Apple Vision Pro…. Anybody buying?

somerandomusername said:
I believe Apple Immersive Video (its proprietary technology that’s 180 degree video, 8K, HDR, 3D) will be what you’re talking about!
Click to expand...

For me, just as a simple example, it will depend on how well and how realistic dynamic reactions of other objects (people, cars, animals, planes, etc) in the frame react to whatever I'm (or others are) doing. It'll be tricky getting that accurate and realistic, IMO. Whether I'm in a crowded museum, in a Formula 1 car participating in a race, in the White House taking a tour, flying in an air show with five other Blue Angels pilots, or whatever.
 
Citysnaps said:
For me, just as a simple example, it will depend on how well and how realistic dynamic reactions of other objects (people, cars, animals, planes, etc) in the frame react to whatever I'm (or others are) doing. It'll be tricky getting that accurate and realistic, IMO. Whether I'm in a crowded museum, in a Formula 1 car participating in a race, in the White House taking a tour, flying in an air show with five other Blue Angels pilots, or whatever.
Click to expand...
Yeah maybe I’m not really sure what you’re talking about now haha.
 
somerandomusername said:
Yeah maybe I’m not really sure what you’re talking about now haha.
Click to expand...

Here's a couple of simple examples:

If I'm sitting on my couch at home, wearing an AVP...

and in any of the following VR scenarios (I just randomly made up)

• Walking on a sidewalk in crowded downtown NYC with hundreds of other pedestrians
•. Driving a Formula1 car in a race with 19 other cars
•. Running a San Francisco marathon with 20 to 30 thousand other runners
•. Flying an F-18 jet with five other Blue Angels jets in an air show

I'd expect any VR software enabling the above virtual experiences to produce a very accurate simulated real life experience. Including dynamically adjusting/moving other pedestrians/cars/runners/jets based upon what I'm doing, in a realistic manner, as if it were real life.

For example... if I'm running a race, I shouldn't be able to "run through" the images of other runners, nor should they be able to run through me, Either of those situations should result in a collision. Same with cars/jets/pedestrians/etc.
 
Cmaier said:
9to5mac.com

Apple Vision Pro ordering process: iPhone or iPad with Face ID needed, 'valid, unexpired prescription' for optical inserts - 9to5Mac

Apple Vision Pro pre-orders are a week away, and Apple is sharing new information about the buying process. An iPhone...
9to5mac.com 9to5mac.com

Looks like it will do a faceID scan to get your size or something. And a little (not much) more info on prescriptions.

I am leaning toward purchasing one, but I really don’t have an excuse at this point.
Click to expand...

I feel the same way.

I'd like to see what develops over the next 6-12 months in terms of interesting AR apps and VR experiences (like the ones I was randomly speculating above). If a suite of really well done virtual experiences (visiting the Louvre/Colosseum/Lascaux cave paintings/aircraft carrier/etc) come out along with the future looking bright for more, I'd probably go for it.

I think the potential is there.
 
I won't say it's way too expensive for the tech involved, but I will say it's way too expensive for any kind of use or benefit it currently has. I'm sure that will probably change over time.

I've been an Apple guy for a long time and I'm well aware of their high prices, but this is the first time I've looked at a product and thought it truly is a toy for elites far removed from the economics of most people. It doesn't really solve any problems or fill a desperate need.
 
Chew Toy McCoy said:
Like what? Will this require everybody involved to be wearing a $3,000 par of goggles? Is the advancement worth that price or is it more “that was neat”?
Click to expand...

Hololens has been playing around with using it in industry: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/hololens/industry-manufacturing#tabx528db880a883468fb2f7c24e38d159cf

Question I have is more about the impacts. Making it so AR can walk you through industrial processes you aren't familiar with is interesting, but I half expect it winds up leading folks to think that skilled labor can be reclassified as unskilled and basically go "let the goggles train them".
 
Chew Toy McCoy said:
Like what? Will this require everybody involved to be wearing a $3,000 par of goggles? Is the advancement worth that price or is it more “that was neat”?
Click to expand...
Medical education and practice, for example. There are applications that would benefit from simultaneous display of several streams (e.g., different types of imaging) in one virtual field of view. Although you can do something similar with real monitors, this would let the wearer to enlarge or otherwise modify the streams much more easily. And are you familiar with robotic-assisted surgery? The AVP could let people in training see what the surgeon is looking at far more immersively than just by looking at a screen.

BTW, $3,000 is considered a small sum in this industry.

I understand the skepticism about the AVP as a mass-market device, though that will hopefully change with future iterations. But concluding that it's just a "neat pair of goggles" that has no real world applications that add value is unfounded in my view.
 
Roller said:
But concluding that it's just a "neat pair of goggles" that has no real world applications that add value is unfounded in my view.
Click to expand...
To be fair, we’ve seen little so far in the way of applications for this thing. Mostly they demo’d it running essentially-2D ipad-style apps in a 3D space, watching 3D movies, and that’s about it. Even if you go to the website today, that’s pretty much all they show (https://www.apple.com/apple-vision-pro/). They’ve shown very little in the way of 3D apps. For example, the FaceTime app is just floating windows, each showing a 2D video. There’s a lot of potential here, but it’s pretty expensive if you’re going to use it as, essentially, a fancy ipad.

We’ll have to see what the app community comes up with, and how Apple evolves this.
 
Nycturne said:
Hololens has been playing around with using it in industry: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/hololens/industry-manufacturing#tabx528db880a883468fb2f7c24e38d159cf

Question I have is more about the impacts. Making it so AR can walk you through industrial processes you aren't familiar with is interesting, but I half expect it winds up leading folks to think that skilled labor can be reclassified as unskilled and basically go "let the goggles train them".
Click to expand...

Roller said:
Medical education and practice, for example. There are applications that would benefit from simultaneous display of several streams (e.g., different types of imaging) in one virtual field of view. Although you can do something similar with real monitors, this would let the wearer to enlarge or otherwise modify the streams much more easily. And are you familiar with robotic-assisted surgery? The AVP could let people in training see what the surgeon is looking at far more immersively than just by looking at a screen.

BTW, $3,000 is considered a small sum in this industry.

I understand the skepticism about the AVP as a mass-market device, though that will hopefully change with future iterations. But concluding that it's just a "neat pair of goggles" that has no real world applications that add value is unfounded in my view.
Click to expand...


Good examples. Perhaps my hangup is this was marketed (from what I recall) as a consumer or marginally work-related multitasking device, and an expensive one at that. This seems a bit backward from the usual device with a lot of common uses that later finds specialized niche applications. This seems like the real magic would be in the niche uses but Apple wants you to believe you want to spend $3k to have a simulated movie theater experience on your face.
 
Cmaier said:
To be fair, we’ve seen little so far in the way of applications for this thing. Mostly they demo’d it running essentially-2D ipad-style apps in a 3D space, watching 3D movies, and that’s about it. Even if you go to the website today, that’s pretty much all they show (https://www.apple.com/apple-vision-pro/). They’ve shown very little in the way of 3D apps. For example, the FaceTime app is just floating windows, each showing a 2D video. There’s a lot of potential here, but it’s pretty expensive if you’re going to use it as, essentially, a fancy ipad.

We’ll have to see what the app community comes up with, and how Apple evolves this.
Click to expand...


It feels a bit like “Do you need be constantly blasted with content to your eyes and ears at all waking hours but are tired of it also requiring your hands? Well, now your addiction can be hands-free! And you also don’t need to worry about walking into people and walls while you fill your brain! Consume while you move about freely!”
 
Chew Toy McCoy said:
Like what? Will this require everybody involved to be wearing a $3,000 par of goggles? Is the advancement worth that price or is it more “that was neat”?
Click to expand...

Not sure in what context you mean "everybody."

Here's an example. A person engages an architect to build a new home. Based upon a series of discussions about uses/needs/requirements/etc. between the architect and client over a period of time, after a month or so the architect is ready to present an initial design to the client.

That's typically done in a design review where the architect presents his/her design in several meetings, showing first an initial exterior design. And then a more detailed interior design, based upon client requirements from the above discussions.

During these reviews the architect presents a handful of printed 2D drawings; multiple side views and a top view of the exterior (and maybe corner "3D" views), and multiple top views for the interior spaces. That can be accompanied with 3D-simulated walk-through views on a large 2D computer display. Paper drawings and 3D-simulated views of interior spaces on a 2D computer display are far from ideal for the client to get a really good feel of the design.

Much better would be an AVP with appropriate software to let the architect and client (requires two AVPs) do a "real life" walkthrough of the interior and exterior home design while sitting in the architect's office. Very minor design changes could be handled on the spot. Others more involved (adding an extra couple bedrooms, baths, etc) would take some time and another client review.

The client comes away with a far more realistic and confident feeling of the design he/she will be signing off on, and ultimately spending a lot of money for construction.

The above could also apply to interior designers and landscape architects engaging with clients.

I wouldn't be surprised if Autodesk is already working on an AVP software module for their BIM for Archtects software.
 
Citysnaps said:
Not sure in what context you mean "everybody."

Here's an example. A person engages an architect to build a new home. Based upon a series of discussions about uses/needs/requirements/etc. between the architect and client over a period of time, after a month or so the architect is ready to present an initial design to the client.

That's typically done in a design review where the architect presents his/her design in several meetings, showing first an initial exterior design. And then a more detailed interior design, based upon client requirements from the above discussions.

During these reviews the architect presents a handful of printed 2D drawings; multiple side views and a top view of the exterior (and maybe corner "3D" views), and multiple top views for the interior spaces. That can be accompanied with 3D-simulated walk-through views on a large 2D computer display. Paper drawings and 3D-simulated views of interior spaces on a 2D computer display are far from ideal for the client to get a really good feel of the design.

Much better would be an AVP with appropriate software to let the architect and client (requires two AVPs) do a "real life" walkthrough of the interior and exterior home design while sitting in the architect's office. Very minor design changes could be handled on the spot. Others more involved (adding an extra couple bedrooms, baths, etc) would take some time and another client review.

The client comes away with a far more realistic and confident feeling of the design he/she will be signing off on, and ultimately spending a lot of money for construction.

The above could also apply to interior designers and landscape architects engaging with clients.

I wouldn't be surprised if Autodesk is already working on an AVP software module for their BIM for Archtects software.
Click to expand...


By "everybody" I mean if the scenario you just described involves a committee or group of people then everybody there would have to have a device on...or I guess take turns.
 
I just want the mlb app to let me watch from any seat in the stadium, and as I turn my head the view follows. Is that so hard? ;-)
 
Cmaier said:
I just want the mlb app to let me watch from any seat in the stadium, and as I turn my head the view follows. Is that so hard? ;-)
Click to expand...
Even better, I want to be able to be any place on the field too. Long fly ball to center, I'm in center field looking up.
 
jbailey said:
Even better, I want to be able to be any place on the field too. Long fly ball to center, I'm in center field looking up.
Click to expand...
Field is a terrible place to see a game :-)
 
Chew Toy McCoy said:
By "everybody" I mean if the scenario you just described involves a committee or group of people then everybody there would have to have a device on...or I guess take turns.
Click to expand...

Ah, OK.

For the scenario I posted above the architect would ideally have two or three AVPs, depending if the client is one person or a couple.
 

Similar threads

Joelist
The Vision Pro
2 3
Replies
40
Views
2K
Chew Toy McCoy
Chew Toy McCoy
Back
Top