• Apple cropped photos of the Vision Pro headset to remove the battery pack, making it look less cumbersome.
  • Journalists were not allowed to take photos or videos of the Vision Pro’s hardware during a press briefing.
  • Apple sees the cord from the battery pack as getting in the way of making the headset more mobile.

Archive link: https://archive.ph/GYPuS

  • MeatsOfRage@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Of course you can’t see it, if it’s in their back pocket they’re going to be sitting on it. Is the photographer supposed to get up their ass to get the battery pack in frame. If you uncropped the photo you would just see more of their bodies and that’s completely unnecessary for something you wear on your face. Don’t get me wrong I think everything about the Vision Pro is nonsense but this article is some clickbatey horse-shit.

  • ABCDE@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Pointless article when the battery pack is in the main picture they’ve included! Bizarre stuff.

  • Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    This is why VR will not be a thing yet again. Last time the problem was displays weren’t compact enough and the computers weren’t powerful enough. Now the problem is that batteries are too heavy and it’s basically a smartphone strapped to your face.

    Get back to me when you have something like a chunky pair of glasses that can overlay a 3D world onto the real one, or even replace it entirely, and last for hours and hours and hours.

    Which will be never, because that much energy density would probably explode.

    • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Battery is weight. Putting that weight off the head and into a back pocket is imho a very acceptable solution to the weight problem.

      And for the record, VR is already “a thing”. Has been for years now. It’s mainstream, it’s on multiple platforms, and even has standalone offerings.

      “Chunky pair of glasses” already exists as a VR device, but they are highly personalized and prohibitively expensive.

      As for “it’s basically a smartphone strapped to your face” I’m not sure how you’d break away from that? A smartphone is just an ultra compact PC with a screen. A VR device like you’re talking about is… just an ultra compact PC with 2 screens and some lenses. The reason they are so similar in your mind is because they are essentially the same thing, just in a different form factor.

      • Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Battery is weight. Putting that weight off the head and into a back pocket is imho a very acceptable solution to the weight problem.

        The screen is also a huge part of the weight issue, because it is literally a smartphone strapped to your head, plus some extra bits so your eyes can focus. It’s heavy, and it’s located on the front of your head. There’s big foam bits touching your face all over. I could definitely not wear this for as long as I’m usually working at my desktop.

        Yes, putting the battery somewhere else is a good solution, one I’ve used with my Quest a bunch of times. But if I need to be plugged into a wall to do long stints with a smartphone strapped to my face, what’s the advantage of that over a normal screen?

        Then again, I’m a boring old man who just wants more space for text editors and terminal windows. Maybe you kids have found something fun to do with VR.

        And for the record, VR is already “a thing”. Has been for years now. It’s mainstream, it’s on multiple platforms, and even has standalone offerings.

        VR is a “thing,” yes. It is a thing gathering dust on my shelf. It’s fun like Wii Sports is fun, but without the audience. It’s a neat experience but the only truly useful thing I’ve found to do with it is to walk around the streets of a city I’m going to visit so I can orient myself. But that’s hardly something I’d spend $3,500 to do.

        Hopefully Apple will find a “killer app” for VR. If I could use this thing to quickly and easily sketch out a remodeling project, I’d love it. But I haven’t found anything on my Quest that can do that, but Apple knows a thing or two about killer apps. Or they did, anyway.

        “Chunky pair of glasses” already exists as a VR device, but they are highly personalized and prohibitively expensive.

        All the ones I’ve seen look like really ridiculously oversized ski goggles. Please link to something like this and I may change my mind.

        As for “it’s basically a smartphone strapped to your face” I’m not sure how you’d break away from that?

        Have a super miniature, high-intensity display somewhere near the front of the glasses and use mirrors to reflect it into the user’s eye. It would involve incredibly complex eye tracking algorithms to prevent nausea, and that’s going to cost in computing power and energy.

        Or use lasers projected onto the lenses at some kind of polarization, which might do a better job of overlaying on bright backgrounds, but suffer the same eye tracking limitation.

        Don’t get me wrong, I really want VR. But I want to be in VR for hours at a time, not minutes. And that’s about as long as I can stand to have a cell phone strapped to my face.

        • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          The screen is only a real factor as weight when the devices are trying to cut costs. The Quest for example, isn’t marketed as a high end product, and even the Quest Pro is cutting corners. One of those corners is the screen.

          Take a look at Bigscreen Beyond. They are about the size of swim goggles with the middle filled in. But as I said, they are highly personalized. You likely can’t share them, even with someone who has a similar face shape and eye position. Though they are PCVR and tethered, but as a first iteration by the company it’s pretty decent. They do have a price tag of $1k though.

          And I find it odd that you can’t stand VR for more than minutes at a time. I was an early adopter, and while the Oculus DKs were harsh, the CV1 was comfortable enough for me to play for hours on end. The Rift S is still my go to. Though I’m likely going to be snagging a Beyond when I have the cash to spare.

          • Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            And I find it odd that you can’t stand VR for more than minutes at a time.

            I sweat a lot more than most people and the face mask gets uncomfortably slippery. Plus I don’t like being disconnected from the rest of the world for that long.

            • fishos@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              8 months ago

              So really, this isn’t a “VR is bad” but a “I hate his thing and you should too” rant, huh?

      • sverit@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        True, but having a cable attached to a headset feels pretty un-free.

        • lepinkainen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Would a big battery attached to the back of the headset be more free?

          Attaching the same battery to your belt is only an issue if you’re playing nude. Even then you can wear it like a crossbody bag in a pinch =)