175 comments

[ 2.6 ms ] story [ 226 ms ] thread
A one paragraph news article with effectively zero details? Keeping that quality bar nice and high at techcrunch.
It's just now coming on (as of this writing) in the presentation. I'm guessing it's TechCrunch trying to "frist post!!11!" about the headset.
It's a livestream. There is more content being added literally as we speak.
big scuba mask vibes
As a CPAP user using a nasal mask but would not wear this for too long.
Doesn’t look very comfortable to wear for people that use glasses (50% of the population)
I would expect that glasses won't be necessary for most nearsighted users and farsighted users would probably have some kind of internal diopter adjustment.
There are other issues like astigmatism for example.
They just showed inserts for vision correction. They didn't specifically mention astigmatism correction, so not sure if that will be an option.
Yep. Just like how microscopes work where you don't need glasses and can just adjust the focus.
That is not the case with existing VR headsets. I'd be very surprised if apple has changed something to make that no longer the case.

Without glasses, i can only really make out text if its inches from my face. With my quest 2 though, i cannot see anything in the headset without my glasses. The objects in the headset act as if they are several feet away. I cant see objects several feet away without my glasses.

edit: later in the presentation they announce they are partnering with a company that makes corrective lens inserts. Similar solutions exist for other existing VR headsets already.

They just said there will be inserts for vision correction. No real detail about ranges of power yet.
I think the misunderstanding comes from the fact that the display is physically close to the face, despite them "focused at infinity" and users having to focus give or take ~10m/30ft out.
It may not be the case, but it could be the case-- AFAIK this is a solved problem for other use cases.
I know that the PSVR2 can have prescription lenses so it is possible for headsets to deal with this.
I've seen reports they are going to allow for prescription lenses in the headset since it's too thin for glasses.
Welp, they require magnetic glasses that clip onto the screens.
They announced additional corrective lenses you can attach, which is the approach I use with my Index headset to supply my -5.5 and -6 prescription. The ones for the Index and other headsets are aftermarket though.
(comment deleted)
Looks like they’re using magnetically attached prescription lenses.
I have prescription lenses for my Oculus Quest 2. I'm sure something similar will be available for this. Ya, its another $60-90, but at $3k, it would be dumb not to invest in those.
Looks like a diving mask - clunky and bulky. It has a cable to something.
Battery is waist mounted with some kind of belt
Just the battery? Once you take the cost of a belt mounted device I'd think they would want to move (hot) compute off your head too.
It's so hard to convey the experience this stuff without actually using it. Sure it looks awesome in these fake renders of what passthrough looks like, but IRL how does it look?
The "EyeSight" feature has weird implications for how Apple thinks this thing should be used. I'm not really sure I love the idea of making it "easier" for someone to leave the goggles on while interacting with me.
> I'm not really sure I love the idea of making it "easier" for someone to leave the goggles on while interacting with me.

I think the big thing here is being able to go up and talk to someone real quick. If Im working and someone just wants to talk for 10 seconds, its much easier to just look over at them instead of slipping the whole headset off.

That's fair, but on the other hand I can imagine situations where it would be okay. Like maybe one person is working on something and another person is advising their interactions within the AR. It'd be nice to be able to interact a bit while still leaving the person mostly in the virtual world.

I'm thinking about an interaction kind of like the scene in Minority Report where one character is controlling the displays while the other is giving information and interacting with them, but it's not always a face-to-face interaction (https://youtu.be/7SFeCgoep1c). In that sort of situation, this kind of feature seems useful.

Another parallel is the 3D video feature - basically the projectors from that movie (that he uses to view a video of his child)
It looks like they are using a lenticular screen to create the "EyeSight" image, that way it looks 3d (ish) to the people around you.
They just specifically mentioned that in the presentation 15 minutes after you suggested it. Good eye.
I don't think it's so weird, part of the usability issue with headsets has always been having to take them off to interact with meatspace stuff. For me at least, a big part of that was it being really awkward to talk to someone next to you from inside the headset, even if you see them in passthrough fine, since you can't make eye contact. Not sure if this will be perfect or have a "my eyes are up here" effect, but it doesn't seem like a strange idea.
(comment deleted)
I'm sure it will be a very slick and uncanny effect in action. But I think the lack of eye contact is a key part of maintaining some of the social friction to using these kinds of things all the time (which is, just in my personal opinion, a good thing.)
+1. Later on in the presentation they show a father taking pictures of his kids in 3d. Playing with your kids while wearing AR goggles is just beyond dystopian.
This part really made me sad.
(comment deleted)
Same here. The fact that a usually "tasteful" company like Apple decided to demonstrate VR intruding into our life in this way, makes me somewhat worried about the future.

By comparison I suddenly find something like the Valve Index and the emphasis on gaming, much more benign.

I mean to be fair, in that video he was recording a video using the headset. In that context, I don't think it's _that_ different from a parent pressing their eye into a camcorder or holding up a smart phone.
Isn't it easier to look away, or pull your head out, if it's a smart phone?
It does have similar vibes, but personally I wouldn't have the same negative reaction if the same functionality was added to the iphone. There's just something inauthentic with the digitally projected eyes.
Agree. Here's hoping future iPhone/iPad models can capture Spatial Video, I'd much rather do that. That use case felt like one of the few "well, this is the way it works for now, ship it" moments.
I agree with all the mentions of dystopia, and have often considered the "Metaverse" to very much embody such. Then I get to thinking and realize the Gen A'ers will soon enough exclaim "Okay, Millennial" when we shout of these things being dystopian.
In contrast, for me this seems like the "killer feature" that differentiates it from the current generation of headsets. I've always been completely uninterested in anything AR/VR and a big reason for that is that these headsets make you feel so "cut off". The ability to see someone's eyes while they are wearing the headset reduces that feeling of isolation.

I agree that it will always be weird to just keep the headset on during an entire conversation or to just walk around with them all the time. But if someone is doing work or watching a movie or something with these on, and just needs to turn their head to talk to you for a minute, it's a nice feature to have.

This will definitely used for pornography.
Not from the App Store, it won't.
Why did Meta preempt this with Quest 3. They safe
Oh dear, this looks even worse than imagined, with that massive tethered wire at the back.

Maybe the next version would be much better, cheaper and wireless. But not now.

EDIT: Come on admit it. You would not seriously buy this first version until it looks less clunky and more natural. Eventually it will look as natural as glasses.

Don't fall for Apple's mixed reality distortion field again, please.

If having a tethered battery reduces the weight of the headset, then I imagine it may be preferable that way. The weight of the Quest can make it uncomfortable to wear for long periods.
When Bob Iger came on stage I did a full facepalm. When they started buttering me up before announcing the price, I knew it was over.

At $3,499, this is a toy for rich people, not a new computing platform. It almost feels redundant next to an iPhone, which is really not the selling point you want for something that costs more than 3x as much.

This is the most un-Apple (?) product announcement I've ever seen
Apple investing a lot of silicon into AI and GPU cores in Apple Silicone for a few years now makes sense given what they are presenting here
If masses don’t accept this, AR VR might be set back by 5-10 more years. Just getting people to try modern XR out is hard enough, and retention is just as hard

I can see why the Jony Ive camp kept pushing for a thinner form factor.

Given the manufacturing rumors, I doubt I can get one without paying a scalper

I'm curious to see how the display resolution will look. Previously, when I tried a VR headset, I could easily spot the pixels. Apple is renowned for their Retina displays, so it would be strange if they opted for a low resolution.
I see the facetime part functionality as interesting -- but what do you look like on facetime if you are wearing this?
(comment deleted)
(comment deleted)
It showed someone participating in a group video call. But it only showed what the other people (who were not wearing headsets) look like. What does the Vision Pro user look like? Does it just use animoji or something?

EDIT: sounds like they render a realistic animated image of you, if I caught that correctly?

They've got a interior facing camera, they could make you a pair of floating eyeballs!

Kidding, but also not, I imagine they make use of that camera for this somehow.

I'm suspecting they'll ask users to enroll/login with camera for IPD correction, then make a figurative Live2D model using that picture, interior camera and lip sync.

Edit: and yep, your head is modeled and a doppelganger of you will show in calls.

They're talking about this now. Sounds basically like this, except 3d. They also have lips (using downwards facing cameras I guess).
I wonder how this will work without the ability to capture full facial expressions. Can they extrapolate from the features they can see, to fill in the gaps of what they can't see? Or will tone of voice be sufficient to let people know when you're happy or upset?

This could be the next generation of "tone gets lost in text".

From what they showed, it will be a reallistic-looking 3D avatar of yourself. It's quite into uncanny valley territory but it will likely improve over time. What they demoed looks a bit like a blurry deepfake.
Suspiciously accurate! As they just explained on the stream, this is exactly how it will work.
I thought that was funny as well. I suppose this is where the new "poster" feature comes in? They'll just see pre-recorded looped video of you?
Your edit is correct. I was just going to reply. Your stream seems to be ahead of mine :(
Probably because I'm just down the road from Cupertino. That's how the internet works, right?
Here in Hillsborough. Your stream seemed to be a lot more than 5ms ahead.

I think I was in a 4 or 5k stream. Whatever apples page delivers when on a 5k monitor I guess.

You use the front LIDAR to scan the depth map of your face while the actual cameras take pictures.

Then they construct a virtual avatar out of that.

Curious if this will give a viable mobile workstation. If I can get the experience of a 4k ~32 inch monitor while traveling I'd consider buying it just for that. They seem to be promoting that..... getting nervous about price though.
I'd be worried about being able to use this for more than 30-60 minutes without getting a splitting headache.
I've always thought the killer feature to get people to start using AR/VR wasn't games or social experiences, but just a bigger screen for web browsing, Excel, dashboards and a bunch of other boring software.

Honestly, I'm not sure how Vision Pro product stacks up to what Apple says, but the marketing shows that Apple has clearly figured this out.

> I was initially a skeptic of widespread adoption of VR. I'm not sure that it's going to be the next smartphone. However, if it gets more comfortable and the price point goes down, I could see it being a replacement for traditional desktop monitors. Instead of paying $1k for a 27-inch display you get as many large screens as you want. That seems probable to me.

>

> I know that sounds awfully boring and mundane, but that probably comes way before other applications. After all the original iPhone was just an iPod you could make calls with.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33358495

I have often wondered why none of the other VR/AR companies really keyed in on this. While it it not as sexy as 'immersive video games' I can tell you that I would have been on the AR/VR train a long time ago if they were offering me the ability to use the goggles as a huge chunk of screen real estate. I can imagine a lot of people in mac-friendly open office spaces hopping onto this as soon as it is available.

Edit: OK, just saw the Disney pitch for Vision Pro. They are going to sell a ton of these things to every sports fanatic in the world.

Probably because it’s not just the screen/goggles, but the whole ecosystem, i.e. the OS (input, touch, scrolling, mouse, widgets, …)

Imagine building this on Windows. It won’t suck less, it’s just suck in 3D.

I'm not sure that will be available this generation, that was a big "imagine" scenario from my understanding.

From what I understand the other headsets aren't suitable for code. With 23M pixels, I hope this one can cut it

Apple: People are getting myopia from their screens being too close to their eyes.

Also Apple: We’re strapping two 4K displays to your eyeballs with our new Apple Vision Pro AR headset.

In all seriousness, this looks pretty awesome, and certainly paints a positive picture for AR in the future. It's pretty crazy how ahead Apple is to Meta considering Zuck pivoted their entire company around the space a few years ago. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple gets this headset to iPhone prices in 3-4 years. I imagine this will be around $3,000 now (price not announced as of my post), so it will just be an enthusiast tool for now, but mass adoption is certainly possible down the line.

For some reasons, VR headsets are known to improve myopia and crossed eyes. I don't know for cataracts but myopia don't seem to be a huge issue wrt VR uses.
As a layperson, that would be unsurprising if myopia is being caused due to short focal distances. It's not like your eyes are actually focusing on something an inch or two in front of them. As far as they're concerned, they're looking at something potentially several feet (or miles!) away.
(comment deleted)
Yeah honestly I'm surprised and disheartened that Apple went this direction. This feels dystopian and less humane in many ways – an accelerant of the physical isolation that we've seen technology create. The shots of people at home alone talking to an empty room, the dad playing his daughters with the headset on, the woman grabbing a drink from her fridge.

My hope is that this is a calculated step towards a more integrated form factor that will enrich our sense of connection and engagement with the physical world.

But if you feel anxiety you can download a 9.99 per month Mindfulness app, plug it to your 3.999 RSP headset, your 149.99 Bluetooth headphones and pretend you are in a Goop-approved Buddhist meditation landscape (in—app purchase at 9.99)

Just like the actual Buddhist monks!

(comment deleted)
You'll also get the blue bubbles while the Meta Quest peasants will get green bubbles, making sure they get anxiety, not you.
Those three shots in particular are a perfect execution of product marketing, designed to overload your critical thinking - “this is normal. Accept it. Embrace it”

The first time you see it it’s weird as fuck. The second and more times, not so much. A but like AirPods but much more extreme.

Whether this works out for them remains to be seen.

I know a few people that have improved or eliminated their myopia through more use of VR.

VR apps typically use far focal distance so even though the screens are close to your eyes, your eye muscles/lenses are typically held at far/infinity focal length.

Don't forget the part about not spending enough time outside, exacerbating myopia.

And now you can bring the beautiful outdoors inside, so you never have to leave your couch again!

It's super interesting to see Apple's strategy played out here. It feels like so many of their announcements today are part of a strategy to essentially become "the OS for your life".

Apple's nudging people into using all their devices for every aspect of their life. Compare this with the idea of creating a metaverse where you can interact with other people. It's harder to get people to jump into a metaverse cold, whereas if you're already an iPhone user, it's easier to use the halo effect to drag you in.

I struggle to understand what some people were expecting. If it’s nothing more than putting screens in 3d space, it’s already worth it for me. I can sit on the couch, type on my MacBook, and look at multiple displays around me using the Vision Pro. As a bonus, I can still see what’s going on around me so nobody can come in and scare the shit out of me. Win win. I’ll take this content viewing device any day over a weird metaverse/avatar future that nobody wants.
Try reality, that's cool too.
In what reality can I have three displays mounted around my couch?
Yeah if this just works it’s exactly what I want.
I'm curious about how it would work for people like me who are nearsighted. Do you get alternate lenses? Or do they correct the picture in software?
They just covered this in the stream. It has lens inserts.
They provide lenses. But I believe you would have to buy them separate.
The actual focal distance is somewhere around six feet on most headsets. If you're more nearsighted than that then yes you will need lenses, or to wear your glasses while using it.
I agree, especially if you can get multiple screens on your Mac.
I mean, if I could pace the room when in a boring ass meeting without having to sit in front of screen - that’d be awesome.
What's stopping you now? Really curious, as I do that a lot already. :D
If Apple is the catalyst that brings back stereo photography I'm happy.
So it's a Hololens VR with front and back cameras with a front LCD gimmick for displaying emojis...
A new entrant in the "No wireless? Less space than a Nomad? Lame." race...