Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Apple Hardware

Apple's Vision Pro Labs Are Drawing Audible Gasps From Developers, Says Company (zdnet.com) 81

Posted by BeauHD from the are-they-looking-at-the-price? dept.
According to a recent Apple press release, some developers are reacting with an "audible gasp" when first using the company's upcoming Vision Pro headset. ZDNet reports: Michael Simmons, who's led the team behind popular productivity apps Fantastical and Cardhop described his experience as "like seeing Fantastical for the first time. It felt like I was part of the app." By the time his test session was over, the big takeaway was that "Experiencing spatial computing not only validated the designs we'd been thinking about -- it helped us start thinking not just about left to right or up and down but beyond borders at all." "The first time you see your own app running for real, that's when you get the audible gasp," adds David Smith, podcaster and developer of Widgetsmith.

"It instantly got me thinking about how 3D offerings and visuals could come forward in our experiences," says Chris Delbuck, principal design technologist at Slack, in the Apple press release. Delbuck had first planned to test the iPadOS version of Slack on the Vision Pro, only to realize how much more potential there was in upgrading the UX to suit VisionOS' added layer of depth.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple's Vision Pro Labs Are Drawing Audible Gasps From Developers, Says Company More

Apple's Vision Pro Labs Are Drawing Audible Gasps From Developers, Says Company

Comments Filter:

  • Audible Gasps? (Score:5, Funny)

    by tsqr ( 808554 ) on Thursday August 24, 2023 @07:51PM (#63794826)

    Personally, I've found that a sudden wave of nausea often elicits an audible gasp.

  • Yeah (Score:3, Funny)

    by Bahbus ( 1180627 ) on Thursday August 24, 2023 @08:05PM (#63794848) Homepage

    Gasping for air because the device is overpriced garbage. None of the quoted app developers are very interesting or good.

  • the contenders (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Walt Dismal ( 534799 ) on Thursday August 24, 2023 @08:08PM (#63794852)

    I am guessing that Apple gets it right while Zuck and Google have poor approaches and demonstrated fumbles. Microsoft HoloLens has its niche markets but also in them is seeing the motion sickness problem. So I'd put my bet money on Apple and Microsoft.

    A lesser known contender is Tilt 5 who make an awesome product for the gaming world. Because their glasses are for tabletop gaming, they do not have the motion sickness problem.

    • Re:the contenders (Score:5, Insightful)

      by keltor ( 99721 ) * on Thursday August 24, 2023 @09:54PM (#63794986)
      I've got severe motion sickness issues with Quest and the rest of the 3D VR crowd, but all of the AR stuff has been perfectly fine, so definitely I'd only put my money in AR, but really what we need is a killer app, even if it's just the same thing in a new format (I mean smartphones didn't really have a killer app, they just computers in your pocket which is kind of a killer app in and of itself. :D
    • Apple's offering is $3500, and will almost assuredly be in a walled garden, the first is a massive problem on its own just because of the current existence of devices on the market that already excel what Apple is putting on the table in the same price category (the HoloLens works on SteamVR for example), but the latter is an absolute death sentence. VR is incredibly niche as it is specifically because it's so expensive and it's held back by a limited application base that's currently dominated by gaming bu
      • I'd buy it just to watch movies on planes with...and tune the world out.

        Although, using it to have "Multiple-Monitors" wherever I am, especially traveling would be nice too.

        • This is the killer app.

        • Sony had decent movie glasses out like 20 years ago, they worked well and were pretty small. A used Oculus Go is less than $50 if you can find it, it's not so heavy and is fine for watching movies.

          I'd rather just watch on a laptop or cell phone, but I guess people do it.

        • you'll spend over $3500 just to watch movies on a plane? How many other people will follow you? I can't imagine your demographic is large enough to support an entire product line long term, especially when there's already AR/VR glasses on the market that do the same thing for a fraction of the cost, granted not with all the bells and whistles, but if you can get a headset for $500 or less that does most of that, what would another $3000 get you that makes it worth it to an industry supporting demographic?

          • you'll spend over $3500 just to watch movies on a plane? How many other people will follow you? I can't imagine your demographic is large enough to support an entire product line long term, especially when there's already AR/VR glasses on the market that do the same thing for a fraction of the cost, granted not with all the bells and whistles, but if you can get a headset for $500 or less that does most of that, what would another $3000 get you that makes it worth it to an industry supporting demographic?

            I

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by Tom ( 822 )

      What Apple is doing is going to the developers and ensuring that THEY are fans, so that they are making cool apps. Because cool apps are what makes the product.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        The apps mentioned in the summary, Fantastical and Cardhop, are just a boring calendar and some kind of contact management thing. Can't wait to view my calendar in AR on a $3,500 headset.

        There are no killer apps. Big screen TV? Okay but you can buy a lot of TV for $3,500, with better picture quality, and it cost $0 to add a second or even third viewer. Navigation? Yeah I'll walk around with my $3,500 headset on, much nicer than just glancing down at my headset occasionally. Games? It's a bit out of the aver

        • There are definitely industrial use cases no doubt about that. In the consumer space, AR really feels like a solution in search of a problem. An awful lot of ideas are basically a 2D display floating in space. Bonus points if you have to physically move to change from your calendar to your contacts.

          None of the ideas appear to be centered around anything that's actually related to the physical space you are in, the R part of AR. So, very much sounds like a cool monitor masquerading as AR.

          Also unless you're

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Tom ( 822 )

          You missed the point.

          Yes, these apps are not VR killer apps. Because they were made for a 2D screen. The point of these labs and previews for devs is to show them the new thing so that they get ideas of cool apps to make for it.

          I have no idea if there will be a killer VR app soon. I don't see one, just like you. If I did, I'd go out and make it.

          But I see what Apple is doing there - showing their VR googles to people who just might come up with one.

          • Re: (Score:3)

            by jvkjvk ( 102057 )

            >>There are no killer apps
            >You missed the point.
            >But I see what Apple is doing there - showing their VR googles to people who just might come up with one.

            So, just like all the other VR companies? All of them try to court developers. Oculus came out with it's SDK in *2012*!

            What is so NEW! and shiny about this Apple hardware that would inspire developers to spend the time and money to develop the "killer VR app"? If it didn't happen in, what, *11 years*, why now with this particular hardware?

            W

            • Re: (Score:1)

              by Tom ( 822 )

              Oculus came out with it's SDK in *2012*!

              Oculus was focussed on gaming and gave off that vibe. A good friend of mine got one of the early SDKs - because he's a game dev.

              If it didn't happen in, what, *11 years*, why now with this particular hardware?

              I don't know.

              Look, I'm not saying Apple is the genius who cracked the code. I don't see it, either. I'm just saying that what they're doing in the article - working with application developers - makes sense.

        • I'd buy one just for being able to tune out on an airplane and watch a movie on "Big Screen" that is portable enough to.....take on a plane with you.

          I would also enjoy having multiple monitors for working on travel, like in the hotel room.

          And c'mon, if you're in IT $3500 for a new toy shouldn't be breaking the bank if you want one, you know?

          Hell, that's what a nice camera costs these days and there's a lot more tech in these things.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by dgatwood ( 11270 )

            I'd buy one just for being able to tune out on an airplane and watch a movie on "Big Screen" that is portable enough to.....take on a plane with you.

            And assuming the FAA doesn't shoot down the idea, it will make a great way to get work done on your laptop while it is safely stowed beneath the seat in front of you for takeoff and landing.

        • This is also my take on it. Apple seems to be pushing 2D apps in 3D space for unknown reasons but there's no difference from using it on a desktop or laptop. No matter how you display them, they're still 2D apps.

          And there's nothing amazing about 2D apps in a 3D space, just like there's nothing amazing about having apps on a smartphone, until you tap into the features that makes portable apps more powerful such as the device always being with you and the device knowing where it is geographically. This allows

          • I hadn’t thought about it until your post. Maybe one of the features Apple is counting upon is the use of the eyes as a mouse replacement. A more effective pointing device is, by itself, quite valuable. All those existing 2D apps that work with fingers/mouse might work better with the eyes.

  • Tune in for more exciting news (Score:5, Funny)

    by systemd-anonymousd ( 6652324 ) on Thursday August 24, 2023 @08:22PM (#63794864)

    According to marketing materials, the thing being marketed is really good.

  • The "gasp" (Score:5, Interesting)

    by christoban ( 3028573 ) on Thursday August 24, 2023 @08:29PM (#63794882)

    From what I read, the gasp is because of the way it follows the eye very quickly, and use it instead of a separate pointing device to handle menu interaction. It elicits a very "surprised" response as the effect is startling and cool as heck.

    It did require better hardware to accomplish, but not remotely THAT much better for that expense. And anyone expecting next gens to get cheaper is not familiar with Apple since the iPhone. Anyway, the "gasp" is a marketer's wet dream!

    • I would prefer a dedicated, manual pointing device instead of eye-tracking. Smartphones as they are still have bugs with recognizing touch behaviors, and I can imagine that the eye-tracking will have respectively similar bugs for years down the line.

      • I would prefer a dedicated, manual pointing device instead of eye-tracking.

        Says the person who has never tried or experienced said solution.

        "I don't like xxx food. It just looks gross." - Also you, but at 40 instead of 12.

    • I'm going to wait for the "Apple Vision SE".

  • A side story on this people don't seem to be thinking about is what a great idea this on-site developer lab is.

    With the device being so expensive, not everyone can afford a dev kit (not sure they are even shipping many, or any, yet). So it's great to have a cheaper option for lots of developers to be able to try ideas out with.

    Even better, it allows for lots of great face to face conversations with the Vision developers who can see what people are building, and adapt the SDK to work better for uses they ha

    • With the device being so expensive, not everyone can afford a dev kit

      That's a great explanation for why this device is dead in the water already, thanks!

      • I would agree, if devs were the intended audience/market, but they're not.

        The apps are obviously going to get developed, based on what we read in this article, and how Apple will provide it for *free* to attractive prospects (https://developer.apple.com/visionos/developer-kit/). Apple just needs a few good apps for the demos to kick-start the market anyway. Apple marketing is just that good.

        Unlike the competition, Apple is targeting a completely different demographic; wealthier people, not gamers. That is o

    • "With the device being so expensive, not everyone can afford a dev kit"

      Anyone who's going to be developing apps for this thing is going to consider $3,500 a drop in the bucket. A lot of Apples computers are more expensive than the Vision Pro. The "on site conversations with developers" might make a little more sense, but I doubt it is the real aim especially with how much they are touting the facetime interactivity. I'm guessing what is mostly going on is that Apple seems to be keeping quite a tight lid

      • Anyone who's going to be developing apps for this thing is going to consider $3,500 a drop in the bucket. A lot of Apples computers are more expensive than the Vision Pro.

        As an Apple dev I agree with this point, however I wouldn't personally drop money on a dev kit unless I felt I had a pretty solid idea to develop on it - spending some effort on a prototype then trying it on the real thing, will show me how much I should push to buy an earlier prototype to finish development on (or even just to finish deve

  • If it's that good, it wouldn't need to be advertised.

  • The last thing we need as a society are *apple* flavor glAssHoles
  • Sounds like some staged crap you would expect at a trade show from the 1930s and 1940s. My question is "Can I use this product without having to worry about a bunch of unpredictable shit getting in my way or causing a disaster?"

  • It was when they announced the price, right?

  • Like I did when I saw the price.

  • Price stupidity (Score:3)

    by ScooterComputer ( 10306 ) on Friday August 25, 2023 @06:55AM (#63795574)

    I donâ(TM)t get the fools on this site complaining about the Vision Pro price. What has happened to Slashdot? True Nerds have a sense of history, and understand how technology cost curves work. Along with basic Economics.
    In 1990, I paid over $3,500 for my first Mac, a IIci. The 13-inch Apple Trinitron monitor that accompanied was another $999!
    Go to DollarTimes and check the inflation calculator. $3500 of todayâ(TM)s dollars is not -that- much money, thanks to the Federal Reserve and out-of-control gov spending. And if the Vision Pro is the game-changing tech (like the Mac was in 1984) that all of Appleâ(TM)s VR/AR -competitors- seem to believe it is, $3,500 will historically be sensical. Further, a large number of consumers are buying $1,000 Pro iPhones every year! (Yes, I know, they arenâ(TM)t paying that much every year.) Point is, they can and do spend when they feel the tech warrants.
    Will the first version of Vision Pro be the be-all/end-all? No, of course not, just as the little black-and-white Mac in 1984 was not⦠but by the IIci in 1990, the revolution was obvious. (OK, wasnâ(TM)t to everyone; DOS morons were shouting fealty to the command-line and proclaiming Windows a fad well past 2000.) The 2007 iPhone and 2010 iPad were pricing aberrations, an unusual step, but neither fulfilled the promise of the form-factor; that took another 3 or 4 iterations. Has this community gotten so misguidedly spoiled because of them??

    TL;DR: The people on here complaining about the price are idiots. Ignore.

    • In 1990, I paid over $3,500 for my first Mac, a IIci. The 13-inch Apple Trinitron monitor that accompanied was another $999!

      My mom's first computer was a Macintosh IIci she used for DTP. The full system cost was over $8,000 with a two page mono display. A full PC system that did the same job running the same software would have been around $4000, but the DTP software wasn't very reliable on PC yet. These days e.g. Adobe products are just as reliable on Windows as they are on MacOS, but back then, not so much. Windows NT was a credible OS (Windows NT 3.51 probably having been the best version of Windows of all, in its day) but th

    • Trinitron at any price was a rip-off especially for a monitor .. the shadow mask lines were annoying .. like the VR screen door effect of today.

    • I think you're missing some things with regards to the price. For one thing, you're comparing the price of this device with the price of a computer, however this device doesn't have all of the capabilities of a Mac. It runs a different OS that is not capable of running productivity apps such as Final Cut, Resolve, Photoshop, Premiere, DAWs, etc. So the $3500 you're paying for it is in addition to the $2600 - $4000 you already paid for your Macbook Pro. Given that the processor in this thing is in the ba

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by garote ( 682822 )

        Yeah, no. "Not capable of running productivity apps" is just not a statement you can make.

        All these giant blinky ski-goggles need to do is run the same apps that your average iPad does (which they will) and offer the attachment of a pointing device like the iPad does (which it will) and your full productivity suite for most professionals on the planet is right there. I mean, I don't know when you last checked, but an iPad runs pretty great versions of both Final Cut Pro and Photoshop.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by noodler ( 724788 )

      donâ(TM)t

      todayâ(TM)s

      Appleâ(TM)s

      arenâ(TM)t

      wasnâ(TM)t

      In 1990, I paid over $3,500 for my first Mac

      ... obviously...

  • thing on your face. I don't want to put a big thing on my face.

  • It's still better than audible farts.

  • Gasp, it's a fickign calendar app! It breaks all boundaries of time and space! Is there clock? And I need a compass!!

  • It looks like apple is reporting on a developer working on their platform that is masturbating to his own app..

Slashdot Top Deals

Every nonzero finite dimensional inner product space has an orthonormal basis. It makes sense, when you don't think about it.

Close