Half the Size & Half the Price is What Vision Pro Needs to Take Off : virtualreality@lemmy.world

Half the Size & Half the Price is What Vision Pro Needs to Take Off (www.roadtovr.com)

submitted 1 year ago by MyOpinion@lemm.ee to c/virtualreality@lemmy.world

19 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Cutting it down to half the size would mean bringing it down around 310 grams; certainly not be easy but also not entirely unrealistic, especially if they stick to an off-board battery. After all, Bigscreen Beyond is around 180 grams. It might not be a standalone headset, but it shows how compact the housing, optics, and displays can be.

And half the cost would mean a price tag of roughly $1,750. Still not cheap compared to most headsets out there, but significantly more attainable, especially if Apple can market it as also being the best TV most people will have in their home.

This might seem obvious. Making any tech product smaller and cheaper is a good thing.

But my point here is that Vision Pro is disproportionately held back by its size and cost. It has way more to be gained by halving its size and cost than Quest, for instance, because Quest’s core UX is still very clunky.

all 19 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago (2 children)

How is it the best TV in the house if only one person can watch at a time?

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] UnbrokenTaco@lemm.ee 13 points 1 year ago

Some people live alone.

Plenty of people use their phones as TVs for streaming Netflix.

parent

[–] ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

I bought some cheap USB-C glasses awhile back. Definitely not VR or mixed reality — there’s not motion tracking — but it was cheap and it’s actually weirdly handy. It plugs into any modern phone, Steam Deck, laptop etc. and is just a monitor.

It’s good on flights but I’ve also found niche applications. Like attending a presentation/lecture? Just pull it up on your phone and lay back. It actually helps me pay attention since I can’t do anything else with screens over my eyes. (I can touch-type or use a game controller but it’s basically impossible to use a touchscreen you can’t see.)

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

They sound neat. I'd like to try some, what did you get?

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

TCL Nextware G. I got them a couple of years ago so there might be better/cheaper versions now but the simplicity is half the point to me. I like that it’s just a 1080p generic monitor and there’s no drivers or need for a discrete GPU or anything like that.

Out of curiosity, I just checked Amazon and my receipt. They were cheaper in 2023 but I’m in the U.S. and TCL is a Chinese company so prices are ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ here.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 1 point 1 year ago

TCL Nextware G

Thanks! They are a bit more than I expected but still not bad even at $249.

parent

[–] Die4Ever 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Do people actually like the feature of it rendering an image of your eyes for other people on the outside? I feel like it's not worth the cost and weight and battery usage

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] cubism_pitta@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Its supposed to indicate engagement with content vs real world but its pretty useless in my experience.

My wife just flails in front of me and makes jokes about robot eyes / douche goggles :)

I do find the premise of this article funny "HALF THE WEGIHT AND HALF THE PRICE!"... like no shit Sherlock... let's just go to the magic device tree and pick one

parent

[–] MyOpinion@lemm.ee [S] 1 point 1 year ago

As a single person I would not know, but I have heard that couples find it valuable.

parent

[–] tiredofsametab@fedia.io 7 points 1 year ago

Zero interest. I don't own anything else apple nor do I want to (I have to use a mac for work and actively despise it). I'm not even creating an account with them for something. One of the reasons I don't have Quest either; meta gets now account from me.

[–] DannyBoy@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 year ago

And half the cost would mean a price tag of roughly $1,750.

It costs how much?!

I had no idea it was so pricey. Looks like it starts at $5k CAD and goes up to $6,772 CAD with Apple Care and lenses. That's insane.

[–] Euphoma@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

I feel like they would need to scrap the front display and use a different lens technology like pancake lens to cut down the size.

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] MyOpinion@lemm.ee [S] 1 point 1 year ago

I believe that is the direction they are going.

parent

[–] Pilferjinx@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Am I missing something here? It's nice and all having cool headsets, but without that reason-you-can't-be-without, VR/AR will always be a novelty.

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] MyOpinion@lemm.ee [S] 2 points 1 year ago

Vr is going to take a long time to mature. The headsets are just now getting to decent resolution and comfort and the computers needed to create virtual worlds are here but very expensive. It may not be for everyone but it will be great for millions of people.

parent

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 1 point 1 year ago

Fr.

The hardware is good enough now. It can be priced better, but what it really needs are killer apps. And I don't think the average person, tech fan or otherwise, gives a shit about being able to do what they already do with productivity tools on a regular screen with documents and spreadsheets in VR. Meetings in VR are cool; but they could have just been an email. Apple isn't even focusing on the main audience for the tech when they go all-in on it being a productivity device and not a gaming or learning device.

parent

[–] realitista@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I think the main thing holding Vision Pro back is its use case. People mainly seem to be using it for monitor replacement, something which I feel like the Xreal Air and Viture Pro have better figured out in terms of price point and form factor. On the VR/AR side of things, meta and Sony are killing them on software library and cost. It doesn't leave much room for Apple.

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] MyOpinion@lemm.ee [S] 2 points 1 year ago

Apple has a lot of work to do to create something people would really want to use. It will be interesting to see what direction they go.

parent

[–] BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

The problem is that Vision Pro is awful at object recognition and tracking. Which are, y’know, the foundation of all meaningful AR use-cases. In theory it should have the raw power to do it, but something is very wrong somewhere because it just can’t do it.

parent