Whatever use cases they try to push for social settings, I think Google Glass was still the better solution. Nobody uses their Vision Pro outside, and it’s way too expensive as just another VR headset to use at home.

  • WolfLink@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    I would buy an Apple Vision Pro if it were in the Google Glass form factor.

    I want things like walking directions virtually overlayed on the street, or reminders to visibly pop up when relevant, or just a neater interface than my phone for things like checking my calendar or recent messages.

    I think part of the issue is the Google Glass form factor came with some unfortunate limitations. The full VR headset approach allows the image to look however Apple wants. With the Google Glass things can only be lightly overlayed on a small portion of the visual field.

    • mibo80
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      I think AR and VR will become much more interesting when they can get tweaked by the consumer and a hobbyist market develops.

      • WolfLink@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        That’s Apple’s hope as well. They started allowing even hobbyist devs to test on the device almost a year before the public release.

        • udon@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          They don’t do that to allow consumers or hobbyists tweak the device in ways they want. They want to establish a functional ecosystem, so they need apps. Once it’s running, apple is the first to shut it down again and charge whatever they want

          • WolfLink@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            They don’t do that to allow consumers or hobbyists tweak the device in ways they want. They want to establish a functional ecosystem, so they need apps.

            Those two statements, allowing consumers and hobbyists to tweak the device in the ways they want, and having a functional ecosystem of apps, are loosely equivalent.

            I know the difference is you want hobbyists to be able to change more than Apple allows. But it isn’t a binary hobbyists or not.

        • krashmo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          That may be true but if you’re looking to Apple to encourage open source enhancements for their products you must not be very familiar with their corporate philosophy. It’s technically possible that could evolve but it would require a complete change in direction compared to where they have always positioned themselves which seems pretty unlikely.

          • WolfLink@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            There are open source apps for all of Apple’s Products. I’m using one to type this comment.

            They do put restrictions on what you can make, but they absolutely want the open source and hobbyist devs.