Less weight, no external display (remove eyesight), prizedrop and allow porn apps via alternative App Store and it will sell like hot cakes.
I’ve been hearing people claim that it’s the next incremental improvement that’s gonna do it since the very first Oculus prototype. Turns out there’s always another next incremental improvement.
Look, I have owned what? Five? Six? HMDs since VR started. I’m looking at two right now. I’m not a hater. But it’s way past time to acknowledge that this isn’t mainstream tech. This thing is behaving like all other standalone VR devices. Which is impressive, because the price tag is absurd, it should have been dead on the water day one.
So many companies have tried to make VR mainstream. Just like 3D movies they have a niche group that love the tech and then there’s everyone else.
Yep. I’m right there with 3D as well. My 3DS’s slider was on at 100% that entire generation. It’s just hard to get everybody onboard, especially when you have physical issues like nausea and corrective lenses getting in the way.
At the end of the day physical displays are a great tech solution. You put a thing in a place and the thing shows you things with super high quality. And if you don’t want to look at the thing you just… look away.
Gonna take a lot to convince people that strapping one of those to their face is a more convenient solution, or that immersion is worth the inconvenience. It’s why people run around with laggy, crappy-sounding wireless earbuds instead of awesome, bulky on-ear wired audiophile headphones. Convenience and cost win most of the time.
I suspect, nothing less than Nintendo, Sony, or Microsoft going all in on their next generation console would be enough to bring VR mainstream. As in, the VR being the primary way to play.
Of the three, I can’t see Sony or Microsoft doing it.
Maybe Nintendo, as doing weird stuff is kinda their thing, but even that’s doubtful.
as doing weird stuff is kinda their thing
Their corporate culture of doing weird stuff is an extension of their corporate culture of not trying to compete on cutting edge tech. Nintendo’s hardware has always been a generation behind in actual performance, so they focus on making that stuff fun rather than competing on realism/performance.
Their biggest flop was when they strayed from that principle and released a VR headset 1995.
Yeah… there were a bunch of issues with the Virtual Boy.
A Sudo 3D experience on hardware that couldn’t handle 3D graphics, needed to be setup on a table, and a color palette that made the GameBoy seem high fidelity, never mind the red was horrid to stare at for too long.
It really was ahead of its time… in all the wrong ways.
There’s a couple making porn with one. I have an AVP but haven’t looked up their content. There’s an app to play Quest porn and I tried it on a vid and it was very uncomfortable to watch. I prefer porn in 2d.
What’s prizedrop mean? Sorry.
I assume they meant price drop
I know this is a community designed to give us a place to hate on Apple and all of it’s products, but I love the Vision Pro.
Ironically I use it the most for porn consumption. It’s fantastic for 2D porn viewing of all kinds.
I can’t wait until someone makes Apple Immersive Video quality porn. That experience would make this headset suddenly affordable to a lot of guys out there.
I applaud your honesty
The vast majority of things the Apple vision pro does have already been done better on the Quest platform… Including porn.
But the Quest also has a wide selection of games… And is much cheaper.
And made by you know who
FoxConn? Or that Bangladeshi factory that rioted? Where is Apple Vision made?
I believe they are referring to Meta.
Well, I guess you never tried the vision… there is a very big difference in screen quality. I rather pay more instead of watching porn in less than 720p (respectively of course, 4k+ isn’t that great with VR eye distance) Apple vision has 35 to 50 PPD (Pixel per degree) (compared to 70 PPD on their Retina screens) while the ques 3 only has maximum 25 PPD
Well, I guess you never tried the vision… there is a very big difference in screen quality. I rather pay more instead of watching porn in less than 720p (respectively of course, 4k+ isn’t that great with VR eye distance) Apple vision has 35 to 50 PPD (Pixel per degree) (compared to 70 PPD on their Retina screens) while the ques 3 only has maximum 25 PPD
I’m not surprised. I’ve watched a few reviews of this thing and still cannot think of any real use case.
The idea of virtualizing computer interface displays and being able to lock them to physical locations in space is really cool. But there is no fucking way I would wear a headset just for that. I’d love to have an intangible screen that magically hangs above my stove to help with cooking tasks. But again… headset? No thanks.
Precisely. Headsets for simracing, flight sims or any other immersive entertainment—yay! Headset for an everyday task (recipes while cooking, weather display or whatever) that could as well be solved with putting a phone or a tablet on a stand on your table—why? And it gets worse if there are multiple persons who’d want to use that information display.
Only use case I could imagine is having a huge high res virtual screen for productivity while travelling. But the Apple Vision is way overengineered for just that. For immersive entertainment I’d rather have Varjo for the price.
But it can do both.
It’s too bad Google glass didn’t take off. Seems like a happy medium.
It’s a version 1 product that mainly exists for developers. It is expensive. Sales were always going to be slow. Hopefully in the future manufacturing develops that allows a much cheaper and improved version, while developers create great new uses for the tech.
I can see developers working on Vision Pro apps and games if they’re more expensive on that particular platform.
So I think it will be like the iPhone app store compared to Google Play store, with iPhone having more paid apps, and Google having more free apps… Only in the VR space Meta is the competitor, and already has a wide selection of apps and games.
I’ve repeatedly seen people claim that the latter generations of the Vision Pro will be what launches it into success but like… how? The Vision Pro is incredibly expensive, limited in functionality, and has an ultra locked-down ecosystem not because it’s a first-gen product but because that is how Apple operates. All of their products follow that trend. In fact, additional Vision Pro generations are likely to be more expensive just like how new iPhones and Macbooks are going up in price and staying there.
The majority of people are simply not interested in VR/AR and Apple’s pricey take on it isn’t going to change that.
The first iPhone didn’t even have third party apps. I’m not saying the Vision Pro will make it but even the iPhone had its issues to begin with. I’d like it to succeed because I think it has potential. It is super expensive but hopefully that will get better. But you’re right the iPhone got way more expensive. Although I suspect the first iPhones were highly subsidized to begin with and I doubt the Visio Pro is.
Yeah, what are you even supposed to do with it?
There appears to be little to no entertainment with virtually no VR games. I can’t see how you could be productive using one either. A laptop with a real keyboard must be 100% better and way cheaper.
Sure you can watch video and porn, but you can do that with any VR headset using apps like virtual home theater (really great app btw, with amazing sound reproduction)
What functionality is it limited on?
Are new iPhones actually that much more expensive than their original release?
Let’s ask Android Authority! https://www.androidauthority.com/iphone-price-history-3221497/
Short answer, adjusted for inflation the iPhone 15 is only a little more expensive than the original iPhone.
I bought the PSVR. Its fun as a novelty but I wouldnt want to work there.
A fuckton of R&D dollars are circling the drain at this point.
Would wager it will earn a place next to the cube.
