Hacker News Reader

Comment by minhduong243 | Hacker News Reader

Surprise surprise, a long-time Apple hater who got a lot of things wrong on the company and who has not worked on hardware thinks he understands the hardware more than the company. I get that everyone can be disappointed with a product, but thinking he knows more about a product as sophisticated as Vision Pro than Apple is something else. I stopped reading his stuff a long time ago and it seems nothing changed

View on HN

Can you explain what he got wrong? The post made sense to me, and I'm interested in the counterargument beyond "Apple must know best".

In this case, he is entitled to liking or disliking the experience watching the game on VP. I read that several liked the experience, but he absolutely can have a different opinion. What I am talking about here is that he implied to know more about the product than Apple, which started the project way back in 2015 and has more information than he does. We can all like or dislike a product or opine on a strategy or a state of a business, but claiming to know more about a product, esp one like VP, than the company itself, looking outside in, is too much imo.

> Can you explain what he got wrong?

If I’m understanding this correctly, he is suggesting that Apple should put their fancy camera in a strategic location at every stadium and concert hall in the country/world and then give the Vision Pro owners live access to the cameras when there is an event going on. With no production crew sitting between the camera and viewer.

I suppose that it’s impossible to prove unless they actually did it, but this sounds like it would be a monumental failure! The “immersive experience” would be fun for 10 or 20 minutes and then people would want the different angles and replays and everything else you get from having a production crew. Just wait for the first time you wish you could see a replay!

I was at the “Sammy Sosa corked bat incident” game and you know what all of us inside the ballpark saw and heard? Nothing. A play happened, the umps gathered and chatted for a couple minutes, and the game went on. People wondered where Sosa went and then we read about it in the newspaper the next day.

You think people want to pay $3500 to not be able to see better angles? To not be able to see replays? Yeah, courtside seats are amazing; that doesn’t mean they are perfect.

People pay to go to basketball games, so yes, obviously.

I don't think his point is that you shouldn't have a production crew. It's moreso two points:

- you shouldn't change perspectives very often, because that's jarring

- having more streams is preferable to having high production value, so if it costs too much you should just cut the production team.

> If I’m understanding this correctly, he is suggesting that Apple should put their fancy camera in a strategic location at every stadium and concert hall in the country/world

I don't think you understood correctly. He's talking about optimising the use of limited cameras.

> The “immersive experience” would be fun for 10 or 20 minutes and then people would want the different angles.

People pay money to attend events in person, so this doesn't appear to be true.

> You think people want to pay $3500 ...

That's about the same as flying to another country to watch the football world cup final in person. Once.

> to not be able to see better angles? To not be able to see replays?

You could watch replays on the big screens at the event. I'm sure user-selectable angles would be inevitable.

> Yeah, courtside seats are amazing; that doesn’t mean they are perfect.

Amazing sounds good enough to me!

Sometimes he gets things very right. But I think when he's not the target audience for something he struggles to understand it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com