They do come with a built-in iPhone that has a 2-hour battery life, though, so there's that. The only thing that I think might give this enough of an edge that Apple will keep selling it until they can get the price down is the resolution on the display. ('Cause it sure ain't the price! I've paid less than that for several of the cars I've owned.) According to a guy who's worked with some real high-end prototypes (not made by Apple, he's NDA'd as to who the companies were, but none of them were Apple), the only thing that makes it tolerable for the majority of people to wear those things for a long period of time is the resolution. Lag and framerate can be issues as well, but if the resolution of the screens is high enough, the majority of people could wear the things for long periods of time. All Apple has said is that they have a higher resolution than 4K. Dude says it has to be at least 6K for you not to be bothered by wearing the goggles. This is one of the things that I'll watch out of the corner of my eye. I will not be plunking down anywhere close to even $350 for a pair of VR goggles any time soon, but if it looks like things might be trending in that direction, I could become interested.
You remember the expert I mentioned in the OP? He's on this podcast talking about the headset and devices like it. And he relates how he inadvertently discovered a way to really fuck with people wearing VR headsets. They showed a movie that had been shot by someone wearing a Steadicam and walking down to the end of a pier. When he got there, he turned the camera sideways because he was done. They left that part in, and when they showed it to people, everybody ripped their headsets off when the camera went sideways. Imagine trying play a game or watch a movie and everything goes sideways at random intervals!
This episode has a guy who got to try the goggles at a demo. TL;DW: It's like the iPad and the Watch, everybody thinks it's neat, but not really sure what people will do with it. Because of supply issues, they'll only be able to sell about 450K/yr. for a couple of years. Since Apple owns the broadcast rights to MLS, they're almost certainly going to have special content for the goggles. These goggles are by far the best that anyone has come up with, and even if the tech's a flop, there's a lot of good ideas that will easily translate to desktop and mobile apps.
I want to know if you can have the displays that let people see an image of your eyes can show a red light going back and forth on it. It’d be funny to wear them and look like a Cylon.
I don't think so. Just scanning the API names, there's no indication that you can control the EyeSight content.
Ignore the headline on the article: https://www.reuters.com/technology/apple-forced-make-cuts-vision-pro-production-plans-ft-2023-07-03/ The difference they’re talking about is neither dramatic, nor unexpected. Buried in the article is that they only plan to scale up enough to build 18 million a year. They’re not expecting a dramatic growth spurt in sales for a while if that’s where their projections are.
Here’s What Reviewers Are Saying About the Apple Vision Pro TL;DR, it's neat, needs more apps, and a reason to buy it (most people who buy VR goggles use them for a few months, and then give up).
The first part of this is reviews of the headset. TL;DW version: Apple's figured out the UI better than anyone else, but until they can get the device down to something like a pair of eyeglasses, there's probably not going to be a reason most people will want them. Now, I will say that I hope Apple keeps plugging away at the idea for at least a couple of years, even if it becomes obvious that you'll never be able to get a device that is just like eyeglasses. Here's why: One of the hosts, who's obsessed with video quality, says that the way you watch movies and TV shows in the device really highlights the things that have been shot well. Meaning a higher frame rate than 24 FPS (it doesn't have to be something insane like 120 FPS, either, just above 24 FPS). Now, if something's above 24 FPS, even if you've got a shitty TV, you'll notice an improvement in image quality. Just like when they were transitioning from SDTV to HDTV, you could see an improvement on a SDTV. It wasn't as good as an HDTV, but it was still better than stuff that wasn't in HDTV. Given that Apple's got their own streaming service, I'm sure that they'll be wanting to make sure that everything produced for that service looks good in the Vision Pro. And even if you don't have a Vision Pro, everything on that service will look better than the other services. All of whom will want to catch up.
