Hacker News Reader

Comment by wouldbecouldbe | Hacker News Reader

I’ve been trying to figure out if Vision Pro suffers the same fate as other AR glasses that it can’t be used in the sun, Anyone knows?

View on HN

I was curious if the micro led display could withstand more heat than the Quest headsets but I can't find anyone testing (accidentally or otherwise) on an actual device.

As far as tracking goes, the AVP has downward facing cameras and a lidar system that presumably works as well in the sun as their phone lidars.

You can use it in the sun as it is using video passthrough not optical AR like the hololens.

question is whether tracking works - the sun and its pesky infrared rays overpowers any structured light projections (appears as noise)

It's not AR glasses. It's VR with lots of cameras.

You're describing an approach to implementing AR.

Simple test: can you get a drink out of the fridge while wearing the headset?

If the answer is yes, it's AR.

The definitions of these terms are certainly not fixed or universally agreed-upon, but on the spectrum from VR to MR to AR, the Vision Pro is definitely not at the AR end of things, and is very much not the class of device that the term "AR glasses" refers to.

The problems that "AR glasses" have with operating outside in full daylight are inherent to a class of devices that does not include the Vision Pro. To the extent that the Vision Pro works better outdoors than whatever "AR glasses" OP had in mind, it's because the Vision Pro is a fundamentally different kind of device with wildly different tradeoffs and design goals.

So to summarize: unlike other AR glasses, it isn't unusable in sunlight, because it uses cameras to provide augmented reality, rather than something else.

Got it.

Why "other" AR glasses?

AVP is not glasses. It's a headset.

Headsets and glasses are two entirely different product categories.

Because a refusal to understand what someone means when it's obvious, doesn't (as the delusion would have it) make that person look intelligent or win them imaginary internet points. It's just annoying.

You are correcting his terminology using a categorization (AR, MR, VR, XR, etc) which is not standardized or even commonly used. So what's the point of correcting?

The simplest common-use definitions are:

* Augmented: combines synthetic and real-world imagery

* Virtual: fully-synthetic imagery

AVP can do both.

Doing both is called mixed reality. The only caveat is you see reality through a screen and not normal gasses. The terminology is very common in the XR industry. https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/article/beyond...

No. Please see the definitions. You’ll find links to them all under XR since XR covers them all: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_reality

AVP is, by all definitions, XR, VR, AR, and mixed reality.

AR with cameras and screens is an implementation detail, with the definition being realtime. You can easily play ping pong with an AVP on.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com