The $3500 price tag and closed ecosystem is self-sabotaging, so MZ doesn't need to be worried at all. Carmack's vision was a cheap device that could hit mass market, and that's where the real game still is. Also, games.
Give it a couple iterations and you'll have something that costs $2k many will purchase in lieue of another Macbook. It will be lighter/more compact, with somewhat palatable battery life. There have been reports Apple is also working on a simpler version, so there could be an Air in a few years that starts just north of $1k.
If this platform is successful, that is. I have my doubts everyone will want to strap a device to their head a large chunk of the day, every day, no matter how incredible.
> Meta's product is the metaverse. Apple's product is this device bolstered by their ecosystem.
One way or another, that's the bet here.
1) Apple didn't mention the metaverse at all (as far as I can remember)
2) The user experience looked great, without those moments that would make someone who was neutral think "Err, ... that's a bit .... creepy"
- The isolation aspects of consuming TV/movies (Mark has a point here IMO)
- The whole taking 3d images/videos of your children with a headset on
- The uncanny valley Facetime avatars
- The external screen that gives a window to your eyes in AR mode
I was specifically speaking about the interface, which when meta introduced theirs had all these weird things "Why has nobody got legs? Why does it look like absolute arse? etc". It didn't have those. It looked slick, like you would expect from Apple.
That’s a strong statement. Same thing could’ve been said about the iPad and IMHO that would be a more reasonable claim. There isn’t any evidence still that you can do any work comfortably l in this thing regardless of the price point
wish I was kidding..
They really are not fundamentally different. Apple can bring to bear a lot more polish and synergy with the rest of their ecosystem but it's only as different as iOS and Android.
Being a grumpy naysayer is just as removed from reality as being an unreasonable Apple cultist. Thankfully we all have a choice when engaging our wallets.
Not a single person on this planet is forced to buy an Apple product but nonetheless, the flame wars keep raging since the dawn of the Internet.
It IS a VR and AR device. AKA mixed reality. The fact that they are promoting lots of floating 2d windows doesn't make that a new category of product. Other people have been doing that and calling it something like mixed reality.
It's just that people don't know about things like the Varjo that are ultra-high end and in a similar price bracket or category and so they decide to just pretend it was an entirely new thing.
If I was Apple I could improve my sex life just by telling Apple fans that instead of a penis I had "tremendous tensiler" or something.
I don’t think anyone is claiming that MR is new and that Apple is first to the market. People are claiming they appear to be the first to do it close enough to “right” to make it a compelling device.
- 2x OLED screens
- 2x lidar camera
- 2x truedepth camera module
- 2x4=8 RGB cameras with very high spec
- 2x A15 chip
- 2x accelerometer, gyroscope, magnetometer, barometer, proxmity, ambient sensors
- 2x gps, wifi, bluetooth, nfc, uwb, 3g/4g/5g
- 2x flash led
- 2x batteries
- 2x stereo speakers
- 2x3=6 microphones
They already have crazy profit margin on iphones. I think if they would price it at $2500 this would make more sense.
If they would allow to run full MacOS on this thing and I could use it just as Mac Mini replacement and attach physical external display via hdmi out then I could easier stomach $3500 price.
Not quite the same ballpark, is it? iPhone 14 Pro resolution is 2556×1179 at 460ppi. Vision Pro is believed to have 3800x3000 at 3400ppi. That's almost an order of magnitude improvement in density over the iPhone screens (and 3x the density of the Quest Pro or the PSVR2.)
So then take the price of ipad pro 11. Even cheaper than iphone 14 pro and has most of those components I mentioned above (excluding 3g/4g/5g). 2x ipad pro 11 == 2x $800 = $1600. Does it really cost apple ~$1000 or even $500 per such 3400ppi screen to justify such price?
And regarding screen resolution very old Sony Experia 1 (from 2019) had 4k resolution (1644 x 3840 pixels at 650dpi):
I can easily imagine that for a relatively new technology with a ppi much higher than anything commercially available (as far as I can find through searching) that they are getting on for $1k each at the moment, yeah.
I am mildly optimistic, even the initial Vision Pro won't be much more expensive than a well-spec'ed MacBook Air plus 5k display. So at least I think Vision is attractive to pro Mac users as a very portable workstation with a lot off screen estate.
Even if IDE is there then how about Python and Nodejs modules in such restricted environment.
I Hope Meta will switch to Linus and Valve will stick with Linux where you can run any legacy software currently available including many Pro tools.
This is just slightly better than someone connecting ipad to external monitor and logging with remote desktop to cloud computer and pretending ipad is good for software development.