That’s awesome. Hope you both enjoy this new device! It would be really cool if two people wearing AVPs have digital faces instead of headsets, but I guess that could be weird.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The EyeSight thread (MERGED)
- Thread starter tomtad
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well I’m not surprised people fall asleep using Quest Pro…
How does the Eyesight help with this? How would you know if someone wearing a VP is looking at you, or at an app window floating in front of your face?
People keep thinking that transparent displays are the way to solving that issue - not in a headset of this basic form factor. Maybe in AR Glasses that are rumored as a separate upcoming product line and serve a different purpose.
If the displays were transparent in the AVP, you'd still have only tiny windows through the headset to see the eyes. There's the PCB, carrier material, fans and so on. Also, passthrough would still have to happen actively with cameras and computation since the FOV through the actual displays into the environment is just too small.
I would tend to disagree (but, yes I have preordered one, so this may be biased). Ever try to talk to someone wearing an Oculus…they could be looking/doing anything. To not need to take it off every time a conversation develops will be so much more natural, especially for teams in a room corroborating on something. It will also make people more aware of body language around the wearer.
That is literally what EyeSight is…you can tell when they are looking at you. It is mirror reflective if they are immersed in an app or movie.
No, removing it would be much more natural. Creating a fake representation of a person's eyes is just so not an acceptable stand-in for that courtesy. But count me among those who get bent out of shape when someone can't stop looking at their phone when having a conversation. It's just rude, and speaks volumes about the person who prioritizes fiddling with their Distraction Device over a brief, focused interaction.
But, of course, IMO and all that. Ironically, as a strong introvert, I would just as soon not have the interaction to begin with, so you'd think I'd love the idea of virtual environments and being spared from "real" eye-contact. But there's something about technology inserting, and in this case asserting, itself in a one-to-one exchange that I find strongly off-putting.
Last edited:
Good news you can just put it to full immersive mode then and people will plainly see you’re not available 🤷♂️
What if the other person is wearing a VR/AR headset to help them see because they're blind or have low vision? That is starting to become a thing. Are you going to tell a random person asking you for help to take it off just because you don't like it? You don't know what their deal is or why they're wearing it.
Who knows if the Vision Pro will help in that capacity, but if it does, the EyeSight feature is a whole lot better than the ones used below.
www.forbes.com
visionbuddy.com
Imagine telling a deaf person to take those things off their ears because you don't like them (and not knowing they were helping him hear). In either case, who's the rude person now?
Who knows if the Vision Pro will help in that capacity, but if it does, the EyeSight feature is a whole lot better than the ones used below.
How VR Is Helping Visually Impaired Patients Regain Close To Normal Levels Of Sight
A London-based startup has developed a wearable that enables visually impaired people to see up close and at a distance clearly.
www.forbes.com
How Virtual Reality (VR) headsets help visually impaired people regain vision and transform the way they see the world
The world we live in has thrown us millions of possibilities and for few people to be devoid of some is a truly heartbreaking experience.
Imagine telling a deaf person to take those things off their ears because you don't like them (and not knowing they were helping him hear). In either case, who's the rude person now?
Maybe in the future, but I don't think so. First - the main cost of eye sight is the eye tracking setup - the external display is likely pretty crappy (technically) because it just needs to display either a glowy thing or eyes. Being lenticular just means the horizontal resolution of the screen is divided into how many angles it supports, as it is likely just a lenticular filter applied to a normal rectangular display. And since eye tracking is critical, it will never be removed, so then eyesight is essentially just the cost of the external screen.
Then there is the usage - Apple wants use of the Vision Pro to become normalized, and not just a bedroom gaming headset like everything else on the market. Currently, most headsets block you off from the world around you. And for the ones that do let you see things around you - the people around you have no idea if you are reaching towards them or towards a floating fishing pole in a VR game. EyeSight solves this, and it means that for small interactions, leaving the headset on could become normalized, and make it much more acceptable for use in an office. Personally I think this will still be weird, but it is a small step to try and make it more usable.
It is actually exactly opposite to a person staring at their phone while talking to you. In that scenario, by definition, the person is staring at their phone, not you. Their attention is on their phone.
With the Vision Pro, if their virtual eyes are on the front screen staring at you it means they are staring at you, not staring at Vision Pro content. Their attention is on you. If they were staring at Vision Pro content their eyes wouldn’t be showing on the front screen.
It’s very annoying when a person is staring at their phone while in conversation, but just like others have said here, we don’t know what everyone’s situation is. Maybe the person on their phone is doing something they deem important.
The same can apply to the AVP.
A lot of us see it as a toy, but not everyone will use it to only play games and have fun. Maybe people will use it in productive ways and that means that sometimes they’re busy when they’re using it. But even if they are using it to watch a show or movie, they might be engrossed in that media.
I’m very curious about how many AVP-wearers will be wearing it in public spaces. I would think that it won’t go mainstream in that way for a long time, so we probably have time to invent social etiquette and prepare for how conversations will look while one is wearing it.
The same can apply to the AVP.
A lot of us see it as a toy, but not everyone will use it to only play games and have fun. Maybe people will use it in productive ways and that means that sometimes they’re busy when they’re using it. But even if they are using it to watch a show or movie, they might be engrossed in that media.
I’m very curious about how many AVP-wearers will be wearing it in public spaces. I would think that it won’t go mainstream in that way for a long time, so we probably have time to invent social etiquette and prepare for how conversations will look while one is wearing it.
Their eyes would be partially shown if the user is using the pass through and is not fully immersed. There will be a visual on EyeSight that depicts the person viewing content but still able to see you. There’s like three EyeSight modes I think.
Ah cool! Yeah, we’re all slightly at a disadvantage in this thread that none of us have actually used the VP yet 😄
But nevertheless, my point stands. EyeSight is designed specifically to prevent the ‘rude’ scenario of not knowing when someone is paying attention to you that some people are complaining about. It is designed to prevent the equivalent of someone staring at their phone when talking to you. So it is not the same as that, it is the opposite of that.
From what I understand, if the user is looking at a window then Eyesight will not show their eyes but some sort of graphic.
Edit- or as another user pointed out it shows their eyes with a “reflection” of whatever they’re viewing. In either case you should able to see where their attention is/isn’t.
Last edited:
It's how you'd see each other if you FaceTime each other, so I guess that feature could work in person for multiple AVP wearers. Not sure Apple's documented such, so we'll have to wait and see...
But the non-wearer doesn’t know if transparency mode is on, off, or if audio is playing at all. So the equivalent to Eyesight would be if the AirPods had different color lights to let you know if audio was off/on and transparency mode was off/on. (Since ear holes can’t change direction of what they’re listening to or show visual cues for communication, this could be done with something simple like lights instead of video passthrough of ear holes 😆)
I also think it’s off putting to look at one’s phone in a face to face conversation—of any length or seriousness—unless it’s for good reason, which I can’t know so I try to give benefit of the doubt. But if I happen to see Instagram on their screen, my respect goes down. Glancing at a notification is tolerable but not great either. I usually prefer to try to remember to look later.
But to me Eyesight is different because you can see their eyes are on you. So it’s about attention, not about wearing something. It would be like someone wearing lightly tinted sunglasses—not appropriate for all situations, but fine in many.
