The Talk Show Live From WWDC 2023 Now Available on YouTube

[yegon]

I don't care what a person's politcal leanings are but let's just say that Gruber put the derangement in Trump Derangement Syndrome

Definitely. It started in 2015 when Trump started getting serious airtime. Post election his blog was 50/50 politics/Apple. I recall he even said he considered starting a politics blog. Great, I thought, more regurgitated inflammatory opinions with Huffpo or Fox News as the "source". He constantly used the phrase "you're not wired right (ie, correctly)" if you disagreed with him, while peddling reactionary nonsense, blissfully acting as if his chosen candidate's sh*t didn't stink. After Hillary lost he tweeted "Hillary 2020. **** you.". My immediate reaction was...you have learned nothing.

https://twitter.com/x/status/796340133016535040

Don't take this as a sign I'm Trump defense force either. My opinion is worthless, but I've a distaste for every POTUS since Kennedy, and here in the UK I'm yet to experience a good prime minister since being born in the early 80s. There are no good guys, merely some you happen to agree with more than the other. Obligatory George Carlin link incoming…

 

[Idgit]

Oh bull. It started way before then. Once Bertrand Serlet retired, the dumbification began.

It became a skeuomorphic nightmare with feature bloat and half baked features with Scott Forstall. 10.7 Lion, anyone? Then Ive did a complete 180 degrees with 10.10 Yosemite and sucked all the usability out of the OS.

Federighi came in and united the underlying technologies across platforms and Dye tried to correct Ive’s mistakes by bringing back some classic Mac OS design elements.

However, it was too late. iPhone and iOS had already become the behemoth and lead operating system that all Apple operating systems would take cues from. And now we are here and things like System Settings are the new normal.

We are lucky with still have Finder, as stripped down its default settings are.

Wasn’t Federighi Serlet’s successor?

 

[citysnaps]

Rockwell was great but definitely no credit to Gruber though

No credit to Gruber was asked for or needed.

My point is many of the people posting here just dropped in to have a good slam at Gruber, apparently feeling better afterwards. And nothing about, or any discussion regarding what Rockwell revealed.

Sadly, I'm not shocked. It's all about having an opportunity to knock someone (Cook is always a crowd pleaser) and never about the reveal, message, and point of the story. Which in this case is Apple announcing their entry into the AR world, and discussing the underlying tech in the device and its astonishing performance/features.

 

[roguefury]

Watched this on my big TV, found my self yelling for Gruber to just say something several times. It was painful to watch, and honestly for 2+ hours, rather sad.

 

[thadoggfather]

His political ravings are what hammered in the final nail for me. Like I come to you for tech stuff, not the bs I get on Fox News, CNN, MSNBC etc.

If Keith olbermann decided to write a tech blog, it’d be something like Daring Fireball

 

[Jensend]

In the paper I linked, the pancake optics distort the physical pixels so that they appear significantly denser in the center (by a factor of five or so, if I’m reading it correctly). I'm assuming that Apple is doing something similar. You are right that foveated rendering is in principle independent from that.

If Apple is doing something like that, it means that as you look away from the center, the display would be much less than Retina quality. The average human can rotate their eyes about 45° inward, outward, and downward, and 30° upward. This pretty closely matches the FOV of the typical headset.

I’m assuming Apple’s device has similar optical properties to other headsets until I see evidence that points to them using significantly different optics than other VR headsets. Here’s a page going into significant detail about the PPD and how it relates to viewing angle in the first consumer PC VR headsets in the modern era: HTC Vive and Oculus Rift. You get a slightly higher resolution in the center of the lens than a simple pixels/FOV calculation would provide, but it’s not that far off.

I think it’s just hard to make an assessment about Retina quality from viewing a demo that isn’t optimized for that purpose and has no reference to compare to.

 

[Naraxus]

No credit to Gruber was asked for or needed.

My point is many of the people posting here just dropped in to have a good slam at Gruber, apparently feeling better afterwards. And nothing about, or any discussion regarding what Rockwell revealed.

Sadly, I'm not shocked. It's all about having an opportunity to knock someone (Cook is always a crowd pleaser) and never about the reveal, message, and point of the story. Which in this case is Apple announcing their entry into the AR world, and discussing the underlying tech in the device and its astonishing performance/features.

So as usual, I pose the following to you: why did you bother reading the thread and subsequently comment on it if you knew what it was about? Why not just ignore the thread?

I suspect we all know the answer (speaking of opportunities to knock people) since you seemingly missed the point people were making about Gruber.

 

[Naraxus]

Wasn’t Federighi Serlet’s successor?

He was

 

[Naraxus]

In 2012, he got Forstall fired and took over the HI (Human Interfaces) group specifically to redesign iOS and Mac OS. He absolutely spent time working on both operating system designs and approved much of the flatter interface.

100% correct.

 

[klasma]

If Apple is doing something like that, it means that as you look away from the center, the display would be much less than Retina quality. The average human can rotate their eyes about 45° inward, outward, and downward, and 30° upward. This pretty closely matches the FOV of the typical headset.

Yes, though in practice you’ll rather turn your head for e.g. reading small text. In the horizontal direction, one also tends to not utilize the full range, because for the eye that is looking inward, part of the FoV will be taken up by the nose. (Probably depends on the nose , but that is how it appears to me.)

I’m assuming Apple’s device has similar optical properties to other headsets until I see evidence that points to them using significantly different optics than other VR headsets. Here’s a page going into significant detail about the PPD and how it relates to viewing angle in the first consumer PC VR headsets in the modern era: HTC Vive and Oculus Rift. You get a slightly higher resolution in the center of the lens than a simple pixels/FOV calculation would provide, but it’s not that far off.

I think it’s just hard to make an assessment about Retina quality from viewing a demo that isn’t optimized for that purpose and has no reference to compare to.

Well, there are several reports that during the demo no pixels or screen door effect could be discerned, and there also don’t seem to be any reports to the contrary. That either means that the 4000 pixels are actually quite adequate, or else that they skew to the center.

We’ll know soon enough I guess (next year at the latest).

 

[FloatingBones]

I’d be pretty skeptical about believing Apple’s public narrative about their intentions.

Why skeptical on this question? Soon after Apple Vision is released, it'll be blatantly obvious if the product will isolate someone or keep them in the real world.

 

[smulji]

In 2012, he got Forstall fired and took over the HI (Human Interfaces) group specifically to redesign iOS and Mac OS. He absolutely spent time working on both operating system designs and approved much of the flatter interface.

In hindsight, it seems to me that the wrong person got fired

 

[Jensend]

Yes, though in practice you’ll rather turn your head for e.g. reading small text. In the horizontal direction, one also tends to not utilize the full range, because for the eye that is looking inward, part of the FoV will be taken up by the nose. (Probably depends on the nose , but that is how it appears to me.)


Well, there are several reports that during the demo no pixels or screen door effect could be discerned, and there also don’t seem to be any reports to the contrary. That either means that the 4000 pixels are actually quite adequate, or else that they skew to the center.

We’ll know soon enough I guess (next year at the latest).

I also see a lot of reviews of less-than-Retina pixel density monitors where people don’t complain about the pixel density.

One other factor is probably the use of high quality anti-aliasing. Even on a 4K display displaying a 4K resolution rendered image, jagged stair step edges are easily visible or real-time rendered 3D content. High quality supersampling can smooth out those jaggies.

I hope you’re right. I hope people can replace their Pro Display XDR with this with no loss in quality, except perhaps a lower maximum brightness. I’d love for this to be able to replace my triple 4K monitor setup visually, even if the first generation probably won’t be comfortable enough for me to work for an 8 hour day—many hands-on reviewers have commented that the didn’t think the AVP had improved comfort compared to other headsets.

 

[matrix07]

No. Vision Pro is just a toy for rich people and techies who are bored. This is the first Apple product where it’s just cool tech for the sake of it.

In some sense you're not wrong. It doesn't essentially solve any mundane problems we're having. The point of this "platform" is it will enhance your experience, not solving problems (even though it's solving some - like space issue). Whether you will find it worth your $3,500 now or less money in the future is up to you to decide but this (spatial - 3D - computing) is the future.

 

[wigby]

The only win here is that it’s not Rene Ritchie. I swear that guy craps out AirTags.

You mean the guy employed by Google for the past 6 months? What are you talking about?

 

[wigby]

You’re operating under an assumption that Apple wants objective truth being disseminated

They do not

Apple much prefers fluffy puff and praise from an ecosystem of folks who are totally in the bag for all things Apple.

It is their own WWDC. Do you really invite people to a party at your house hoping for conflict and uncomfortable moments? It's a marketing event from the top brand in the world, not a technology intervention.

 

[wigby]

Then I can’t take his interviews seriously and someone else who’s got the balls to ask real questions should take his spot. Problem with Gruber is he’s trying too hard to be one of the cool kids. I’m willing to bet money Marques can do a much better job.

This event is for developers and Apple PR. None of those people want Gruber to attack Apple with hard questions. And if you were there, neither would you.

 

[wigby]

he's a total buffoon and kinda creepy


I also like how he instantly self-revises the word 'rough' when describing his experience with the Apple display for the first month of ownership. Can't dare criticize any Apple products with too much conviction because he's been suckling off the Apple iNipple for decades now as the PR pushover.

...I find all the self indulgent 'jokes' insanely cringey.

Do you sit on the internet all day and criticize people's work or do you criticize their work to their face? Because no one likes either.

 

[thadoggfather]

Do you sit on the internet all day and criticize people's work or do you criticize their work to their face? Because no one likes either.

How funny, now criticizing me for criticizing someone else.

Nah it seems I'm not the only one who doesn't care for the lad from scrolling the comments, but even if everyone else liked him and I didn't- everyone is entitled to their own opinions always including yours of me.

You should see how he writes. It's completely unhinged. And his interview style is boring and sycophant-ish and as mentioned he didnt even seem prepared to really discuss specific details of things and seemed as if he just read blog updates about the keynote... which is surprising considering he had 30 minutes of hands on time with Vision pro.

So yeah, I think criticism is warranted.

I’d much rather a marques brown Lee interview at least the dude is kinda fun

 

[MareLuce]

Get professionals: [...] Kara Swisher [...]

Yes!

Ms. Swisher asks the best questions, with the right amount of punch.

 

[wigby]

And in other news water is wet.
Employer aside he remains on the Mount Rushmore of sycophantic jackassness (not a word but apt nonetheless).

Does he have an interview or video out praising Vision Realty Pro? Because I'd like to see it. There's nothing wrong with people that get excited about new technology so long as they are not oblivious to facts that contradict their opinions. Rene is not one of those people.

 

[falkon-engine]

John Gruber, Rene Ritchie, iJustine all culled from the same smelly pile of day old monkey exhaust.

Too much?

Is it apple flavored at least ?

 

[jcshas]

Right? I bet this whole thing would have been 10 minutes shorter if they’d edited out all the long silences where Gruber’s formulating his thoughts. He’s not a particularly good interviewer, and I don’t think he strayed from the script once. It’s such a good opportunity and I feel like it’s wasted every year. No, I couldn’t personally do better, but then that isn’t my job.

Totally agree.

 

[jcshas]

His stuttering and pauses are awful. A very good writer but a very bad speaker. Very annoying. He needs to fire questions more quickly and more fluidly...
or have someone editing out all the annoying pauses & speeding him up before post a video. it's so amateurish.

Still informations in the video are 👍

Exactly. I’m not saying I can do any better but if I were fortunate enough to have a rare opportunity to share the stage with a couple of Apple execs I would probably sign up for Toastmasters. This was one was really difficult to watch.

 

[smulji]

In some sense you're not wrong. It doesn't essentially solve any mundane problems we're having. The point of this "platform" is it will enhance your experience, not solving problems (even though it's solving some - like space issue). Whether you will find it worth your $3,500 now or less money in the future is up to you to decide but this (spatial - 3D - computing) is the future.

Not my future