Developers already not interested

[dante_mr]

I want to dive into AR or VR to experiment, but (1) I have glasses and (2) I've heard too many people talk about vomiting after playing some games. So I figure I can wait it out until I try it without buying first.

1) having glasses and trying AR/VR is the worst. Thankfully I can use contacts but it sucks otherwise. Glad Apple is doing magnetic lenses.

For 2) for some reason this actually has gotten worse for me on my Quest 2. And it absolutely is a problem for some games. Especially games that don't use any teleport or blink mechanics. The mismatch between what your eyes see and what you actually experience can lead to nausea for some people (exact same reason behind sea sickness).

And what sucks the most is that the nausea can last for hours after you remove the headset. But this is entirely individual and depends on the app.

But it's why I just stick to a select amount of games I know don't make me nauseous like Startenders or Cosmonious High. Both of which I hope come to Vision Pro with better graphics.

 

[Basic75]

Why is it okay to have sex videos on your phone but the same thing would be considered taboo on a headset?

Sure, some people watching porn on a Vision Pro will not ruffle any feathers, but consider this. Phones are used for many things and watching porn is just one of them. And when you hear "smartphone" you don't automatically or necessarily think of porn, I hope, and that's where it could become a problem for the headset. If mainstream opinion starts equating Vision Pro with porn because that's the killer application everybody is talking about then Apple won't be happy.

 

[Jensend]

For me this product reminds me of the HomePod in many ways. Apple enter the segment several years late and release a product much more expensive than the competition who have significant market share. Realistically, do many people here think a £3500 AR headset computer is going to appeal to a mass consumer audience? Headsets are niche to begin with, and Apple are pricing themselves at the very high end of this niche. It is no wonder there are articles suggesting developers are reluctant to commit at this point.

Speakers are a very mature product category. They pretty much sound the same they did a few decades ago, and people who really care enough about sound quality to purchase expensive speakers probably already have expensive speakers. So then the main value add is the voice assistant, but there’s not all that much to differentiate there either. I can just as easily ask other smart speakers to tell me the weather, set an alarm, or play a song. I use the same voice command, just with a different wake word.

The one speaker area that there was some room for growth recently was wireless earbuds, and Apple was very successful there.

The VR/AR category has a ton of room for major and meaningful technological growth and innovation, and will for several decades. And this is especially true for all-in-one devices that run their own OS. Much of the reason VR is niche is because it isn’t good enough.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

Speakers are a very mature product category. They pretty much sound the same they did a few decades ago, and people who really care enough about sound quality to purchase expensive speakers probably already have expensive speakers. So then the main value add is the voice assistant, but there’s not all that much to differentiate there either. I can just as easily ask other smart speakers to tell me the weather, set an alarm, or play a song. I use the same voice command, just with a different wake word.

The HomePod had perhaps the best sound quality for a smart assistant speaker device, but we all know from our use of Apple products that Siri is appallingly bad compared to Amazon and Google’s equivalents and that also played against them I think, along with overpriced HomeKit compatible products.

The VR/AR category has a ton of room for major and meaningful technological growth and innovation, and will for several decades. And this is especially true for all-in-one devices that run their own OS. Much of the reason VR is niche is because it isn’t good enough.

Another thing to consider that the reason VR is niche is the reluctance of some people not to want to wear it on their head for long. They are also solo devices too of course.

 

[Piggie]

Sure, some people watching porn on a Vision Pro will not ruffle any feathers, but consider this. Phones are used for many things and watching porn is just one of them. And when you hear "smartphone" you don't automatically or necessarily think of porn, I hope, and that's where it could become a problem for the headset. If mainstream opinion starts equating Vision Pro with porn because that's the killer application everybody is talking about then Apple won't be happy.

Personally it's not going to happen.
Will you be able to watch adult material in a floating 2D window, or even a cinema sizes virtual floating screen?
Probably yes, as that's no different to streaming on a current Apple product.
However Apple will be in FULL LOCK DOWN CONTROL of any apps which use the AR/VR experience to create custom 3D content, and there's no way they are going to allow adult content onto their "Spatial Computing Store"
Having 3D Virtual adult AI characters as if they were standing in front of you in your home environment is not going to get past Apple so it's not going to happen.

 

[dante_mr]

Personally it's not going to happen.
Will you be able to watch adult material in a floating 2D window, or even a cinema sizes virtual floating screen?
Probably yes, as that's no different to streaming on a current Apple product.
However Apple will be in FULL LOCK DOWN CONTROL of any apps which use the AR/VR experience to create custom 3D content, and there's no way they are going to allow adult content onto their "Spatial Computing Store"
Having 3D Virtual adult AI characters as if they were standing in front of you in your home environment is not going to get past Apple so it's not going to happen.

Agreed on Apple not allowing pornographic apps in the App Store. Much like they already don’t on iOS.

However, people will easily find workarounds. Most notably via Safari and WebXR, which I believe is confirmed to be supported in the documentation.

Might limit what kind of pornographic VR content can be created but PrawnHub VR (which I believe already exists) should work out of the box.

Edit: changed ******* to PrawnHub

 

[Jensend]

The HomePod had perhaps the best sound quality for a smart assistant speaker device

I don't know how important that is to most people... but I'm not very picky with audio. I use the speakers built into my OLED TV, I often listen to music just from my MacBook or iPad speakers. I have $80 headphones if I want to listen privately. I do find that the speakers in the M1 MacBook Air sound muffled, though.

But with VR, the difference between 1.8k pixels square and 3.4k square may change the device from being unusable to being usable, for things like browsing websites. Expanding the FOV and the Dynamic Range will be very helpful, when that time comes. They would benefit from extremely high refresh rates, so you can get clear motion with no strobing. They will eventually have focus that adjusts dynamically based on what you are looking at.

Another thing to consider that the reason VR is niche is the reluctance of some people not to want to wear it on their head for long. They are also solo devices too of course.

Well, that partially falls under the "not good enough" category. If they could get it down close to the size of wraparound sunglasses, people would be willing to wear it for longer, at least on average (some people argue that 3D cinema/TV failed because of the requirement to wear even small lightweight glasses, but I don't buy it).

Apple mostly makes products for use by one person.
I think there are some very interesting use cases for shared virtual spaces, but Apple probably doesn't want to highlight that right now, since that would require multiple copies of a very expensive product to work.
You could have a mode for apps that makes them shared, so people in the same room could see things in the same physical place, like a TV, whiteboard, or a board game.
And you can have shared apps for people who aren't in the same room as you, of course.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

I don't know how important that is to most people... but I'm not very picky with audio. I use the speakers built into my OLED TV, I often listen to music just from my MacBook or iPad speakers. I have $80 headphones if I want to listen privately. I do find that the speakers in the M1 MacBook Air sound muffled, though.

But with VR, the difference between 1.8k pixels square and 3.4k square may change the device from being unusable to being usable, for things like browsing websites. Expanding the FOV and the Dynamic Range will be very helpful, when that time comes. They would benefit from extremely high refresh rates, so you can get clear motion with no strobing. They will eventually have focus that adjusts dynamically based on what you are looking at.

I’m not bothered my audio quality as long as it’s good enough. I have an Amazon echo in my kitchen which is plenty good enough for listening to the radio and a bit of music when cooking. It was £55 as opposed to £349 when the HomePod first came out so was a no brainer at the time.

Not overly bothered by picture quality either, in fact I downgraded my Netflix subscription as the standard quality was good enough. It’s surprising how many people are like me I think.

Well, that partially falls under the "not good enough" category. If they could get it down close to the size of wraparound sunglasses, people would be willing to wear it for longer, at least on average (some people argue that 3D cinema/TV failed because of the requirement to wear even small lightweight glasses, but I don't buy it).

Apple mostly makes products for use by one person.
I think there are some very interesting use cases for shared virtual spaces, but Apple probably doesn't want to highlight that right now, since that would require multiple copies of a very expensive product to work.
You could have a mode for apps that makes them shared, so people in the same room could see things in the same physical place, like a TV, whiteboard, or a board game.
And you can have shared apps for people who aren't in the same room as you, of course.

If I’d was the size of a pair of sunglasses and didn’t mess people hair up and all packaged into a £500 price tag, I could see it being a more mainstream device. Highly doubt that will ever happen though. I wouldn’t wear any device that close to my eyes for more than half an hour in any case. I appreciate it’s probably not meant for everyone and will have select use cases.

 

[Surfsalot]

Must have a dodgy tv to be happy with Netflix standard potatoe picture.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

Must have a dodgy tv to be happy with Netflix standard potatoe picture.

Or I’m not bothered as previously mentioned.

 

[vladi]

Must have a dodgy tv to be happy with Netflix standard potatoe picture.

I say it's either UHD-BD or go home.

 

[macfacts]

Must have a dodgy tv to be happy with Netflix standard potatoe picture.

I'm happy with telesync or Telecine or camera, old school bootleg quality.

 

[Surfsalot]

I'm happy with telesync or Telecine or camera, old school bootleg quality.

Bit late to the party 😀

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

Can't beat a bit of 'potato quality' Netflix content.

 

[unrigestered]

DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS!!!

 

[Kierkegaarden]

DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS!!!

 

[macfacts]

The thing is, small devs are not well equipped to deal with the demands of AR and VR. It will be heavy on 3D maths, which is a specialised discipline

That Apple's job to provide useful APIs that does the heavy work.