Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Details Using Vision Pro With Certain Medical Conditions

jz0309 said:
I just look at history in technology, it’s a question of when… but you’re entitled to your opinion just as we all are
Click to expand...

Non answer. The fact is that things like batteries are not getting smaller any time soon. Neither are many other components of this system. Just because things got smaller for a large part of the 20th century does not mean the same will happen in the 21st. Physics still apply. Moore’s law is over.

This will never fit into standard eye glasses. That’s a ridiculous fantasy.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: jz0309
Surf Monkey said:
“Things get smaller sometimes” isn’t really an argument.
Click to expand...
Well you didn't even consider the thought of glasses with transparent OLED technology embedded where the processing would reside in a iPhone device you have connected via USB-C to it. After all the huge AVP has a battery cord running up to it. So yes the size of the display is quite possible given the OLED displays you see in phones just being further reduced in size/increased density.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: jz0309 and Surf Monkey
Jring21 said:
You dont have binocular vision if you need prism in your eyeglasses, and prism is rare, certainly not “most prescription”. what you are seeing out of each eye are aligned but your eyes are still not aligned with prism and you should know it, and this is why eye tracking won’t work. Dont blame your own problem on others and your lack of understanding. It’s like you need a cane to walk and try to buy a bike, and then you find it insulting when they said don’t recommend it like as if you are completely crippled. Get over it and rather educate yourself.
Click to expand...
First of all: I'm in full agreement that prism is not "most prescriptions" but I doubt a lot of people know that. I didn't know that prism was "rare" until Apple told me that--I just got my eyes checked at a small-town strip-mall chain eye place, bought glasses from them with the prescription they said I need, and I can see perfectly. They didn't say "You have a rare problem", they just mentioned that I needed prism.

Also, according to Zeiss itself 5% of all glasses prescriptions they fill have prism, which would amount to about 3% of the US population. That's uncommon, certainly, but not rare by most reasonable definitions of "rare".

Second, I didn't say I was insulted by the fact that they won't currently make inserts for me; I'm an engineer, I get technical limitations. I felt insulted by the fact that they could have either made that Zeiss page that lets you check your prescription available a day or two early and said "Get ready for your pre-order--check your prescription here!" or just said in the fine print "Prescriptions with prism or those that correct for extreme myopia are not currently supported" instead of making me get up at 5am to find out. There was no benefit to anyone, even from an advertising standpoint, from withholding that information until preorders opened.

Also, the cane analogy is exceptionally poor in this case. There are people with extreme binocular vision problems, but my glasses correct my vision to better than 20/20, while wearing them I have absolutely perfect binocular, distance, and near vision, and have no problem using non-eye-tracking VR headsets with them on. I can in fact buy Meta Quest optical inserts with prism, they just cost a bit extra.

So it's not a person who walks with a cane trying to buy a bicycle. It's a person who wears some kind of readily-available orthopedic inserts for a problem around 1 out of 30 people have and can ride a consumer or professional bicycle as well as anyone else with them trying to buy a new kind of e-bike and being told that the pedals don't support their inserts.

Which isn't to say there isn't a technical limitation involved--maybe it really isn't possible to do eye tracking with prism, period. Or, more likely, it's not possible in this version but will be at some future point when the technology improves, or when a compensation algorithm for the eye tracking mechanism is developed. Time will tell.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dmi, bloomfeld and Realityck
Pretty happy I live in Norway where we don't have medical providers.

Everyone do have a personal doctor, though.
 
On the Apple Vision Pro site it asks that you rotate your head to set fit. I suppose that's fine for a young person who easily moves their head from side to side, but being an older person who isn't quite so nimble, I was unable to get past that first phase of buying the Vision Pro. It kept asking me to look to this side or that but I couldn't twist my neck far enough around to meet its requirements.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: Surf Monkey
Realityck said:
Well you didn't even consider the thought of glasses with transparent OLED technology embedded where the processing would reside in a iPhone device you have connected via USB-C to it. After all the huge AVP has a battery cord running up to it. So yes the size of the display is quite possible give the OLED displays you see in phones just being further reduced in size/increased density.
Click to expand...

There’s no way that happens. iPhone doesn’t have the processing power or battery life and transparent screens don’t appear to be part of Apple’s plans. But those aren’t the issue. The cameras, processing, lidar emitters, speakers and so forth all would need to squeeze into glasses frames too. So no, that is never going to happen.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: jz0309
Way off-topic, but I can't resist:
jz0309 said:
I just look at history in technology, it’s a question of when… but you’re entitled to your opinion just as we all are
Click to expand...
I can accept that there are some physical limitations to the universe from which technology is not exempt, and it's possible that AR may never get to the point where it "needs" to be -- normal-looking glasses with transparent embedded screens (or projection) and eye tracking.

But yeah, after the trend of the past century, it's generally a losing proposition to bet against miniaturization or future development. It's not going to happen overnight, but it probably will eventually, and likely not that far in the future, especially given that you can already buy glasses with rudimentary projection displays today.

I remember quite clearly that when the first, barely-functional iPhone came out, I thought to myself, "Part of me doesn't want to believe this, but I expect that in the not-that-distant future a version of this thing will have more computing power than my top-of-the-line Power Mac, and some time later a supercomputer. I believe it took less than 9 years to best that day's top-of-line desktop. My phone today is competitive with the fastest computer in the world from around 30 years ago, although not from 2007 (yet).

But more specifically on the miniaturization, It's kind of mind-boggling to think that I now have a pair of earbuds that are almost exactly the same size as the ones I was using 30 years ago, except they have no cord, much better sound quality, good microphones, better noise cancellation than even existed 30 years ago, a wireless bidirectional link to a pocket-sized device sitting on the other side of the house, surreally good tracking of the position of my head, and a touch sensor, and can do all of that for several hours with the onboard batteries.

30 years ago, that wasn't just "miniaturization", that was speculative science fiction. Even most near-future science fiction 30 years ago didn't take it that far.

Never mind that I'm wearing a watch that includes a cell phone, wireless LAN, roughly-SDTV-resolution color screen, speaker, microphone, a multi-core computer with 64GB of storage and 1GB of RAM, a GPS system and compass, and throws in a blood oxygen and heart rate meter plus an EKG, and it'll run all day on a battery and is waterproof. Just the antennas on an early cell phone, GPS receiver, or wi-fi card were bigger than the entire device, and sizes of any one thing individually ranged from a brick to a suitcase 30-50 years ago.

It won't happen tomorrow, it probably won't happen for a decade or two, but barring the complete collapse of civilization, it probably will happen eventually, and well within most of our lifetimes.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Surf Monkey, jz0309 and Chuckeee
KennyJr said:
On the Apple Vision Pro site it asks that you rotate your head to set fit. I suppose that's fine for a young person who easily moves their head from side to side, but being an older person who isn't quite so nimble, I was unable to get past that first phase of buying the Vision Pro. It kept asking me to look to this side or that but I couldn't twist my neck far enough around to meet its requirements.
Click to expand...
If this was genuinely what tripped you up, just move the phone instead of your head. I just checked, and could easily do a scan of my face without moving my neck even slightly, and you don't even really have to move the phone that far up or down.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chuckeee
qCzar said:
By the title I thought this was going a different direction on how it can help certain medical conditions. I like that they're being proactive about the medical limitations.

I'm hoping by Vision 2 there are apps to help strengthen lazy eyes. Would love to fix my lazy eye without surgery, or at the very least compliment the surgery with eye exercises.
Click to expand...
Wow, I never even considered that option. My ophthalmologist sent me to an orthoptist. I would work with her for an hour staring into a device she adjusted. I never did my take home exercises she wanted me to do!
 
Soon they'll discover it accelerates gum recession and tooth decay.
1705798146333.png
 
Makosuke said:
If this was genuinely what tripped you up, just move the phone instead of your head. I just checked, and could easily do a scan of my face without moving my neck even slightly, and you don't even really have to move the phone that far up or down.
Click to expand...
Thanks! Got it! My Vision Pro will arrive about a month from now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chuckeee
Makosuke said:
Way off-topic, but I can't resist:

I can accept that there are some physical limitations to the universe from which technology is not exempt, and it's possible that AR may never get to the point where it "needs" to be -- normal-looking glasses with transparent embedded screens (or projection) and eye tracking.

But yeah, after the trend of the past century, it's generally a losing proposition to bet against miniaturization or future development. It's not going to happen overnight, but it probably will eventually, and likely not that far in the future, especially given that you can already buy glasses with rudimentary projection displays today.

I remember quite clearly that when the first, barely-functional iPhone came out, I thought to myself, "Part of me doesn't want to believe this, but I expect that in the not-that-distant future a version of this thing will have more computing power than my top-of-the-line Power Mac, and some time later a supercomputer. I believe it took less than 9 years to best that day's top-of-line desktop. My phone today is competitive with the fastest computer in the world from around 30 years ago, although not from 2007 (yet).

But more specifically on the miniaturization, It's kind of mind-boggling to think that I now have a pair of earbuds that are almost exactly the same size as the ones I was using 30 years ago, except they have no cord, much better sound quality, good microphones, better noise cancellation than even existed 30 years ago, a wireless bidirectional link to a pocket-sized device sitting on the other side of the house, surreally good tracking of the position of my head, and a touch sensor, and can do all of that for several hours with the onboard batteries.

30 years ago, that wasn't just "miniaturization", that was speculative science fiction. Even most near-future science fiction 30 years ago didn't take it that far.

Never mind that I'm wearing a watch that includes a cell phone, wireless LAN, roughly-SDTV-resolution color screen, speaker, microphone, a multi-core computer with 64GB of storage and 1GB of RAM, a GPS system and compass, and throws in a blood oxygen and heart rate meter plus an EKG, and it'll run all day on a battery and is waterproof. Just the antennas on an early cell phone, GPS receiver, or wi-fi card were bigger than the entire device, and sizes of any one thing individually ranged from a brick to a suitcase 30-50 years ago.

It won't happen tomorrow, it probably won't happen for a decade or two, but barring the complete collapse of civilization, it probably will happen eventually, and well within most of our lifetimes.
Click to expand...

The trend for smaller and smaller miniaturization has slowed down dramatically over the last 20 or so years. Moore’s law has basically reached its conclusion as well. So no, the events of the last century do not necessarily indicate that things will just keep getting smaller and smaller. There’s a lower limit and it’s a mistake to imagine that the dramatically accelerated pace of technological advancement seen since the dawn of the Information Age will continue apace forever. It won’t and it isn’t.
 
To wit:

time.com

4 Charts That Show Why AI Progress Is Unlikely to Slow Down

Three major inputs are the key to understanding how AI will likely progress
time.com time.com

www.wsj.com

Essay | Tech Progress Is Slowing Down

Despite utopian hopes, the exponential growth of computer technology can’t be replicated in other key areas.
www.wsj.com www.wsj.com

www.marketplace.org

Disruptive advancements in science are slowing, new report shows

Across the board, we’re seeing less big scientific breakthroughs. So what’s going on?
www.marketplace.org www.marketplace.org

Why the U.S. Innovation Ecosystem Is Slowing Down

The data suggests that American innovation is sputtering: Productivity growth in the United States, which is powered by innovation, has been decelerating. Total factor productivity grew substantially in the middle of the 20th century, but started slowing in 1970. This slow growth continues...
hbr.org hbr.org

Impact of Micro-/Nano-Electronics, Miniaturization Limit, and Technology Development for the Next 10 Years and after | Newswise

Electronics started at the beginning of the 20th century with the invention of vacuum tubes. It brought about modern technologies such as telecommunication, broadcast (radio/TV), computer, etc., and changed our society revolutionarily. Then, vacuum tubes were gradually replaced by semiconductor...
www.newswise.com www.newswise.com

Etc.
 
Surf Monkey said:
The trend for smaller and smaller miniaturization has slowed down dramatically over the last 20 or so years. Moore’s law has basically reached its conclusion as well. So no, the events of the last century do not necessarily indicate that things will just keep getting smaller and smaller. There’s a lower limit and it’s a mistake to imagine that the dramatically accelerated pace of technological advancement seen since the dawn of the Information Age will continue apace forever. It won’t and it isn’t.
Click to expand...
Our Apple devices have billions and billions of transistors. When I interviewed at Fairchild R&D in the mid 1960s the engineer interviewing me said, See my tie tack (a little 1/2 inch disc holding his tie in place), that's a silicon wafer; and each of those little squares on there is an integrated circuit; and each of those integrated circuits has 13 transistors. I was blown away - having come from a world of discrete transistors and vacuum tubes. Gordon Moore (Moore's law) was our head of R&D .. Andy Grove was my department head. Over the years since - I've said, over and over again, ICs just can't get any denser, and over and over again they just keep getting denser and denser (more and more transistors per unit area/volume). As it stands now, I see no end in sight. Anyhow, over time I left Fairchild to join Extrion with Peter Rose Who's Ion Implanters became the new method for doping semiconductors. Gordon Moore along with Robert Noyce went on to found Intel while Andy Grove went on to become Intel's next CEO .. Sorry for boring you folks with this trivial bit of nostalgia, I'll try to keep a lid on it in the future.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: bloomfeld, phenste, Chuckeee and 1 other person
pretty sure this document literally just exists to free Apple from liability on this front—same way every single video game ever has a warning about consulting a doctor before playing if you experience seizures. yall are funny in these comment threads 😆
 
I tried ordering a Vision Pro but Zeiss wouldn't approve my prescription because of inclusion of low level prism (they require you to upload your prescription). I explained that I can operate perfectly fine without Prism but still Zeiss said no. Hopefully Zeiss will improve their technology for prism inclusion. It's a shame Apple didn't select a more capable optics source.

Next time I decide (if I decide) to give it another try, assuming Zeiss doesn't improve their optics technology, I'll simply ask my optometrist to not include the prism part of the prescription.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back