this post was submitted on 07 Feb 2024
10 points (85.7% liked)

Asklemmy

44279 readers
438 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

i wouldn't normally be concerned since any company releasing a VR product with this price tag is obviously going to fail... but it's apple and somehow through exquisite branding and sleek design they have managed to create something that resonated with "tech reviewers" and rich folk who can afford it.

what's really concerning is that it's not marketed as a new VR headset, it's marketed by apple and these "tech reviewers" as the new iphone, something you take with you everywhere and do your daily tasks in, consume content in etc...

and it's dystopian. imagine you are watching youtube on this thing and when an ad shows up, you can't look away, even if you try to they can track your eye movement and just move the window, you can't mute it, you certainly cannot install adblock on it, you are forced to watch the ad until it satisfies apple or you just give up and take out the headset.

this is why i think all these tech giants (google meta apple etc) were/are interested in the "metaverse". it holds both your vision and your hearing hostage, you cannot do anything else when using it but to just use the thing. a 100% efficiency attention machine, completely blocking you from the outside world.

i'm not concerned about this iteration as much as people are not hyped about this iteration. just like how people are hyped about the next apple vision, i'm more worried about the next iterations with somewhat lower price tag and better software availability. i hope it flops and i know it probably won't achieve any sort of mainstream adoption even if it's deemed a success because it probably can't get less bulky and look less dorky, but the possibility is still worrying. what are your thoughts?

(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (3 children)

Check out what these stupid chuds have to say about it: https://www.youtube.com/live/gseav7sgpks?feature=shared

I’ve never seen people who are less trustworthy; these douchebags are willingly blind to the glaring cons of this technology.

“I’m wondering if you are the type of person who wants to keep it on all day”

NO ONE will want the embarrassment of keeping this on their face all day. This is like the Segway.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Do your part: sucker punch (or pick the pocket of) any tech bro chud you see wearing one in public.

If people are afraid to wear them in public, they’ll fade away much like the Google glassholes did.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago

Im not afraid of this or the next few iterations of ADglasses the tech bros put out, im more worried about the encroaching optessive surveillance technology these proof-of-concept devices might represent.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (3 children)

I just don't understand how Apple, a company known for their sleek, elegant design aesthetics above all else, put their name on something that looks so dorky

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago

I'll be honest I think their watch and AirPods both look kinda dumb, but they seem to be quite popular. And I distinctly remember that when both came out people were taking shots at how they looked, myself included.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago

I think how the headset looks only somewhat matters...

Apple has generated an image of being "the innovator" in technology. There was "no smartphone" until the iPhone came around (even though that statement is not completely accurate). Their computers are "superior" (even though that statement isn't necessarily accurate either). Still, the point is that the masses feel that Apple is a technologically innovative company and they still want to own some Apple technology rather than dealing with anything else.

In some realms, this is arguably working. The newer generations (today's school children) see iPhones as far superior than Android (statement accuracy not relevant) and that anyone not having an iPhone as something being too poor to own the superior phone. Apple wants to keep that brand identity - of being superior technology.

Things like VR put a bit of a damper on that vision. If VR is the "latest and greatest thing" then why does "the owners of Facebook" have their own VR technology while Apple has nothing similar? There is a feeling that Apple introduces products when they are finally ready for the masses... but there is also a growing feeling that Apple is just falling behind and can no longer be innovative. The lack of innovation feelings is something that needs to be removed.

So we have the Apple VR headset. Does it look good? Well, it looks innovative in advertising. Is it for you? No. They would prefer that you don't use the headset but instead that you "have feelings of technology superiority" when thinking of Apple products. Actually using the headset could harm those feelings. So they make sure to actually release something VR that only people with a ton of money could actually use so that those people can brag about having the latest innovative thing (while also not mentioning any issues with the device). Those people help deliver the actual product...

The actual product is the "innovative feelings". So, to conclude the point, I feel that something that looks "so dorky" is sort of the point here.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Some people call VR dystopian, but it's got great potential too.

During COVID while I was living alone and we were under lockdown...

I used a Quest to watch movies in a virtual theater with a bunch of people from around the world. I remember being in a theater watching an absolutely ridiculous Nicolas Cage movie laughing my ass off with a bunch of dudes from Australia. Another time I watched a cricket game with some people who explained the rules to me and kinda gave me some play by play on what was happening.

I've also attended a few support group meetings in VR for coping with loss that had quite a lot of attendants. The meeting was run by a licensed group therapist and we took turns sharing and then reflecting on each others stories. It was frankly amazing.

I also played mini golf with friends of mine as well as had a couple meetings over a round of mini golf with the other guy on my design team during lockdown. Honestly the best virtual meetings I ever had.

All of the above were very social and very positive experience. I didn't feel far away from people, I felt connected to them.

Same way a smartphone can be a useful tool that enhances your life or a screen you stare at for hours consuming bullshit TikTok videos. You're in control of what you make of it. You can also stick to a dumb phone and not participate at all.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Not to take away from your experience because I'm sure it was genuinely wonderful, but all I can picture for that support group is a bunch of absurd VRchat avatars sitting in a circle for a therapy session.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (2 children)

There were no insane avatars, everyone looked pretty normal. Sorry to burst your bubble.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago

How many of them have fursonas?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

any company releasing a VR product with this price tag is obviously going to fail…

Varjo is doing very well and offers probably the best VR sets. Prices start at around 3000€

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago

And IIRC those are all PCVR sets and not standalone.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I have so much to say about this, I hardly know where to start. A few brief points:

Yes, this product direction is problematic in many many ways. There is a reason why science fiction has been speculating about these types of devices for decades and nearly always portraying the technology as an escape mechanism for a horrifying dystopian reality.

We’ve experienced several really big technology revolutions in just a few decades (pc, internet, social, mobile). All have brought wonderful improvements to life, but all have had profound, and unanticipated side effects. In all instances, we would have benefited as a society by interrogating consequences more completely at the beginning, rather than just letting market forces alone to drive them into mass adoption.

The good news is that none of this is really new. This appears to be a pretty good implementation of a UI model that consumers have been largely rejecting for over 30 years. There are absolutely very useful, very good uses for these UIs, but these are niche markets overall all.

In many ways, XR (a catch all term for both VR and AR) is a retro futuristic idea. This is a vision of the future as seen 40 years ago. Really innovative human computer interfacing doesn’t look like this anymore. Actually useful innovation involves things like agents, voice ui’s and so on (think Jarvis from the MCU).

The question is, can Apple’s marketing prowess and effectively infinite budget push a largely unpleasant, unneeded, and expensive product into mass adoption? I am hopeful that they can’t. I am hopeful that reality isn’t sci-fi dystopian enough to create a wide market for this. If they can, it may say more about how dystopian our real reality has become. That’s the really worrisome part to me.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Excuse me but 'voice UI' is a hell of a lot more retro futuristic than XR. That shit has been around in sci-fi for 60+ years easy and in real life for decades at this point and is still absolutely horrible to use for just about anything more complex than setting a timer and adding things to a list.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago

I think what the tech implies these big tech giants want for the world is more worrisome than the specific tech itself.

They may fail with this iteration or the next, but why do you think they're trying so hard insisting this is the next big thing? To survive, capitalism needs to create new problems to be solved. The smart phone didn't solve any problems we had, it created a desire, which then became a fear (FOMO, then it became a need, which then finally became a problem if you didn't have one.

If you're homeless today and want to get out of it, one of the first things you need is an address, then an internet connection, and a smart phone. Why? Because most jobs require it to get a hold of you and in many cases to facilitate the software used on the job.

They don't need to convince consumers to adopt the new tech per se. They just need to convince businesses that without the new technological progress, their competitors will leave them behind. Then it won't matter if you like the tech or not, you'll NEED it to have a job and survive. Just like the smart phone is today.

They're directing us, telling us how the future will look like based off of THEIR vision, not OURS.

That's what worries me. Not this AR headset, but rather the reasons they have for insisting this is the future we are all heading towards.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

it's a toy for hype-susceptible tech-impaired rich snobs. what's to be worried about?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 11 months ago

People were complaining when newspapers were new that itd take everyones attention and make people distant. I think its great that more VR stuff is happening because the tech can be used for so much and lets people experience things they might not have otherwise.
If you were hospitalized for a long period would you rather watch the ceiling/small TV or would you want to travel the world via VR?
All new tech can be used for good or bad but we shouldnt stop progressing

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

This is anecdotal, but I see all of these VR rooms or stores at malls or on outlet areas where you can play with VR heat and have fun. They are almost always empty. I VERY rarely ever see people in them.

There another entertainment venue near me that has bowing and games and stuff. They also have a VR area that I have never seen open. Don’t know if it’s just constantly broken or if nobody is actually interested in it.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Went to one of these with my co-workers. We were the only ones and nobody was there before we arrived and when we left there wasn't anybody else coming in either.

They probably have to constantly update the HW to actually get customers and then it has to be expensive enough that the few that come, make them a profit.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Eh, you're talking what, $1500 for a headset and rig? Even if you have 4 setups at one of those kiosks the cost to have someone running it is going to quickly outpace the cost of the hardware.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago

I know a guy who used to run one of these businesses. He pivoted to something else because of the expenses, and hardware wasn't the biggest. The monthly license fees for games are outrageous when you want to provide them to the public. Which means you have to constantly bet on which game's demand will outweigh the cost on monthly basis.

Before COVID, his place was very busy. I went many times and it was a lot of fun. But, because of the cost of games, profitable, but still not super successful.

Then COVID came along. That really killed it. No one wants to wear a VR helmet that was just warn by a sweaty stranger minutes earlier during a pandemic.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I’ve not really seen any overly positive reviews. Most reviews I’ve seen talk about it like it’s this neat thing that doesn’t really have much to do in it now and are saying you’d probably only use it 1/2 hr at a time because of the hefty weight, unless you’re sitting/laying on a couch. It’s kind of a confused piece of tech because Apple is desperate to call it “spatial computing” and market it like it’s AR, but really it’s a VR headset. Yet they’re really not taking advantage of the VR aspect.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The first iPad also had shitty reviews and then it still established itself. I wouldn't judge too early just based on these initial reviews.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I’m actually hopeful for it and hope it does ok enough and that they release a cheaper Vision SE or something that’s at least in the realm of possibility for commoners to own. I just think Apple itself is kind of confused about what this thing should be and I think their walled garden approach could hurt them in the long run on this.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Indeed. Has all the VR features, but tries to sell as AR device with little to no AR use cases with the exception of a text field opening up over a real bluetooth keyboard. Having dozens of screens and apps floating around you isn't "AR", it's VR. And that you can see the real world has already been done by Occulus years ago. Sure this is a better quality and leverages the Apple ecosystem, but you can't sell it believably as an AR device yet. That said, the apps of the first iPhone weren't great either, so let's see how they iterate over this 600g ski goggles.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It’s not VR if you can see the real world. That’s literally the only distinction between the two and you messed it up.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›