$3.49
this post was submitted on 11 Feb 2024
540 points (97.2% liked)
Memes
45581 readers
1 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
I didn't realize those were swimming goggles at first, and was concerned about what he could possibly be doing that required safety goggles but no shirt.
These glasses are very submerssive.
load more comments
(2 replies)
From what I understand the thing isn't see through and the eyes are actually projected outside. Can somebody explain why they had to add tech to do it?
Because there are screens in the way? The choice was to either not have the viewer's eyes be visible, or use a screen to display eyes (not even real eyes, you can supposedly have cat eyes for an example). Considering the device is meant to be AR (augmented reality) and not VR, it kinda makes sense to show the user's eyes since they're still "connected" to the outside world. Otherwise you'd have a bunch of blank visors walking around and then people can't tell if you're looking at them or your furry waifu.
You actually remove your eyes before inserting the optical couplers into your sockets. You put your eyes in the storage compartment on the front giving the appearance that you're looking out through the device.
Achieving realistic, fast camera passthrough on both sides is harder than you think
Yes, that's my point. Why? Why make it extra more complicated and more expensive for no good benefit?
Heavier, too. It's about as heavy as the competitors despite having a separate battery.
It's not necessary to have the external screen.
The Quest has passthrough cameras to allow you to see the world with stuff displayed over it too, but Apple has decided that simulating eye contact is important.
It's Apple's unique selling point here, but they'd have what sounds like a high-quality headset without it.
To allow eye contact for social interactions. If you want ubiquitous AR in real life that is what you need. This is an attempt to achieve this with current technology and it "almost" works / near miss / fails spectacularly.
For no good benefit? Try comparing the display to a HoloLens 2. There's no current display technology that's cheaper and allows you to see through while projecting the light at the same intensity. You can search it up.
I think they're asking why eyes need to be projected on the outside.
Or anything for that matter.
All I'd want is "Go away. Gaming." But a Post-It would do just fine. Hell, I'd prefer googly eyes than my own projected, that'd be way cooler and more useful.
I accomplished everything I need by taping a piece of paper with sharpie eyes on my Quest 2 and it cost me $0 to do so!
I'll point to someone down this thread about eye contact in that case. It's not like it costed much though, reviewers have noted that iSight's display quality is quite horrible and it seems like all this features added was a small screen
That's why we've been stuck with windows for centuries.
Have you tried Linux? /s
load more comments
(2 replies)
Maybe they think it makes you look less stupid.
They have Tesla truck success in that, then.
I think this is kind of a temporary workaround. In Apples ideal world, the Vision Pro would actually be transparent and you could see the users eyes for real, but the tech isn't ready to project what apple is doing on glasses. So they settled for a VR headset and put eyes on the outside. Eventually in however many years it takes, they will actually use glasses and won't have to do the screen on the outside. They must believe, that being able to see Vision Pro users eyes is integral to the product, or at least important to the product being accepted by everyone.
Imagine you're sitting in restaurant waiting for the waiter while doing some work on your Vision Pro. The waiter shows up and says 'sir...'. You look at him and... there were two options:
-
it's just a black screen so it's not clear if you're actually looking at him. Are you paying attention? Of are you still 'inside' and can't hear/see anyone
-
you have this fake eyes indicating that you're actually looking at him
It's a really stupid "solution" to a huge problem all VR/AR has The actual solution? Don't buy it.
So they can sell you custom eyes like cats and aliens and shit.
Meme or actually?
Actually
And the eyes are not the wearer's eyes. They are just digital eyes.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Omg i hope that thing on the right is fan made
Holy fuck you can't talk about a person like that
For 350 bucks it's a bargain though
I mean, yeah, I already have my bid in but still.
I'm gonna snipe that auction you're gonna be so mad
I outbid you by a penny.
You son of a...
I have added 2 pennies for the lip.
I'm sorry. :( lol
The one on the left holds up rich assholes who (sadly) have either all the impact on the world, or none of it
The one on the right holds up furries and femboys, who have all the impact on the IT and telecom infrastructure in the western world, which hold up everyone.
I respect the one on the right for obvious reasons.
Tell me you're into drone kink without telling me you're into drone kink. 😆
100% True
At least the cheaper one protects me from the smell of nuclear was- I mean the smell of cigarettes.
Apple people sure do enjoy being cucked
Btw, what happpened with the micro-mirrors and laser solution, projecting the image in your eyes? Sounds ideal for AR to me.
Not related to Apple.
Expensive and difficult to get high resolution (good quality precise microscopic mirrors). Apple went for higher DPI regular display because that's a far more well known engineering problem
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://www.piped.video/watch?v=Dgbq5UbjnKs
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›