• Users of those services will be steered toward the web
  • Searches indicate apps from Meta may also be unavailable

Bypass paywall: https://archive.ph/4kfYI

  • qwertyqwertyqwerty@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    10 months ago

    To be fair, a lot of people were wondering the same thing when the iPad was announced. Now there’s like a billion of them out there.

    • ji17br@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      10 months ago

      They were wondering that for the iPod, the iPhone, the iPad, the Apple Watch, and AirPods. I’d bet that in 10 years a decent portion of the population will have some sort of headset, Apple or otherwise.

      • herrvogel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        37
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        None of those had a point nearly as questionable as this headset thing. The ipod was an advanced mp3 player, which was very popular and common tech at the time. The iPhone was an advanced phone with a large touchscreen, which was rapidly becoming very common at the time. The iPad was an advanced tablet, which was a concept that had already been tried many times by many other companies by then. The air pods are just advanced wireless earbuds, which nobody could ever deny were rapidly becoming more popular.

        VR headsets are fundamentally different from all of those, in that there’s no technological and social precedence quite like it. People used mp3 players and watches and phones before Apple did something new. Nobody was wondering the point of a better mp3 player that could hold massive amounts of songs. But the history of humankind says nothing about the masses’ willingness to walk around in public with big ass high tech ski goggles strapped to their faces. VR is much, much more unknown compared to those.

        • ji17br@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          I get what you’re saying, and regarding people walking around in public wearing a headset, I completely agree. It’ll be a very long time before that happens, if ever.

          I disagree that AR won’t become more ubiquitous in people’s lives. Right now, the biggest gripe I see when people talk about Vision Pro is the price. Which was also the case with all the other Apple products I mentioned. The price will come down, it’ll get more features, and it will become more attractive to consumers.

          Only time will tell which of us will be right.

          • nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            10 months ago

            The iPhone had 2 interesting things going for it. Everyone had been begging for an iPod phone for years before this happened. Apple had been working on the iPad since the Newton failed and the iPhone was a combination between iPod phone and iPad.

            All glass all touch screens were not a thing people thought they wanted before Apple made a really compelling (and pleasing) device.

            AR has been a thing for years, but hasn’t garnered the popularity or utility that MP3s and phones ever had. QR codes being the possible exception and only since most phones handle them natively at this stage.

            It’s possible that AR just hasn’t had a good enough UX to break the “cool experiment bro” uses imagined so far (because of screen/camera/movement limitations). It’ll be interesting to see if Apple has managed to revolutionize the experience enough to imagine new and more widely needed AR uses or not.

        • scarabic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          10 months ago

          We can argue that this product has no continuity with anything anyone has ever used, or we can admit that it is a new kind of immersive screen for a world where people are absolutely hooked to screens. It’s pretty simple.

          And the very concept of virtual reality has been an inevitability for decades. This is something people have been fantasizing about for a long time, thought they underestimated the technical challenges and limitations of it all. We’re getting close to overcoming most of them now.

          While the whole world laughs at Mark Zuckerburg, Occulus headsets are selling in rapidly increasing numbers. They sold more headsets in 2021 than Microsoft sold Xboxes. So to use your own words, yes, this product is a foray into a space that is rapidly growing in popularity.

          • herrvogel@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Oculus headsets are for gaming, mostly. There’s a rather humongous social and practical gap between wearing one of those in the privacy of your living room and casually wearing one outside in public. There never was such a massive gap for the iPad or whatever. Maybe if we were already used to the likes of Google glass, but we all know what happened to that one.

            I’m honestly not laughing at zuck, at least not for this one. Besides not believing it’s not gonna catch on, at least not this first generation, I’m actively hoping it doesn’t. The world absolutely does not need people walking around in public with a dozen cameras attached to their faces, with LCD screens between their eyes and mine at all times. I wouldn’t be comfortable with that shit and I don’t want to get comfortable with it either.

            • scarabic@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              Why are you talking about whether people will feel good walking around in public with headsets on? The Apple Vision doesn’t even do that. You realize it’s tethered by a wire, and is closer in usage to an iMac than Google Glass, right?

              You seem to have your own speech about headsets you want to espouse but it is not connected to reality or this thread or this product.

        • Eggyhead@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          If you have a computer space with multiple monitors with various equipment interfacing with it cluttering up a desk at your home, imagine all of that just completely gone, cleaned up, with nothing there but a recliner and a headset that can even go with you.

          I think this is the value proposition. The price is too high for me, but I don’t think there’s anything to be confused about. The smart watch and iPad took more for me to wrap my head around than this.

          • theangryseal@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            10 months ago

            When they get it down to rad sunglasses I’ll wear them everywhere.

            I love my Quest headset, but I haven’t turned it on in 6 months. I don’t have time to be isolated like that without asking other people to make sacrifices for me so I can have that time.

            I think the tech will be important in the future. I could be wrong, but when it shrinks down and becomes easy to remove isolation, I think people will want it.

          • BURN@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            The thing is, I don’t want those replaced by a headset. I have a total of 5 monitors on my home setup, and I can’t see a reason to replace any of them. Especially with a headset that’s likely going to be uncomfortable, heavy and isolating. I just can’t see any case where a headset could be even remotely close to preferable.

            A recliner would probably decrease my enjoyment of the setup anyways, as I much prefer a physical desk, chair and monitors.

            • Eggyhead@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              10 months ago

              That sounds like a pretty epic setup! Fortunately no one is forcing you to replace anything. You’re free to keep and make the most of what you’ve spent your own money on, just like anyone else.

              Actually, I’m sure you more than most can appreciate why others who don’t already have a setup like yours might want to look at a headset as an option.

            • Zoolander@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              10 months ago

              If you can’t see any use case for this, especially as they become smaller and cheaper, then no one is going to convince you otherwise. Even now, there are literally thousands of scenarios where a headset with no physical limitations is going to be more preferable than needing an entire room in your house or office for your computer setup.

      • Zagorath@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        10 months ago

        People understood what the iPhone was about immediately. Heck, they knew before it was even announced.

        Same for the Apple Watch…ish. People didn’t know exactly what area it would end up focusing on, but the idea of getting and responding briefly to notifications without getting your phone out has always been appealing.

        AirPods people have, again, always understood the appeal of. People are/were just angry at the option of using wired headphones being taken away.

        • ji17br@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          10 months ago

          I mean, yeah, you can find people who believed in them. But the general consensus around all those products was they are too expensive, don’t offer any meaningful upgrades over current tech, or are just useless and no one will want them.

          I’ve been reading MacRumours forums since before the iPhone launch and it’s always the same thing regarding new products. Without using them, people can have an hard time seeing the positives. I think that issue is even bigger now with the Vision Pro.

          • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            Your confusion probably relates to your idea that people dislike the cost of Vision Pro, as opposed to any actual problems with the product. All those other products were expensive versions of things that existed already that people used.

            VR has existed for 40 years (remember Tron?). The reason it never took off is because the headset sucks and gives you a headache after an hour. That’s basically it. People will buy most anything, but a headache is pushing it.

            • ji17br@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              10 months ago

              I’m not confused at all. The reason people get headaches it’s a tech issue. Not a VR issue. Low resolution screen, low refresh rate, and heavy headsets are the cause of those issues. Technology has not advanced enough to solve those issues. Apple has created the best option so far, but there’s still a lot of room to improve.

              Due to the better tech in Vision Pro I wouldn’t be surprised if the amount of people getting headaches compared to other headsets is lower, but not zero unfortunately.

              I’m not sure how you can say in good conscience that people don’t dislike the price. Go into any thread regarding Vision Pro and price will by far be the most discussed topic.

              • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                That’s because the technology sucks. If it really was revolutionary, $3500 would be a bargain.

                People pay that right now for gaming computers. If it could replace that, it would be worth it. Many people own toys more expensive than that (motorcycles, boats, jet skis). People with mobility issues spend that amount on their wheelchair and can barely go to the Grand Canyon, let alone more remote places.

                It’s just a technology issue. It sucks.

                • ji17br@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  The technology is years ahead of anything else.

                  Why are you comparing bleeding edge technology to a motorbike? Literally the stupidest comparison I’ve seen.

                  You clearly just want to shit on the product and have no intention to having an honest discussion.

                  • Streetdog@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    10 months ago

                    This has been pretty much the case in this community. It’s more for people to praise the tech they’re owning right now, and bitch about anything they don’t own. I’m just browsing, not sure if there’s a futurism community. Your arguments would find better ground there, unfortunately.

            • Zoolander@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              This doesn’t make any sense at all. You know Tron was fiction, right? VR existed back then in the same way that neural prosthetics do now. There are like 5 working versions and none of them are functional enough to be used by the public. “The headset sucks and gives you a headache” is a nonsense generalization. There are hundreds of headsets out there and many people can use any number of them without any headache whatsoever.

              The parent is right. This is the same pattern that repeats every time. People say it’ll never take off and then it absolutely does.

      • umbrella@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        They were wondering why the iPad wasnt a keyboardless mac instead of an oversized phone. Not why it existed.

    • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      10 months ago

      no, they werent. the ipad replaced the netbooks everyone wsa using until tablets became viable. again, an actual use case for a product.

      theyve been pushing these headsets for years now, and theyve gained little traction and not solved any of the common problems.

      anyone who thinks this is will some popular thing everyone will be doing is smokin the reefer, or just not paying attention

      • Pepsi@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        do you seriously think retail consumers are the demographic Apple is trying to capture right now?

        talk to some creative professionals & craftsmen. my company used to work with hololens on a regular basis but there way too much jank in how it performed in a live setting. If the Vision Pro provides even the same level of utility but manages to make live object rendering & tracking consistent and reliable, they’re going to sell truckloads. Hollywood alone has probably 100 different ways to use this tech on set to slim creative workflows and save time (and therefore money). a $5000 headset is practically a rounding error when your principals cost 10x that per hour.

        • MeatsOfRage@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          How is retail not their demographic? All the marketing for this thing has people sitting on the couch, watching movies, viewing their children’s photos in 3D, relaxation and meditation, taking photos with the headset on at a kids birthday, playing NBA 2K24, browsing news, spacial audio. Even the work stuff is pushing things like FaceTime and virtual screens. If retail consumers aren’t their demographic someone should let the marketing department know

          • Pepsi@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            You’re a retail consumer and you’re confused why all of the messaging you’re seeing is geared towards retail consumers?

        • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          nope, i think this will sellout to their core audience, the 1%s. its just funny many people think they are part of that number.

          but my point is, this isnt a mass market device. its not a new ipad or iphone… this is an imac. a niche product for their niche audience.

          even your example is hardcore niche and no where near an actual, large scale adoption

          • Pepsi@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            why would it need to be a massive immediate retail success?

            moreover, why do you seem so irritated that you might not be the target audience here?

      • Zoolander@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        How have they been “pushing these headsets for years” considering that we’re literally discussing the launch of this product?

        • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          The giant thing on my head that’s spose to help…ar/vr…

          This is unnecessary technical debt compared to what is already in place. It solves no current problem in my space.

          But hey, maybe it will work for your niche use case

          • Zoolander@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            Your initial post was “wtf is the use case for this”. The answer to that is literally anything computational that has physical limitations.

    • aluminium@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      The iPad always made 100% sense to me. The first Smartphones were fun and just joyful to use for simple Tasks. A lot of stuff was managed at a system level and Apps and games at the time were genuinely made very well and were great to play / use. Also keep in mind that at the times phones were at best 4". So getting the same experience on a much bigger screen always made sense to me.

      Its only now that people try to use these things as a laptop replacement where they fall apart. But i.m.o. that was never the point and people got gaslit by marketing to believe that using a tablet as laptop replacement is viable.