this post was submitted on 30 Jan 2024
142 points (85.9% liked)
Technology
59378 readers
3118 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm impressed. It speaks to the strength of the Apple brand. Meta should benefit if this becomes the next thing despite the differences.
Hopefully it will push the AR/VR industry forward.
I’ve been expecting this to be the new iPhone in that I think it has the potential to transform consumer perceptions and the industry. I’m personally waiting for reviews and a hands on test because my eyesight is crap. If it makes it so I can use a non-blurry monitor (my vision isn’t correctable to the point that I can easily read a monitor, and I compensate by using the best and sharpest I can find), it would be life changing for me and easily worth the $4k or whatever the final cost is after taxes and lenses and such.
But, like with iPhone, I think it just gets better from here and that the use cases developed using the high end headset will cascade through the industry.
If you have bad eyesight, VR won't help you. The goggles contain lenses to magnify and project the screens to a virtual distance from your eyeballs similar to a monitor.
You'll still need your glasses, I'm afraid.
It will push it in the wrong direction for me. It pushes VR/AR headset to be closed in one ecosystem, low repairability and no software freedom. It should go the other way and a heck lot cheaper than what apple does.
I dont really think it speaks for the strength of the Apple brand, rather, how many fan-boys they have that buy literally a rock with an apple logo on it for $10k. Knowing well they cant use it anywhere except with apple products.
Also a lot of people like being “the first”. Especially with products that might be successful. Currently Apple has a decent reputation in being “the first” with their adaption of new tech. They made the smartphone big, the tablet and the smartwatch (they even specifically made gold ones for these early adopters). All “meh products” before their version. Now people want to be the first with “the next successful tech”. …. And you are going to love it.
It al comes down to emotion really.
Can’t wait for the first music video clip with a famous person wearing the thing. (I actually can wait).
The last real inovation they added was the tablet change my mind. The others are just pr gags or just revisioning the last thing for the 15th time.
Al of them were beter implementations of existing tech, even the tablet. (With beter I mean they changed the market for said tech in their point of time, more accessibility, user friendly etc).
But decrease repairability, (software) freedom. And then the price for that. In the early day, the cheap things were locked down for only be usable on with specific other products, now its the opposite, the more it cost, the more locked down and less products work (well) with it.
It's a very minimalistic and beautiful rock tho
Fanboys who will buy anything Apple… that is what “strength of the brand” /means/
Yeah "Apple isn't a strong brand" is an absolutely insane take.
They are one of the strongest brands in human history lol
strength of the brand i understand how good their products is. But ok, now i know it!