B
yeah Apple should really step up the game here.
This isn't a Quest competitor, though... it's more of a competitor for Meta's upcoming super-premium Project Cambria headset (which is expected to carry a $1k+ price).
An 8k TV is roughly 8000*4000 pixels. This headset will likely have two 4000*4000 screens, at best.
Unlike “3D” cinema/TV, VR isn’t just a stereoscopic image. It changes the image based on your head position, and will soon be changing the image based on your precise pupil position, as most headsets will soon have eye tracking. VR shows you things based on your natural perspective, not just the perspective of camera lenses that may not match your natural perspective.
no, just 3-DOF. All that does is break my brain.
That's one of the things that bother me conceptually, my eyes don't track together, but I may be looking out of either one. (and the other one turns in.) When I'm looking left, I look out of my right eye, when I'm looking right, I look out of my left eye. My eyes can't turn outward. I just don't see them doing any compensation for that, so they wouldn't work. Strabismus would have the same tracking problem as well.
That part I'm actually looking forward too, as long as it would be a smaller package. Think of it as autofocus glasses. That would be VERY cool and useful.
Yeah, 3-DOF VR sucks, but thankfully it’s pretty much dead.
The eye tracking will track your pupils individually, so the images it gives you should look natural to you. I really don’t understand why they’d need to do any special compensation. It will simply put the virtual cameras in the 3D scene at the precise location of your real pupils, and feed the same two images to your two eyes that you’d see in an equivalent real world scene.
The $2K price point is too low in my opinion. No it won’t have “traction” among the lower socio-economic classes and the uneducated. this is not another low end device.
Same here. Such technology in my eyes promotes disconnecting from in-person social life.
$2K is way UNDER priced. Microsoft’s HoloLens is $3500. ( The DoD has a $20 Billion dollar contract with MS for development) — this is not a product for the masses. The masses don’t matter. they have Meta/Oculus and other sub $1000 devices for their uses.
Why are you “surprised”? Apple consumers are not smarter than others. There are many embittered anti-technology Apple consumers. In recent weeks I have read on forms that Apple is “Greedy”, “Racist” “Elitist” and that Apple “doesn’t know what it’s doing”. In the Mixed reality space. The good news is those who don’t “comprehend the potential” of this technology are irrelevant. And that is as it should be.
That would be a problem with my vision as well. Strabismus is very similar. One of my eyes is turned in all the time. And here's the tricky part, depending on which way I'm looking, I may be seeing through the turned in eye, or the one that's not turned in. I do it all automatically, and most of the time I don't even notice which eye I'm looking through.
Increasing social connectivity is actually one of the coolest use cases I can think of for the eventual AR device. Right now, it's generally weird to engage with strangers in public to the point that it's difficult to make new friends if you're new to an area. It would be super cool if there were a meta reality that allowed people to signal that it was cool to interact with them. There would even be some AR interactions that encourage conversations. If the product is successful, it will also enable cool interactions like handing people your contact information and their device automatically saving it and associating it with your face for the next time you interact. It could even parse conversations to give you reminders about things you said you would do. None of this is beyond the capability of AI software right now and Apple has already implemented most of the fundamental technologies in HomeKit person detection, airdrop, live subject detection and gesture tracking for Apple Watch.
VR is closer to real life 3D than it is to 3D movies. If you don't get double vision in real life, there is no reason you should get double vision while using a VR headset. There may be some other properties of the optics that may trigger the double vision, such as limited field of view, but that should be improved as the technology matures.
Cheaper and uniform hardware that just works without the need to set it up, customize it or make sure everything is compatible.
This is not an mass consumer product. The crowd always claps when someone wants a lower price. I want to see a more expensive product. Apple is not in the business of providing tech for the poor.
A decade from now, when many professional positions, education, medicine and sports efforts are enhanced or use mixed reality tools you’ll be outside looking in. The Pentagon has spent Billions on the Metaverse in recent years. Few know about it, because most Americans know little of things military. (They surely don’t serve) Other sectors of the economy are also eagerly looking at the space and it’s potential. The gamers and entertainment make all the noise. But there will be enormous impact across the economy. And some of that impact will be ugly. It’s not a utopia. And it will be abused by some (many?). No matter. Those who turn their back on this fast emerging tech do so at their peril.
that’s a ridiculous idea. Not everyone wants uniformity. The beauty of the present is personalization. My way may not be your way.
Apple sell to the mass consumer market and believe it or not but low earners do buy their tech. There’s a reason why iPhones are in the hands or multiple demographics in our society.
