[closewith]

If the state of the art is the Vision Pro, then all the GP'S complaints are valid. It's not anywhere near good enough to replace a controller.

[dagmx]

For what use cases though? Interacting with websites, most apps and content consumption? Hand tracking beats a controller.

Controllers have their strength for games but most things that people do with their computers are better with hand tracking.

[closewith]

> For what use cases though? Interacting with websites, most apps and content consumption? Hand tracking beats a controller.

I can only imagine this is an extreme minority view, as hand tracking is next to useless for these tasks, outside of tech demos.

[dagmx]

Why do you need a controller for any of that? Those are all point and click, with low precision and large hitboxes. Which is perfect for eye+hand. Almost every review says hand+eye is greatly intuitive, almost every user in the Vision Pro communities as well. Even Meta are using hands+eyes as the way forward.

What exactly are you missing that a controller gives you for those tasks?

[tracyhenry]

This is a pretty common view for Vision Pro users. Hand tracking is great for these. Can't imagine having to use a controller.

Ofc Vision Pro users are extreme minorities so you are not wrong. But I highly encourage you to try out Vision Pro if you haven't.

[closewith]

I did buy a Vision Pro, but it's a nearly unusable device and outside of fora, I've never met anyone whose had a positive experience, so I suspect even among Vision Pro users, it's a minority opinion.

Hand tracking is not a feasible input method for routine computing.