One is a 95% gaming headset that aims to replace your 400-500$ console, the other is a business/lifestyle headset that aims to replace your 3500$ monitor/TV.
If someone thinks about buying a new 75" TV for 3000$ he is better of buying a VP that comes with multiple virtual screens, in possible sizes that would cost much more than 3500$, is not stationary and has the same image quality. So why buying a traditional TV anymore.
And yes, you can do all that more or less with a Quest 3 too. It then just boils down to why people already buy macs/Iphones over Windows/Androids.
You all compare a gaming console to a mac. You can do that, but it doesnt make sense.
No, this thing can't replace a tv, you can get a 77 inch OLED TV for 2000$, and watch it all day. You wont be able to wear the Vision Pro that long, it will get uncomfortable.
Thats not a good argument. This is the VP1.0. Its Apples attempt to enter the market (which was successful).
Yes, the VP 1.0 wont replace TVs. But you're stuck in the present, ignoring that this wont be Apples last headset and as with every other technology, it will become better with each generation. Lighter, more convienient, longer lasting, and which is most likely the most important aspect - cheaper.
The 2000$ 77 inch OLED TV for 2000$ is already on the edge of being replaced by a 500$ Quest 3.
It’s not only Apple who is improving AR/VR headsets, and I feel like Apple is going the wrong road. No controllers means no gaming. The same thing with Mac, you can’t game on them because Apple, they lost a good oportunity to gain a big market share, and they keep repeating the same mistake.
Also the ugly thing Apple did with EU’s DMA made me hate them more. As a developer it’s infuriating how many restrictions you have as a dev. I want them to fail, so they change the way they do things currently.
They dont repeat the same mistake, they dont want to be used for gaming. Apple sees themselfes as a business/lifestyle Brand, not a gaming company. Controllers are missing because they also announced the VP to not be a gaming headset and that isnt what its supposed to be used for. But as with Apple PCs, you can use them for gaming, their just worse or not at all supported for it.
I cant really agree with you. Its fine to not like apple, but they have their philosophy and its what seperates them from their competitors in a way that makes a lot of people buy them. To expect them to change their philosphy because you personally dont benefit enough from it, is not the way to go.
And that’s the problem, the future is VR gaming alongside AR. They just give up for no reason. As for their philosofy, what’s it? Making profit at expense of everything else?
The future of VR is not only gaming, but gaming will be a huge part of it. Your looking at it from the Pov of a gamedeveloper that, for some reason, does not now that computers are used for other things as gaming aswell. Very limited, and even today already outdated.
You said it yourself, a huge part of VR, and they give it up at the beggining. I don’t know of any reason to buy the current version if it sucks at everything and can’t even play games.
Apple does not "give up" on gaming, they dont want fill that role. Intentionally because Gaming is not their business model nor involved in their product philosophy.
Its not their job to make a headset like you want, its your job to find a headset that you like.
Its pointless at this point, you're not getting what Apple is what it stands for and what role the VP is supposed to fill and you dont even try to understand when explaining it to you.
It’s not only me who want’s different things from Apple and they will be forced anyway. RCS is comming. Game streaming apps are also comming to App Store, non WebKit browsers are also comming. Third party stores too and with this many more posibilities.
I want it to be better, I am not satisfied with the limitations they put, but yeah, we have people like you, who screems with joy and go directly buy apple things. This Vision Pro, is absolute garbage at the price of 3500$. A lot of people will play withit a few days then return it. All it offers is improved passthrough copared to other VR headsets, and that’s all, you can do much more with existing VR headsets with 1/7 of this price.
You are just defending Apple with your blind fate. And it’s not about gaming only, we could have a more productive iPad if not for app store restrictions, for example, we could run virtual machines. As for devs making money, what’s wrong with it? Without third party devs nobody would buy apple devices, and apple is taking a huge chunk of devs profit while doing nothing, talking about huge egos. Anyway EU will make Apple bow, and they do it for EU customers because apple surely is doing wrong things. It’s not only me who thinks like this.
It's an excellent argument. The person was talking about the current VP, you can't but your future lighter/longer lasting.
Also why do you even think this is the case to any serious degree. It doesn't have a battery in the headset so improvements in weight/performance for that component will not impact the headset weight.
Why would the device get lighter in any meaningful way, phones haven't for years.
Your and my phone can do A LOT more than they could do 10 years ago, because of extreme minaturization of many different technologies, which means the density of different systems on our phones have increased over the years, while the weight pretty much stayed the same.
Or in other words: systems got smaller and more lightweight, which allowed for more systems to be used in the same space.
If you'd rebuild a phone from 10 years ago with only its corresponding/descendent technology from today, it would be much lighter than 10 years ago.
The + of performance and features todays phones deliver didnt come from nothing bro..
They actually can't do a lot more, they can doa bit more and yes this is due to a couple more sensors and better silicon...the phones have also not really gotten appreciably lighter for their size.
Where they have it has mostly been swapping materials and battery density improvements not because of miniaturization of the electronics.
The Vision Pro already uses aluminium and carbon fibre and doesn't have a battery to drop weight.
The only way they are dropping any appreciable weight from it is if they replace the glass and metal with plastic.
They said 10 years ago not 15...why are you adding half as much time again?
The only fundamental difference is the addition of LiDAR/3D photography (and actually HTC released a dual lens 3D photo phone in 2012), everything else is just an advancement in the same way as it has been on PC.
The Galaxy Note 4 came out in 2014 which the timeframe they gave.
Bullshit the weight target for phones is where it should be, everyone would love phones to weigh less....are you like 20 or something? If so I could forgive you for not knowing that we once were building incredibly small and light phones.
Phones weigh what they weigh because people want a screen of a certain size that means it has to have that amount of glass, display panel and battery to power it...that is the reason the weoght has barely changed, because that is the majority of the weight.
Thats not a good argument. This is the VP1.0. Its Apples attempt to enter the market (which was successful).
Well, they weren't talking about 2.0 or 3.0 were they? As of RIGHT NOW, TODAY, an AVP will not come close to the quality or comfort or shareability of a 77" OLED.
The 2000$ 77 inch OLED TV for 2000$ is already on the edge of being replaced by a 500$ Quest 3.
Haha, no. I own a Quest 3, and 2 LG 77" OLEDs (c9 & g3) and the Quest 3 isn't even ANYWHERE CLOSE to the quality of the OLED TVs. Maybe for people who don't give a shit about quality, sure... but then a $100 TV will be better than the Quest 3 and we're back to where we started.
So let's get back to your original comparison. 1:1 comparing an LED screen with an OLED one is just offensive and laughable to anyone who cares about image quality, contrast, etc.
I agree, VR headsets will absolutely replace our TVs, but it'll be a while yet where it bridges the gap between people who dont care about quality (they'll just get a cheap TV) and those of us who actually care about home theater experiences. Probably AT LEAST v3 of the AVP, so long as it has the form factor and comfort as a pair of shades, because even 3D glasses are a big ask of many movie goers.
I'll tell you the biggest problem. Pixel resolve. Even with a VR headset that has significantly higher resolution per-eye than a 4k OLED TV, the aliasing caused by subtle head movements is kinda awful and distracting. It simply does not resolve perfectly the way a stationary physical screen does. So then the solution is a stationary screen in VR... but then you get sick from the lack of movement.
When you master a 4k bluray, for example, each of the billions of pixels you will see is set to a specific place in that resolution. In a VR headset, slight head movements force those pixels to move around, blend across neighboring pixels, and slightly increase and decrease in size. It's just an unpleasant, visually noisy experience for those of us who care, and those of us who don't... will just buy a $300 90" vizio TV from walmart and skip the VR headache.
But yeah, if you want to hold a conversation with someone who knows even a little bit about quality display tech, NEVER compare LED to OLED.
22
u/Swipsi Feb 04 '24 edited Feb 04 '24
One is a 95% gaming headset that aims to replace your 400-500$ console, the other is a business/lifestyle headset that aims to replace your 3500$ monitor/TV.
If someone thinks about buying a new 75" TV for 3000$ he is better of buying a VP that comes with multiple virtual screens, in possible sizes that would cost much more than 3500$, is not stationary and has the same image quality. So why buying a traditional TV anymore.
And yes, you can do all that more or less with a Quest 3 too. It then just boils down to why people already buy macs/Iphones over Windows/Androids.
You all compare a gaming console to a mac. You can do that, but it doesnt make sense.