How many people bought AVP just to make YouTube videos?
Anyway, the world's best tech influencers couldn't rescue AVP, it is a certified DUD and I expect Apple and HN to suppress discussion of it. Cook will try to turn the spotlight elsewhere. He's got good company, Musk seems to also have a certified flop with the Cyber truck.
Lots of people keep talking about how awesome future revs of AVP will surely be...not seeing it, Apple can't afford the reputation hit of iterating a product like this in public...people expect Apple to get it right early on at this point. Meta can afford to iterate in public on VR because they have no reputation in hardware.
I predict Apple will try to wipe the internet of AVP talk and then quietly kill it like they did with the "Apple Car"
The positive expectations for AVP form the hacker news crowd baffle me.
At this point I consider it proven that VR headsets strapped to our head are not the future, unless they become as comfortable as normal glasses (forever technically impossible), provide visual fidelity on par with modern high DPI screens (currently impossible?) and have perfect pass through (actually possible, maybe).
I would add that “until there is 100% certainty that having an image so close to your eyes all day will not harm your sight.”
I am no anti-vaxxer or flat earther, but old enough to remember that in the 50s the American Doctors vouched that cigarettes were good for your health, and later plastics were hailed as wonderful, and corn syrup was considered harmless, and eggs were both the devils food and a miracle food.
So much money changing hands that I tend to trust very little certifications on health impact.
I don't think Apple is in any danger of a "reputation hit", at least with anybody who matters. The type of fans who buy AVP will parrot whatever Apple's marketing department decides to release, and they'll add their own apologetics on top. For the general public, they don't even know about AVP yet so they won't care. I can't think of any other company on the planet that has an army of defenders who will defend every policy/move and even claim altruism, regardless of how self-serving it is for Apple. If you're waiting to see people turn on Apple, it's gonna be a very, very long while yet.
The Apple crew can be plenty active too. Generally if I post some criticism of Apple it gets a steady supply of downvotes even when I'm being reasonable. Especially if posted when mostly Americans are online.
> Comfort is among the most cited reasons for returns
I predict the next Vision Pro will not be worn at all and will be on a rectangle in front of the person and they can have several rectangles if they'd like.
That rectangle could also come with a proper tactile text input device attached, like a board of buttons or something, and maybe a touch sensitive surface to move a 'pointer' around on that rectangle ('pointer' like 'pointing at things', got it?). That would be pretty rad.
We need to evolve little t-rex arms above our ears that can hold the little rectangles in our field of vision and type little messages on the rectangles or pinch and swipe. The main advantage though would be that anyone driving a vehicle would be required by law to wear some sort of head wrap or helmet that would restrict the driver's t-rex arms from distracting them with their rectangles.
I'm looking at these devices and while cool, they all feel pretty dystopian so far. I have tried VR and honestly, I don't think the experience is that good to warrant the price except perhaps VR-porn which was the most impressive usage of VR I have tried.
Porn is the best use of any VR-headset imo for the simple reason that it is a short term enjoyment that benefits greatly from a more immersive experience that VR can give you.
When you are done you can take it off in shame and go back to doing something that actually gives you value in life. The only reason I would buy a headset would be if I were single and to watch porn and while many would not confess it, I think I'm not alone in this regard. Hence, I would never buy an closed Apple system like AVP even if it's technically better.
My two cents: I have several Meta devices. Long story short I acquired them with a mix of technology interest and potential business use.
They are all part of the furniture now. Incredible technologies, like going to an amusement park. They entertain guests but the dizziness factor is not minor, less if you have kids. Formally it is not "recommended" for kids. Also, they don't have AAA apps like a game console or good experimental content. I completely understand that potential future. Again, they are amazing devices, will be there, but not now.
You can go to Walt Disney parks but you don't have Magic Kingdom at home. If you could try it with VR now, it would probably give more nausea than the real thing.
My first consumerist reaction when the Vision Pro was announced in 2023 was to buy it "right now", I was lucky it was just an announcement until the 2024 release.
Most probably Apple will get it there. Right now, I will play with the device in an Apple Store and tell my friends.
Anecdotally, quite a few people seem to find the fitness-oriented apps and games on Quest pretty compelling.
You don't get nausea when you're constantly moving enough to sweat. But it certainly doesn't address the question of how exactly this can be a generic purpose computing platform.
Fair enough. I meant the VR kind that results from a disconnect between the visual sensation and your actual physical motion. It's most acute when you're not moving at all in VR.
Training boxing, there is an exercise you spin until getting really dizzy and then you must fight. The feeling of nausea disappears the more you hit and focus on fighting. I imagine that it is this type of focused activity that can prevent nausea.
> It's most acute when you're not moving at all in VR.
In my experience most of the nausea comes from the disconnect between in-VR motion and being physically stationary. Games where you have to walk around by moving the controller stick are the worst kind. Teleporting is supposed to help with this but it never helped me and it feels really odd and immersion-breaking.
Rhythm games where the VR motion is relatively slow and steady like Beat Saber, Pistol Whip, Synth Riders and Les Mills Bodycombat (where you're essentially on a slow-moving rail cart) are usually fine. Games where you're sitting down and mostly moving your head like Drums Rock are generally ok.
Games like the Resident Evil series or No Man's Sky are a constant vomit hazard though.
Your description sounds like the early expeiences on the GO and similar devices. Roomscale really made that go away for me but I pretty much still get sick with say any Car racing simulation or similar.
Anything that lets you stand and move on your own is just fine really.
'Can’t deal with these headaches after 10 minutes of use though.'
VR/AR shows just how flimsy DEI at large companies is. When it's a tool for gaining customers or retaining employees, they go all-in. Conversely, when you have an opportunity to make gobs of money with a computing paradigm that is unsuitable for masses of disabled people - including many who wouldn't think of themselves as disabled because they merely have astigmatism - it goes out of the window. Of the 4 people I've let use my non-Apple headset, only 1 could stand it for more than 10 minutes: another young man in tech.
> VR/AR shows just how flimsy DEI at large companies is.
We don't need VR/AR for that, just look at airtags
> disabled because they merely have astigmatism
I don't follow, can you not use the AVP with contacts? (I'm assuming that they don't have enough space for glasses. The Quest Pro needed some sort of spacer for glasses.)
Watch has two killer applications, a fancy Fitbit for posh people using Apple own apps, and digital payments.
There aren't any possible killer applications for Vision Pro that weren't already done by Holo Lens, Meta, VR2 or anything else already in use by the industry.
In fact, most uses cases people are amazed by Vision Pro, were demoed by Microsoft at BUILD 2015 with Holo Lens.
Speaking for myself the killer application for Vision Pro comes from the resolution and audio. If the audio/screen resolution is as good as their announcement suggested and it’s as comfortable to wear as they suggested then it’s compelling in ways that other devices aren’t.
Nothing the Apple watch does wasn't already available in devices from Garmin and others either, Vision Pro and Watch are no different in that sense.
Apple don't do “things no one else does” in any of its (modern) products. Apple does “things that are already out there, with extra shine, and better integration¹ with other Apple stuff”. By that measure, if Vision Pro is a useful+reliable product at all, even if over-priced, you wouldn't expect returns in excess of those seen for watches/iphones/etc.
I'm sure Apple internally discussed at length the implications of allowing their normal return policy before launching this product, so they will not be surprised about people using/abusing it.
They have the problem that they have to keep their shareholders happy, and currently are only releasing improvements fron already existing products, they need the Vision Pro as means to show that.
> All these VR/AR technologies is like an onlyfans girl who promises that she'll definitely meet you next month, just send another few grand meanwhile.
Out of curiosity, do you personally know of people who've had that experience on OnlyFans or know how common it is? From knowing people in the industry I had the (somewhat counterintuitive) impression that sort of thing happened more on general streaming sites like Twitch.
It seems to me that the most obvious use for these VR sets is in engineering, technical support and other areas where having a tech manual type overlay while you work is really valuable. Pushing them to consumers before the tech is really compelling is probably going to be hard for a while. One of the less mentioned problems is they sadly make you look like a dork in use.
That's what Google realized with the glasses at some point. My company at the time considered it for tech support (specialized mass spectrometes), but unless they can do live diagnosis, i.e. put them on and see exactly what the problem is in an instant and how to fix it, it wasn't worth the price
People say that porn was what made VHS popular, but that was a secondary effect. Relatively cheap tech licensing meant there were more (and more affordable) VHS compatible devices out there, which got the content ball rolling (both published and home-movie content) with a fair chunk of initial momentum.
Vision Pro does nothing unique for them to license in that way – if VR video content is what someone wants a device like this for, they will use it to view existing VR video content that already plays on other devices.
I think the hard part is to find a way to make it part of your daily life. I've really been enjoying my Quest 3, though at the same time it's kind of just there unless I need something that only it can do. The way forward is probably to make these devices get out of the way enough to just "be there" all of the time. Google Glass is the closest thing I can think to a device profile/size that would make this work.
A cynical take - a lot of people just bought it to play with a novel toy for a week or to make a video about it to post in social sites. Now some of them claim a socially acceptable reason to return, so that they don't look like a people abusing return policies, but like genuinely affected people.
It depends. Basically as long as you fulfill corporation's criteria for return you should not have any moral issues with it. For example for digital items there can be zero possible negatives in using returns. The problem arises with physical items - some corporations repackage returned items and sell them as new. So people buy a dress to actually wear it (so the dress was fine and the size was fine) and then return, or buy electronics to use and then return are harming future buyers. Indirectly of course.
Again, it is not incorrect to return electronics in general. I've did it once too, I bought a wifi range extender and after observing that it simply didn't work at all in my setup, I've returned it. At the same time there are people buying TVs just to watch some sport event and then returning it. Are we doing essentially the same thing? Technically yes. But for me personally if feels differently.
I’m frequently the “future customer”, and do not feel harmed. I’m happy for people to return electronics, I buy them “open box” for a great discount!
Most recently, I got an OLED TV for nearly $1k off, in absolutely flawless condition, with just a few hours powered on according to its diagnostic menu. If it’s not perfect, it can be returned once again.
That said, I don’t typically bother with Apple’s refurb store (which I believe sells returned items?), the discount is not typically as good as other retailers, and they don’t have them in store like Microcenter or Best Buy.
I was close to returning my Vision Pro but after using it on a plane recently during a business trip (I travel a fair bit) I will definitely be keeping it. It has been the best in flight entertainment by far, watching 3D movies on here while flying is outstanding. It felt like I could touch the water when I watched avatar. It’s also useful for having a big screen when I’m sitting down on a sofa and using my laptop, however, when I tried to use it for work longer term, like 7-8 hours it was just too uncomfortable.
I've been considering this as well, and it's indeed a very compelling usecase. But is it better for the same usecase than the Quest series of headsets?
It seems awesome for plane use, but so, so bulky for light packers. Kinda similar to my noise-cancelling Bose headphones - they're great on planes, but more often than not I'd rather save the space and just use earplugs or IEMs. (They're also not mutually exclusive - if I do pack my noise-cancelling headphones, I'll wear them in addition to earplugs if I want to e.g. read in silence.)
No numbers, no estimate of what % of buyers have returned them or are considering it? It just says there has been an ‘uptick’ of social media posts saying people are returning them. An uptick since when? Since a couple of weeks ago before it was available?
I bought one, I also returned mine. I’ve written about this extensively on my blog [0] but the TL;DR is:
It’s an amazing device, blows the Meta headsets out of the water, but it’s still not “there” yet. The camera/passthrough needs to get better. The Mac Virtual Display is too blurry. And right now, due to software limitations, it’s essentially an iPad in capabilities. Apple was right to release this now (need to get it in developer’s hands in the same way AR/VRKit came out years before the headset) but it doesn’t solve enough problems for me. It’s a cool media consumption device but not worth $4K. If I could replace my external monitors with it then I would probably have kept it but it’s 1-2+ generations away from that. I have no doubt I’ll be interested in buying a future version when those things get better but I constantly felt like “Ok, now let me take this off and do some real work”.
Meta: this submission is flagged now. I wish there is an unflag option, then the moderator (dang) decides what to do if there are enough votes to flag and to unflag. I mean: start with the current behavior and hide the submission, then maybe restore the submission if there are unflag requests despite people had to find it without the help of the front page.
74 comments
[ 3.4 ms ] story [ 145 ms ] threadAnyway, the world's best tech influencers couldn't rescue AVP, it is a certified DUD and I expect Apple and HN to suppress discussion of it. Cook will try to turn the spotlight elsewhere. He's got good company, Musk seems to also have a certified flop with the Cyber truck.
Lots of people keep talking about how awesome future revs of AVP will surely be...not seeing it, Apple can't afford the reputation hit of iterating a product like this in public...people expect Apple to get it right early on at this point. Meta can afford to iterate in public on VR because they have no reputation in hardware.
I predict Apple will try to wipe the internet of AVP talk and then quietly kill it like they did with the "Apple Car"
Can't wait for the HN cope on AVP
At this point I consider it proven that VR headsets strapped to our head are not the future, unless they become as comfortable as normal glasses (forever technically impossible), provide visual fidelity on par with modern high DPI screens (currently impossible?) and have perfect pass through (actually possible, maybe).
I am no anti-vaxxer or flat earther, but old enough to remember that in the 50s the American Doctors vouched that cigarettes were good for your health, and later plastics were hailed as wonderful, and corn syrup was considered harmless, and eggs were both the devils food and a miracle food.
So much money changing hands that I tend to trust very little certifications on health impact.
I predict the next Vision Pro will not be worn at all and will be on a rectangle in front of the person and they can have several rectangles if they'd like.
ah interesting, and inferring from past policy, that's something that Apple won't allow on the AVP, so may be missing a big feature for some.
When you are done you can take it off in shame and go back to doing something that actually gives you value in life. The only reason I would buy a headset would be if I were single and to watch porn and while many would not confess it, I think I'm not alone in this regard. Hence, I would never buy an closed Apple system like AVP even if it's technically better.
They are all part of the furniture now. Incredible technologies, like going to an amusement park. They entertain guests but the dizziness factor is not minor, less if you have kids. Formally it is not "recommended" for kids. Also, they don't have AAA apps like a game console or good experimental content. I completely understand that potential future. Again, they are amazing devices, will be there, but not now.
You can go to Walt Disney parks but you don't have Magic Kingdom at home. If you could try it with VR now, it would probably give more nausea than the real thing.
My first consumerist reaction when the Vision Pro was announced in 2023 was to buy it "right now", I was lucky it was just an announcement until the 2024 release.
Most probably Apple will get it there. Right now, I will play with the device in an Apple Store and tell my friends.
You don't get nausea when you're constantly moving enough to sweat. But it certainly doesn't address the question of how exactly this can be a generic purpose computing platform.
What? I've gotten nauseous during exercise several times, with no VR involved.
In my experience most of the nausea comes from the disconnect between in-VR motion and being physically stationary. Games where you have to walk around by moving the controller stick are the worst kind. Teleporting is supposed to help with this but it never helped me and it feels really odd and immersion-breaking.
Rhythm games where the VR motion is relatively slow and steady like Beat Saber, Pistol Whip, Synth Riders and Les Mills Bodycombat (where you're essentially on a slow-moving rail cart) are usually fine. Games where you're sitting down and mostly moving your head like Drums Rock are generally ok.
Games like the Resident Evil series or No Man's Sky are a constant vomit hazard though.
VR/AR shows just how flimsy DEI at large companies is. When it's a tool for gaining customers or retaining employees, they go all-in. Conversely, when you have an opportunity to make gobs of money with a computing paradigm that is unsuitable for masses of disabled people - including many who wouldn't think of themselves as disabled because they merely have astigmatism - it goes out of the window. Of the 4 people I've let use my non-Apple headset, only 1 could stand it for more than 10 minutes: another young man in tech.
We don't need VR/AR for that, just look at airtags
> disabled because they merely have astigmatism
I don't follow, can you not use the AVP with contacts? (I'm assuming that they don't have enough space for glasses. The Quest Pro needed some sort of spacer for glasses.)
There aren't any possible killer applications for Vision Pro that weren't already done by Holo Lens, Meta, VR2 or anything else already in use by the industry.
In fact, most uses cases people are amazed by Vision Pro, were demoed by Microsoft at BUILD 2015 with Holo Lens.
Apple don't do “things no one else does” in any of its (modern) products. Apple does “things that are already out there, with extra shine, and better integration¹ with other Apple stuff”. By that measure, if Vision Pro is a useful+reliable product at all, even if over-priced, you wouldn't expect returns in excess of those seen for watches/iphones/etc.
--
[1] cough lock-in cough cough
The prospect of having sex is good, but it never happens.
Unless the technology is way better, noone gonna use it
Out of curiosity, do you personally know of people who've had that experience on OnlyFans or know how common it is? From knowing people in the industry I had the (somewhat counterintuitive) impression that sort of thing happened more on general streaming sites like Twitch.
after the initial novelty wears off. must be some realisation that wearing it 12 hours a day is impractical for various reasons..
so whatever neat AR features it has are not really possible to integrate into your day to day life experiences
also buyers remorse at $3500 must hit different.
People say that porn was what made VHS popular, but that was a secondary effect. Relatively cheap tech licensing meant there were more (and more affordable) VHS compatible devices out there, which got the content ball rolling (both published and home-movie content) with a fair chunk of initial momentum.
Vision Pro does nothing unique for them to license in that way – if VR video content is what someone wants a device like this for, they will use it to view existing VR video content that already plays on other devices.
Again, it is not incorrect to return electronics in general. I've did it once too, I bought a wifi range extender and after observing that it simply didn't work at all in my setup, I've returned it. At the same time there are people buying TVs just to watch some sport event and then returning it. Are we doing essentially the same thing? Technically yes. But for me personally if feels differently.
Most recently, I got an OLED TV for nearly $1k off, in absolutely flawless condition, with just a few hours powered on according to its diagnostic menu. If it’s not perfect, it can be returned once again.
That said, I don’t typically bother with Apple’s refurb store (which I believe sells returned items?), the discount is not typically as good as other retailers, and they don’t have them in store like Microcenter or Best Buy.
Reminds me of the Seinfeld episode where Jerry wants to return something for "spite":
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fP0MXJAQhmo
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wig_Master
* https://seinfeld.fandom.com/wiki/The_Wig_Master
I bet for in-flight entertainment use only the choice is a no-brainer.
It’s an amazing device, blows the Meta headsets out of the water, but it’s still not “there” yet. The camera/passthrough needs to get better. The Mac Virtual Display is too blurry. And right now, due to software limitations, it’s essentially an iPad in capabilities. Apple was right to release this now (need to get it in developer’s hands in the same way AR/VRKit came out years before the headset) but it doesn’t solve enough problems for me. It’s a cool media consumption device but not worth $4K. If I could replace my external monitors with it then I would probably have kept it but it’s 1-2+ generations away from that. I have no doubt I’ll be interested in buying a future version when those things get better but I constantly felt like “Ok, now let me take this off and do some real work”.
[0] https://joshstrange.com