The EyeSight thread (MERGED)

[kkee]

I believe it is commendable to acknowledge Apple's efforts in humanizing a machine. An integral aspect of this experience lies in enabling others to perceive your eyes, rather than solely relying on the presence of three dots lenses or blinking lights, which is morr unsettling.

 

[Crow_Servo]

These are films with situations that are completely controlled and manipulated to make sure the audience knows what the character is feeling and thinking. It’s not real life where miscommunication is rampant.

Plus, we knew that V didn’t have apps in his mask, and as far as we knew Geordi was always paying attention to those around him too. It’s not like we were wondering if Geordi was watching TV in his visor while Picard was talking to him.

 

[Crow_Servo]

I believe it is commendable to acknowledge Apple's efforts in humanizing a machine. An integral aspect of this experience lies in enabling others to perceive your eyes, rather than solely relying on the presence of three dots lenses or blinking lights, which is morr unsettling.

Exactly. If Apple just had lights, people would complain that they now have to know what each light means during a conversation. With eyes, it’s much more obvious.

 

[- rob -]

Exactly.

Look, you can say that Apple’s attempt to make the Vision Pro somewhat sociable by simulating eye contact is over-engineered, but it’s got to be better than some kind of “I’m in AR mode and can see you” status light. Unless you bump into another person on the street who happens to own the same headset, no-one is going to actually pick up on that. Whereas humans have evolved to instantly spot and understand eye contact, so I think trying to simulate what people already do to show they are paying attention isn’t a bad idea and at least worth a try.

Maybe it won’t work in reality, but I suspect Apple have paid a vast number of human body language experts and academic specialists in this stuff to advise and consult. They’re probably at least making a somewhat educated guess about whether it’ll work before they spent so much money on developing it.

Apple made a big deal about how much it had studied timekeeping in its design of Apple Watch.

They did not discuss their study of eyes, eye contact and connection in the VP announcement. (Unless I’m forgetting something)

A great deal of effort had to go into studying western and global cultural expectations around eye visibility and eye contact in human interaction.

Making considerations like this and a willingness to build handling into products is part of Apple’s design culture.

They do this with accessibility and privacy as well and it’s very obviously what sets Apple and its products apart from every other company.

An integral aspect of this experience lies in enabling others to perceive your eyes, rather than solely relying on the presence of three dots lenses or blinking lights, which is morr unsettling.

Exactly. If Apple just had lights, people would complain that they now have to know what each light means during a conversation. With eyes, it’s much more obvious.

Apple is already uses single solid colored dots to indicate recording orange for audio in the dynamic island while dictating text for example or green when you have the camera going in selfie mode.

These colored shapes in the existing apple design language indicate some form of active recording or monitoring, with the intent of influencing the ovbserver’s behavior.

This is definitely not what they’re trying to communicate with isight. So such indicators were probably ruled out early on.

 

[Harvey Zoltan]

The eyesight effect looks fairly subtle to me on the website but maybe it’s a different thing in the real world. It will all be out there on Friday, there is going to be a lot to take in.

 

[vantelimus]

This is what most of the journalists said last week when they were shown it and ....

I would take it with a grain of salt. I noticed a bit of an echo chamber on criticisms. It seemed many journalists

…or so you think

Now that's creepy!

 

[vantelimus]

If you need to interact with someone in any way more meaningful then yelling across the room, then the headset gets pulled up to your forehead. Just like how you would look up from your computer or lower your phone for a moment. It’s extremely disrespectful to do otherwise.

Honestly, this sounds some late 19th century early 20th century prescriptive etiquette. If you think it is disrespectful, then you either take offense at the silliest of things or you presume the right to dictate others' behavior. Neither of those is a strategy for success in the 21st century.

 

[vantelimus]

I actually purposely have conversations while wearing my sunglasses and close my eyes during. The conversations go extremely well.

This is a common trait for people with personalities of MBTI type INTP. Eye contact can be uncomfortable and distracting. To insist that everyone adhere to a 19th-century prescriptive etiquette handbook is to demonstrate insensitivity and ignorance of neurodiversity. We still have a long way to go to eliminate ableist bigotry.

 

[jaw04005]

It has "Digital Touch" written all over it for me. I expect they'll dump it in the next revision to save money. Enjoy it while it lasts.

 

[jaw04005]

It's so funny to read these comments about nickel and diming the design down to shave $500 or whatever people think they would "save" off the price. Do you all realize you're talking about Apple? When have you known them to cut corners this way? Just wait and buy a Samsung or whatever copycat design in a year or two.

Apple cuts costs all the time. Why do you think the base storage tiers for current products are so low? Or the fact that they don't ship chargers with most of their products? Or go back 15 years and why you had to pay for a Combo drive, an AirPort Card or even Bluetooth? Don't get me started on how they use to ship the smallest amount of memory possible on their machines.

It saved Apple a few bucks here and there.

 

[CookItOff]

This is a common trait for people with personalities of MBTI type INTP. Eye contact can be uncomfortable and distracting. To insist that everyone adhere to a 19th-century prescriptive etiquette handbook is to demonstrate insensitivity and ignorance of neurodiversity. We still have a long way to go to eliminate ableist bigotry.

I was more joking that I don't have to look at their ugly face (joke again)
I hope I wasn't making light of something serious and my apologies if so.
That makes sense knowing that some people are extremely uncomfortable making eye contact.

 

[Jensend]

Apple cuts costs all the time. Why do you think the base storage tiers for current products are so low?

So they can get significantly more money out of people who can afford to pay more, but with very little increased cost.
Apple would make more profit on a 1TB model for $3550 than they make on the 256gb for $3500.
The core experience is identical on the 256gb and 1tb models, at least initially, so the people who can only afford the lower cost don't feel they are missing out, but those who can will shell out hundreds extra "just in case"

 

[WilliamG]

I hope not. It allows you to be more interactive with the people physically around you when you’re separated by this enclosed device on your face.

People are suggesting that a future version should omit this aspect. I don’t see it as a “pro” feature that remains exclusive only to the premium edition. I see it as a part of the outward identity of the Apple Vision device, like the iPhone had the notch and now Dynamic Island.

It’ll very likely evolve and Apple could possibly find a simpler way to add it to a lower cost version, but I don’t see it being removed entirely.

FaceID and the Dynamic Island are problems to be solved. Nobody likes the notch and nobody likes that pill shape of dead pixels, either. Tesla just came up with a fun way to make the pill less annoying by separating it into two parts and putting stuff around it/in it.

 

[cateye]

This is a common trait for people with personalities of MBTI type INTP. Eye contact can be uncomfortable and distracting. To insist that everyone adhere to a 19th-century prescriptive etiquette handbook is to demonstrate insensitivity and ignorance of neurodiversity. We still have a long way to go to eliminate ableist bigotry.

To conflate promoting an over-fetishized VR headset's marketing-showpiece eye display with actual neurodiversity and the behavior challenges some people face in maintaining eye contact and following the cues of interpersonal exchange is laugh-out-loud funny to any of us who are "on the spectrum," as the kids say.

Casually tossing some Myers-Briggs pop-psychology out there doesn't support the point you think you're making, either, by the way.

 

[Crow_Servo]

FaceID and the Dynamic Island are problems to be solved. Nobody likes the notch and nobody likes that pill shape of dead pixels, either. Tesla just came up with a fun way to make the pill less annoying by separating it into two parts and putting stuff around it/in it.

Right, I addressed my flawed comparison in post # 28.

But I’m intrigued by your Tesla mention. Are you talking about the Tesla app? I just thought Apple didn’t allow for the pill to separated. That’s cool if app developers are allowed to play around with it.

 

[Night Spring]

To conflate promoting an over-fetishized VR headset's marketing-showpiece eye display with actual neurodiversity and the behavior challenges some people face in maintaining eye contact and following the cues of interpersonal exchange is laugh-out-loud funny to any of us who are "on the spectrum," as the kids say.

Casually tossing some Myers-Briggs pop-psychology out there doesn't support the point you think you're making, either, by the way.

I do wonder if different people place different emphasis on eye contact, not because they are neurodivergent but just because, you know, people are different. So some people in this thread are saying they think it'd be terribly rude for someone not to take off the VP when talking to someone else, and others of us are like, "meh, people will get used to talking to someone wearing a VP." Or like with face masks during covid, some people were like, "oh my god, we can't see other people's mouths, we are being deprived of human contact, children are going to grow up emotionally stunted!" and others were like, "yeh, no big deal." Maybe some of us rely much more on visual facial cues, and others are okay with just voice and more general body language.

 

[WilliamG]

Right, I addressed my flawed comparison in post # 28.

But I’m intrigued by your Tesla mention. Are you talking about the Tesla app? I just thought Apple didn’t allow for the pill to separated. That’s cool if app developers are allowed to play around with it.

Haha no. That was a bizarre typo! 🤦🏻‍♂️😅🤦🏻‍♂️ I meant Apple (and some developers).

 

[cateye]

I do wonder if different people place different emphasis on eye contact, not because they are neurodivergent but just because, you know, people are different. So some people in this thread are saying they think it'd be terribly rude for someone not to take off the VP when talking to someone else, and others of us are like, "meh, people will get used to talking to someone wearing a VP." Or like with face masks during covid, some people were like, "oh my god, we can't see other people's mouths, we are being deprived of human contact, children are going to grow up emotionally stunted!" and others were like, "yeh, no big deal." Maybe some of us rely much more on visual facial cues, and others are okay with just voice and more general body language.

Great points! And what's important here is separating between something that, through practical necessity, interrupts assumptions about interpersonal contact (masks to help prevent illness, neurodiversity making eye-contact difficult, industrial or other work situations requiring safety equipment like goggles, face masks, etc.) and completely avoidable contrived situations—like someone wearing the Tim Cook Memorial Cyber Space Goggles, or any face-mounted computing appliance and engaging someone in conversation who is not.

Now, let's say the TCMCSG's are being worn by multiple people in some kind of collaborative work situation. OK, then the balance of normalcy changes and there's an expectation of the rules of engagement changing as a result. How people navigate an interpersonal exchange adjusts based on a practical, situational baseline. In no way does an over-engineered cheeseball eye duplication screen effect create that baseline. It is an exceptionally ridiculous marketing affection that some people seem more smitten by than the genuinely impressive capabilities of the AVP itself.

 

[subjonas]

Great points! And what's important here is separating between something that, through practical necessity, interrupts assumptions about interpersonal contact (masks to help prevent illness, neurodiversity making eye-contact difficult, industrial or other work situations requiring safety equipment like goggles, face masks, etc.) and completely avoidable contrived situations—like someone wearing the Tim Cook Memorial Cyber Space Goggles, or any face-mounted computing appliance and engaging someone in conversation who is not.

Now, let's say the TCMCSG's are being worn by multiple people in some kind of collaborative work situation. OK, then the balance of normalcy changes and there's an expectation of the rules of engagement changing as a result. How people navigate an interpersonal exchange adjusts based on a practical, situational baseline. In no way does an over-engineered cheeseball eye duplication screen effect create that baseline. It is an exceptionally ridiculous marketing affection that some people seem more smitten by than the genuinely impressive capabilities of the AVP itself.

Is your position that the EyeSight feature is valuable for some but not all? I don’t think most would argue with that.

 

[cateye]

Nope. Arguing that it isn't a "feature" at all. It serves no purpose beyond marketing. I'm also rejecting out of hand that somehow those of us not wearing an AVP in the company of someone who is should accept that someone might wear it full time because to expect otherwise is being ableist... as if wearing an AVP is a requirement or a condition, not a choice.

It's like people are making the same mistake Google did with the Google Glass. "Glasshole" was not a term of endearment. Although, "Visionhole" doesn't really roll off the tongue in the same way.

 

[Crow_Servo]

Nope. Arguing that it isn't a "feature" at all. It serves no purpose beyond marketing. I'm also rejecting out of hand that somehow those of us not wearing an AVP in the company of someone who is should accept that someone might wear it full time because to expect otherwise is being ableist... as if wearing an AVP is a requirement or a condition, not a choice.

It's like people are making the same mistake Google did with the Google Glass. "Glasshole" was not a term of endearment. Although, "Visionhole" doesn't really roll off the tongue in the same way.

If we’re truly honest about the purpose of EyeSight, it’s for Apple to make the AVP look like it can fit right into society, instead of being this super niche device that will need plenty of time to grow.

Apple knows they’re late to the VR/AR party, and they’re trying to speed up the clock to artificially position the AVP as being ahead of the competition from day one, instead of acknowledging that they’re entering a new space that is very unknown.

Apple is dubbing this the era of Spatial Computing, a term they invented. So they are inventing the name of the category that this device falls under and they are inventing hypothetical scenarios where a person can walk around wearing the AVP and people around them will just totally accept it because when Apple enters a market, it automatically becomes mainstream.

The AVP is an impressive piece of hardware, but it’s not going to be as convenient to wear as Apple’s marketing is making it out to be. That will be the future versions. But Apple wants us to view it like this is already the future version. Like it’s not that heavy. It only has one cable attached to it. The battery lasts a couple hours, so that’s like a video game controller or something.

We’ll see how successful the marketing is, and how willing the public is to accept it when they see someone they know or don’t know wearing one.

 

[cateye]

Thought it might be fun to circle back to this now that there's some reviews out and people have had first-hand experience with EyeSight.

Although each reviewer had their own take, Nilay over at The Verge summed it up pretty well:

The front display on the Vision Pro is an attempt at keeping you from being isolated from other people while you’re wearing it. In Apple’s photos, it looks like a big, bright screen that shows a video of your eyes to people around you so they feel comfortable talking to you while you’re wearing the headset — a feature adorably called EyeSight. In reality, it might as well not be there. It’s a low-res OLED with a lenticular panel in front of it to provide a mild 3D effect, and it’s so dim and the cover glass is so reflective, it’s actually hard to see in most normal to bright lighting. When people do see your eyes, it’s a low-res, ghostly image of them that feels like CGI. The effect is uncanny — the idea that you’ll be making real eye contact with anyone is a fantasy.

Anyone surprised? Cool in theory, unique in presentation, essentially worthless in function. Calling it now: Gone with AVP v2.0.

 

[cardfan]

Would prefer to turn it off and kinda know for sure what people are seeing. Hopefully that's an option.

 

[cateye]

and kinda know for sure what people are seeing. Hopefully that's an option.

Nope:

And there are no controls or indicators in visionOS for this external display, so you never really know what other people are seeing. Imagine looking someone directly in the eyes and talking to them without knowing if they can see your eyes.

Which, at the same time, could be easily solved in software with some kind of on-screen notification to the wearer—EyeSight active / EyeSight not active, or whatever.

 

[MisterSavage]

Thought it might be fun to circle back to this now that there's some reviews out and people have had first-hand experience with EyeSight.

Although each reviewer had their own take, Nilay over at The Verge summed it up pretty well:



Anyone surprised? Cool in theory, unique in presentation, essentially worthless in function. Calling it now: Gone with AVP v2.0.

Was just about to post that exact paragraph! I still say I'd rather pay less for a version with the same internal visuals but without the external Eyesight.