{"id":44628,"date":"2024-08-23T13:44:09","date_gmt":"2024-08-23T17:44:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mjtsai.com\/blog\/?p=44628"},"modified":"2025-01-02T11:24:11","modified_gmt":"2025-01-02T16:24:11","slug":"takeaways-from-the-vision-pro-after-6-months","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mjtsai.com\/blog\/2024\/08\/23\/takeaways-from-the-vision-pro-after-6-months\/","title":{"rendered":"Takeaways From the Vision Pro After 6 Months"},"content":{"rendered":"

Matthew Ball<\/a> (Hacker News<\/a>):<\/p>\n

The Vision Pro is arguably the highest-profile and most important device debuted by Apple since the iPhone in January 2007. The company spent more time (eight years versus the iPhone’s three) and money (see point #2) developing the device than any other in its history. The Vision Pro is clearly the most ambitious of their product launches since the iPhone, the first to be wholly developed under the purview of CEO Tim Cook (though various head-mounted display prototypes were underway as early as 2006<\/a>), and reporting suggests that its viability was controversial internally<\/a> (with some employees arguing that Head-Mounted Displays (“HMDs”) impart harm by isolating its wearers from other people and, ultimately, the world around them).<\/p>

[…]<\/p>

The very sentence before Apple announced the price of the Vision Pro at WWDC23, Rockwell explained—rationalized—that “If you purchased a new state-of-the-art TV, surround sound system, powerful computer with multiple high-definition displays, high-end camera, and more, you still would not have come close to what Vision Pro delivers.” Given this, we have<\/em> to evaluate the Vision Pro with the fullest of expectations. And to that end…<\/p>

[…]<\/p>

A few months later, there is a wider understanding that while Apple has built some brilliant technology (inclusive of software and hardware), much of its relative spectacle stemmed from the high-end components Apple chose to use and which Meta has thus far opted against.<\/p>

[…]<\/p>

EyeSight was not a wholly unique—Meta had even publicly demonstrated a similarly minded prototype<\/a> in 2021—but culturally, it seemed uniquely Apple. When marketing the Apple Watch, for example, Cook had emphasized the way it reduced digital isolation by keeping users from pulling out their phones and tilting their heads down to it. In time, we may come to consider EyeSight (or similar technologies) essential to the mainstream adoption (and, further, use of) HMDs. Thus far, however, the feature seems like a costly mistake.<\/p>

[…]<\/p>

The Vision Pro is best-in-class when it comes to “spatial mapping” of real-world environments. It’s passthrough functionality is also best-in-class in latency, precision, and image quality. It was also important to Apple that the device be seen as a “mixed-reality” or “spatial computing” device, not a virtual reality one. At the same time, the device is, functionally speaking, a virtual reality device.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n

Sylvia Varnham O’Regan and Wayne Ma<\/a> (via Slashdot<\/a>, MacRumors<\/a>, Hacker News<\/a>):<\/p>\n

Meta Platforms has canceled plans for a premium mixed-reality headset intended to compete with Apple’s Vision Pro, according to two Meta employees.<\/p>

Meta told employees at the company’s Reality Labs division to stop work on the device this week after a product review meeting attended by Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Chief Technology Officer Andrew Bosworth and other Meta executives, the employees said.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n

Ryan Christoffel<\/a>:<\/p>\n

\n

Apple’s Vision Pro seems to have scared Meta off from entering the premium headset market. But in this case, that’s not exactly a win.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n

Previously:<\/p>\n