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.
Your Mac and Apple Vision Pro: What You Can Do (and What You Can't)
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
How many cats do you have. My youngest, a Bengal cross named Negan is a real ******.
Tom
kill #1: sadly he mutilated a mouse
A potentially big difference between traditional and virtual displays is that with the latter, the resolution only matters where your eyes are looking. I get a feeling Apple’s eye-tracking tech is going to prove much more powerful than what we’re currently realizing, appreciating and discussing.
Despite all the doomsayers, this is pretty exciting in the evolution of the Mac.
Last edited:
I get this is a joke...but you can have several Chrome windows open watching multiple cat videos.
I think 3d tvs failed because the overall experience it delivered wasn’t good enough. To be honest 3d movies never delivered that wow factor to me, and that’s because of hardware limitations in the past. I’m hoping this solves that, I think it will.
It only can solve this if your watch movies by yourself.
I almost only watch movies/tv/streaming with my wife, and often others.
Foveated rendering doesn’t increase the resolution of the display panel in the foveal area. It decreases the effective resolution/accuracy outside the foveal area to reduce the total rendering workload. You still get “only” ~4K for the whole field of view of the eye.
You can still arrange those apps in virtual space running directly on AVP. Its only if M2 isn't powerful enough for Illustrator or the native app is somehow inferior to the mac version you would need to mirror your mac screen. As i understand you can use native AVP apps on 'infinite virtual screen' alongside a 4k window of mirrored mac screen. I think the future is running all apps directly on AVP, but would be interesting if they enable higher bandwidth connection via thunderbolt for example
No one of importance ever called the original iPhone stupid, this is an often repeated lie told here for some reason Most people were wowed from day 1. Smart phone market leaders Nokia and Blackberry immediately knew they were in trouble after seeing that first demo.
No one asked why we needed an iPhone. The smart phone market was well established at that point. Everyone knew why we needed an iPhone, they just haven't seen mobile computing done that well up to that point. They certainly didn't say it wasn't the future.
It is true that Steve Balmer lacked vision but his primary criticism was the price and he wasn't wrong about that. The iPhone was definitely a luxury item and didn't pick up huge momentum until Apple struck a deal with AT&T to subsidize the iPhone. Up until then carriers very much controlled the phone market and they expected full control of the hardware on their networks. Apple was turned down by every major carrier and only when they finally struck a deal with AT&T did they have a chance. The first year saw a $199 iphone and a month later a $99 option. The already impressive iPhone finally priced right had Verizon customers switching to a much smaller network AT&T just to have one. Verizon tried all sorts of promotions with competitors until eventually their hand was forced. At the time a $600 iPhone was doomed to fail. Fortunately Jobs was able to negotiate out deals quick enough to pave the future of the platform.
The only way Steve Balmers comments were really wrong was about the keyboard. One of Apples most impressive implementations was perfecting a usable virtual keyboard. No one could imagine it working well because touch screens were not great up until then. Even after the iPhone it took a good number of years before virtual keyboards on competitors products could come close. The first iPhones keyboard is really an under remembered breakthrough innovation that should be mentioned more often.
My larger point though is thst the Vision Pro shares no iPhone launch similarities except the price criticism. I don't see a mobile provider stepping in to save this by subsidizing its huge price.
So, it's not for you. Move on.
I watch movies on my own all the time. And I watch movies with my family, too.
An iPad is considered a media consumption device; and likely mostly used "alone."
A laptop can watch movies, and most people use them alone.
This remains a manufactured criticism wielded by people who have already decided they don't like, won't buy, the AVP.
...and for some reason, think they must convince others not to buy it as well. Odd.
Last edited:
It won’t be that much different from people putting their sleep masks and ear plugs on, I think.
No. You have 4K per eye. Foveated rendering allows this to be allocated based on your eye's focus point. It is already in use on higher end devices and it is stunning!
This is why I plan to buy the AVP. I want to use it as a mac extension.
The only thing people can do is… avoid buying it. Apple has to learn this price is utterly ridiculous, the hard way.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
I agree. I just didn't want to speculate that to feed the pessimism fires.
Again, I look at apparently Apple people reviewing the cheapie 1080p versions and gushing at crispness of views in productivity and I have to extrapolate the crispness to the leap to 4K-per-eye. I don't know how to do the "retina" pessimism thing on this at 4K placed only an inch or two away from our eyes. My gut says resolution should thoroughly impress any actual eyes who give Vpro a try.
But I'll give the pessimists some space here: until any of us can actually have a look with our eyes, there's room for ANY imagination to go anywhere. Fortunately, most of the imagination gets converted to reality in a few weeks... at last!
In the virtual space yeah it makes sense. I assume you will be able to access the mac apps through the mac window like when you access windows os from parrallels app.
So no monitory report.
I’m puzzled by this as well.
This about the battery life and you’re not really working effectively either
Last edited:
That’s what I wrote (“eye” singular, not plural). And with foveated rendering those 4K are still spread over the total field of view of the eye (singular), not concentrated in the foveal area.
And, despite the fact that you, personally, have no use for an iPad, the iPad has been a very successful product.
Those are more subtle and people dont fiddle around with their hands in the air to navigate around something no one else but themselves can see though. Imagine you want to hit play on a movie using your Vision Pro on a plane and suddenly you have your finger stuck into your neighbours nose
honestly, I still dont think it will even work with the change in altitude etc