Why do you think there will be amazing apps? Low volume means expensive apps that don’t make a lot of money for the devs compared to, say, the much larger VR market.
Comment on Apple employees outnumbered customers at Vision Pro launch in San Francisco's Union Square
IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 11 months agoI’ll take that bet. I’ve had a Vive for years, Apple’s effort addresses all of the issues I have with that headset. I’m excited to see what devs are going to come up with, there’s going to be some amazing apps coming out.
Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 11 months ago
IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 11 months ago
There will be things like this:
si.com/…/this-f1-virtual-reality-teaser-brings-sp…
If Apple can figure out how to license and broadcast immersive video live from sporting events, these things are going to sell like crazy once the non-pro, cheaper version comes out.
hitmyspot@aussie.zone 11 months ago
That already existed on psvr 4 years ago and I think take up was minimal. Again, it could be something that apple can popularise, now the technology is better, but it won’t be ground breaking.
Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 months ago
Psvr has the issue of having to buy a console and the headset. Though they may be cheaper compared to vision pro they have the gaming stigma around it while this has the luxury brand on it.
How many billionaires will buy a vision pro vs how many would buy the psX + psvr?This is a device suitable for the masses.
IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 11 months ago
The groundbreaking part is to take that tech, refine it, and sell a metric fuckton of hardware. Groundbreaking is seeing all these disparate, unconnected technologies come together into something new.
dustyData@lemmy.world 11 months ago
And that’s the big dead on arrival red flag. There’s already some ecosystem for VR/AR, specially in games. But Apple is not compatible with non of that. If people could buy a VisionPro and instantly use the software they already own and have been using for a few years but with better hardware and a better experience, the story would be different and this would be a runaway success. But this is one of the cases where the walled garden and overall hostility towards developers from Apple will bite them in the ass. A few massive players have straight up refused to port their software for the Vision Pro, and hardware platforms live and die on their supported software. This is one where Apple can’t carry the whole burden of development since they are already bogged on keeping up with coming up with an entirely new OS and an entirely new UX. If they don’t open the garden and let help in, the Vision Pro will forever be a curious toy, not the productivity machine they want it to be.
IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 11 months ago
If they don’t open the garden and let help in
What does that look like to you? I’m not sure what it is you want Apple to do.
dustyData@lemmy.world 11 months ago
I don’t give a fuck about what Apple does. Their actions and decisions are inconsequential to me personally.
But, entertaining the questions, they could’ve reach out to the developers of the most popular VR apps and games to entice them to port as soon as possible. The only similar thing I’ve heard was a small indie that made like a YouTube frontend, or something (IDK). And that was not on a Dev kit but on a emulator. Which has gigantic limitations. They could also allow devs broader access to the system, like allowing sideloading, kernel level modules, open source some part of the OS to allow people to understand how it works, tinker with and innovate over the possibilities that the hardware brings.
All those are things that Apple will never do though. And as a result, their hardware platform won’t be the bed of innovation they want it to be. Right now the vision pro has no killer app or must have feature. You can’t build the future by forbidding everyone from building unless they pay you out of the nose just to even see the building site.
hitmyspot@aussie.zone 11 months ago
I worry that it’s a bit chicken and egg. I’ve a psvr and psvr2, for reference. Without millions of users, the market for a range of quality apps is poor. Then, of those quality apps, only a few will be truly great, even less revolutionary enough to sell a $3500 headset for one.
IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 11 months ago
This is a big step up from existing VR headsets, it can do things they can’t, so I’m excited to see what devs can do.
hitmyspot@aussie.zone 11 months ago
Me too, but that assumes devs that have the time and access to do so. If it’s not mass market, they may not. In a way, hopefully it means that all vr has to use the same apis/design language eventually rather than a a new set of competing systems. Obviously, with seeing how the phone market went, none of the big companies will allow that to happen if they can avoid it.