Omg i hope that thing on the right is fan made
$3.49
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.
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?
Achieving realistic, fast camera passthrough on both sides is harder than you think
So they could have stopped at many points but decided humanity must suffer
Yes, that’s my point. Why? Why make it extra more complicated and more expensive for no good benefit?
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.
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.
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.
Then go and buy Microsoft’s product. Nobody forces you to get a Vision Pro
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.
Tell me you’re into drone kink without telling me you’re into drone kink. 😆
They made a VR headset… and put a holographic lightfield display… on the outside.
Real fucking brain trust over at Cupertino.
The lightfield part is harder do make in high DPI, but yes I had the exact same thought
More dots won’t make this tech catch on. I assume some PiMax product still has more dots than this. Closer or wider, I dunno, but those guys charge Apple prices for PC rates.
VR has slumped because the right price point for mere stereo is a lot lower than it has been. Even for subsidized gizmos like Quest HMDs. (And not being glued to Facebook would help.) It needs to be too cheap not to own, or fancy enough to beat Virtual Boy plus color and head-tracking.
