, and works great with my pirated copy of elite dangerous. The index is the shit! Apple vision pro can’t do shit for me that the index has done for years now.
OK @max, @thorbot, I didn’t know about this. I’d written off all VR in protest against corporate overreach. Time to do some more investigation…
The index is the GOAT, I highly recommend it if you have a powerful gaming PC to run it and are concerned about privacy
Yeah I am pretty concerned. I think if work from home or hybrid jobs start requiring devices similar to the apple vision pro, it will only further the divide between people that work from home and those that don’t, as well as increasing the barrier to entry to these jobs. Dividing the working class further.
It seems like a company that would require employee-purchased headsets would already require employee-purchased laptops. Do you know of any? Honest question; I don’t, but my bubble is pretty small.
I think what the tech implies these big tech giants want for the world is more worrisome than the specific tech itself.
They may fail with this iteration or the next, but why do you think they’re trying so hard insisting this is the next big thing? To survive, capitalism needs to create new problems to be solved. The smart phone didn’t solve any problems we had, it created a desire, which then became a fear (FOMO), then it became a need, which then finally became a problem if you didn’t have one.
If you’re homeless today and want to get out of it, one of the first things you need is an address, then an internet connection, and a smart phone. Why? Because most jobs require it to get a hold of you and in many cases to facilitate the software used on the job.
They don’t need to convince consumers to adopt the new tech per se. They just need to convince businesses that without the new technological progress, their competitors will leave them behind. Then it won’t matter if you like the tech or not, you’ll NEED it to have a job and survive. Just like the smart phone is today.
They’re directing us, telling us how the future will look like based off of THEIR vision, not OURS.
That’s what worries me. Not this AR headset, but rather the reasons they have for insisting this is the future we are all heading towards.
I agree with his take on the apple vr shit, but fuck nazi notch.
deleted by creator
I think that, in practice, putting a headset on is a big ask for most people. Phones caught on because they’re extremely convenient, almost everyone had a use case that was improved by a smartphone, and once they had it in their pocket it was a short hop to using the phone for other things as well. A headset though? Maybe if it was as unobtrusive as regular glasses, people would put up with it - but even then, regular glasses are so annoying that many people use contact lenses instead. So if you want to put any kind of technology on people’s head and keep it there all day, that’s where your benchmark has to be set, not way up in the same size category as a motorcycle helmet.
Bingo. At the end of the day it’s still something massive that sits on their head. It’s going to sell well as a gimmick. But people will get tired, their necks will hurt, some will get motion sickness, and over time they’ll collect dust like all of the others.
The fact is that vr technology is stunted until hardware can catch up, and by that I mean literally as easy as putting on sunglasses.
AFAIK there’s some strides being made here, like I think there are see-through LCD screens that work in the lab but aren’t mass production ready, so I can see the “final form” of this being a pair of glasses with the ability to put stuff in front of your eyes and all of the actual processing is done remotely by your phone.
…but even then, I think that lands the tech somewhere in the neighborhood of headphones, not the smartphone itself.
My biggest concern is that everyone will eventually be forced by societal and institutional expectations; for now people can easily choose not to wear them, but if/when your employer requires it for work or if/when the only way to talk to your friends is by using it, then you won’t have much of a choice.
For example, Zoom has very shady ties with the Chinese government (and several reports say that they’ve used it to surveil and censor people), yet many schools and workplaces required it (and many still do now). You could refuse to install/use it, but then you’d lose your job or fail your classes. It’s a similar story for TikTok, Discord, and Facebook before that.
If you’re in America, I wouldn’t worry about the Chinese Government spying on you, and be much more worried about the American government doing it, since they can actually use what they find to prosecute you for crimes real or imagined.
But while it is true that you could get forced into using it by social pressure, my post is about how I really don’t think that the tech has the potential for the kind of mass adoption that would create those conditions. You could be forced to use it by your job, but then when you’re not working you can take it off - compare that to the cell phone in your pocket, which they can already use to call you back into work at all hours of the day, the emails they use to get you to give them free labor outside of working hours, and the other ways in which corporations have gotten their fingers into our off time I just don’t see this as a breakthrough or a new threshold being crossed in any way.
I’m much more concerned about the very real and confirmed ties (see:
) Zoom, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, Google, my ISP, my cell phone service provider, etc have to the security apparatus of the country I actually live in who have actual power and authority over me and a long history of murdering left wing activists.
Not really worried about this kind of stuff at all. At the end of the day, it’s not like it’s some essential thing people need to live. People have been worrying that every new piece of technology is going to ruin society. This was said about books, raidio, tv, video games, and so on. I don’t think AR tech is going to be any different.
I imagine that at some point the tech will get miniaturized to the point where AR headsets are basically like glasses. That’s when mass adoption is likely to start happening. I’m also sure there will be open versions of such headsets that can run Linux. It’s just a new more immersive UX, I don’t think it’s anything to get worked up over.
That’s the point, yeah.
