[santiagobasulto]

I don't own Apple Vision Pro, but I tested them two times already and I'm amazed by the technology. I honestly think it's the future. We're probably WAY too early yet, and the Vision Pro might fail badly, but it is indeed the future.

I did a special test session in Japan for "productivity" (the guys at the Apple Store were very friendly and agreed to let me install VSCode and Ghostty on the testing laptop. I cloned an open source repository and spent ~20 minutes just coding.

It was FANTASTIC. The Apple Store was full and I could still "black out" the noise and completely immersed myself in the experience.

I'm seriously considering buying a pair now, but I'm just concerned about the under-investment in the sector.

Regardless, I honestly think it's the future, maybe in 10/20 years, but it'll be the norm.

[prmoustache]

The future is not needing to strap some heavy thing to your face but have a chip directly connected to your brain to serve as an interface for a computer.

[bpavuk]

UGH! imagine a BCI chip serving advertisements into your brain directly and recording everything from how you breathe to how you fuck to "personalize" said ads.

no, I love technology, but I will never bind a piece of tech directly into my brain. we failed with mobile phones and we WILL definitely fail with BCI chips, ON THE EXACT SAME SPOTS. they will be impressive, sure, but they will also hold us captive past user acquisition period

[prmoustache]

I said an interface, not a full blown computer. The idea would be to have a standard protocol so you can control the computer of your choice (which could run adless open source software) without having to touch a keyboard, look at a screen or use headphones/speakers.

Obviously we'd have to legislate so that the kind of ad ridden stuff you mention is not allowed but that is a separate problem.

I think it is interesting in a way that it could allow deaf, mute and blind people to communicate more easily to other non disabled people and vice-versa but I fear we might lose progressively more senses (we have already lost many compared to the wildlife surrounding us) and we would progressively all become deaf and mute and reliant on technology.

But I don't see how we can avoid this kind of technology to take over at some point.

[bpavuk]

> I said an interface, not a full blown computer.

does it matter? the moment my brain becomes a computer's peripheral (input and output alike), said computer can read from my brain and infer things I don't want it to infer.

> The idea would be to have a standard protocol so you can control the computer of your choice

good luck doing that without a regulatory push that's tenfold stronger than DMA. we are lucky to not have vendor-locked keyboards and mice.

> I think it is interesting in a way that it could allow deaf, mute and blind people to communicate more easily

...with the same research that has a HUGE potential for law enforcement/employer/adtech corp/Palantir/whoever to forcefully crack my brain open for them? no thanks I'd rather put `contentDescription` and `alt` properties of UI components as well as test the deaf/mute/blind experience rigorously than face BCI

> But I don't see how we can avoid this kind of technology to take over at some point.

so let's delay it for as long as we physically can!

[prmoustache]

I am not saying I want that, I am saying it will come sooner or later, and will probably be ready before everyone use vision pro or its alternatives.

[ethbr1]

> good luck doing that without a regulatory push that's tenfold stronger than DMA

The only way this would ever happen: Medicare and Medicaid

If they could require a baseline open standard to make a device eligible for reimbursement, then that could potentially sway the market.

[_kb]

Black Mirror already did that episode: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_People_(Black_Mirror).

[Unit327]

I could spend 20 minutes coding in a headset but there's no way could I spend an hour doing it.

[dgellow]

What makes it fantastic and the future? Your comment is just saying it’s great but doesn’t explain why

[kurige]

Having your "workstation" with monitors floating around you in space wherever you're sitting or standing with zero cable management. Whether you're at home in the comfy chair, at a treadmill getting your steps in, or at a hotel on a work trip.

Once the resolution and UX gets good enough a lot of people would love to have their entire office setup replaced by a portable wearable with next to zero cable management. Doubly so if that opens up space in your expensive SF apartment.

That's all good in theory, but we're still a long, long away from this being the future, let alone a future that everybody wants.

[hamburglar]

I’d probably do more development in the meta quest virtual desktop environment if my primary occupation these days wasn’t writing software for the meta quest. It makes it difficult to iterate when you constantly need to flip to a mode where your monitors disappear.

[BoorishBears]

I have one and think it's meh. The display is great, but the lenses are a let down and the FOV is not great for using a (simulated) large monitor.

I only use it when traveling. It's not better than a high quality computer monitor for coding for me, and I'd expect the same to be true for most.

Also a bit meta but... if you ask a question that involves using the AVP in 2026, you're mostly getting answers from a minority of die hards.

Anyone else has probably left theirs sitting around gathering dust for a while now. Last I checked there are actually fewer AVP apps over time, so this isn't exactly a thriving platform.

[philipstorry]

Hiya. Sorry, but you might not like what I have to say - I still hope that you read it all though.

I doubt that this is the future. Maybe it is for a small number of people on HN, but outside of this site there's no way it's the future.

You're amazed by this because it's the ultimate expression of the luxury of focus. Unfortunately whilst developers and artists get the luxury of focus, most other people don't. Most other people have either responsibilities or duties that require them to be interruptable.

Being interrupted sucks. But for most people it's a fundamental part of their job. IT, HR, Finance, Security/Compliance, Facilities, and so many more. As an example for folks in sales not being interrupted may mean a lost sale. That's typically not acceptable.

So what you value from AVP is a detrimental thing for others.

Worse than that, AVP is a very expensive way of getting that focus. We could buy you a bigger monitor and some quality headphones for less than a quarter of the price.

Right now for five hundred bucks I can buy a 34" curved widescreen monitor with built in webcam, microphone and USB power delivery of 100 watts. Someone can plug their laptop into that and charge it whilst getting a webcam and microphone over that same cable. It's very cool. Throw in some noise cancelling headphones and the total bill is maybe seven hundred bucks.

That's the price target that AVP has to compete with. And it's a moving target - the cost of monitors and noise cancelling headphones will go down as well.

Let's be honest, right now I could buy a headphones/monitor combination for you both at an office desk AND at home, pay for the courier to your house, and still have a sizable chunk of change from the cost of AVP. If you scale this up over the whole of society, the costs of AVP vs a monitor/headphones combination are HUGE and yet the gains are, for most situations, marginal at best.

And I'm only talking about cost here. If IT departments have to start issuing AVP devices, they're going to need to do the fitting - something only Apple currently does. They'll have to keep records of the pads used for you. They'll have to keep records of your optician's prescription, and spares of the lenses issued to you (if needed). An AVP is a very personal device - if yours breaks, we can't just pick one of the shelf and know it will work for you immediately, the padding and lenses ensure that.

Imagine an office with 100 desks. Which is easier - 100 monitors like the ones I described before, or 100 AVP headsets? The monitors allow hotdesking if necessary, they work with any laptop (even visitors). They're fungible. Headphones are a bit more personal, but still fungible in a pinch. An AVP headset is the exact opposite of that.

Oh, and I've just realised that IT teams are going to need to either keep a record of your prescription for the lenses, or have delays in issuing replacements. That prescription is PII. Now we have a whole new legal problem to deal with.

None of these issues are insurmountable, but all of the solutions are extra cost. For an already costly device.

The future isn't AVP. The future is big monitors and headphones. Because that future is already here, and its logistics and costs are simple and manageable.

I really am sorry to be the one to tell you this. I know you value the luxury of focus. I hope that, if anything, this comment allows you to enjoy and appreciate that luxury more in the future.

[gigatree]

Different products can target different segments of the market. The question is just whether this one is large enough to support something like the AVP

[philipstorry]

Absolutely. I was, if anything, trying to caution against assuming that the segment the poster was in was the whole of the market.

(Personally I think that the AVP market is too small for the modern Apple to care about, and I don't see similar products from competitors ever having the hype.)

[worldsavior]

Funny you say it's the future when the project was scraped. I don't think people want to live in a fake world.

[F7F7F7]

The project has not been scraped or scrapped. Any outlet that reported that walked it back. It’s reportedly put on hold while they work on the glasses. Its fate might ultimately end up all the same.

I own a AVP and it’s super niche. Can’t blame Apple for putting their attention on the more wearable glasses form factor.

Also, in the year that I’ve owned my AVP I can count on one hand the amount of times I’ve been in full VR/immersive. And I use it everyday.

[tsimionescu]

It is obviously walked waaaayyy back from the original plans, and any hype is well and truly dead. AR/VR in general are a tech dead end that sounds cool to some sci-fi enthusiasts and has some niche entertainment applications, but that's inevitably it, every time it rears its head.

[ShinyLeftPad]

For every comment like this there's 5 from actual users who enjoy it. I know multiple people who tried it in store and want it but don't have the money. It's a product for pro developers with money to spare who will create the initial ecosystem for future casual users.

[stingraycharles]

It’s unlike Apple to be too early with something. Usually it’s the competition and they show how it should really be done.

I guess the main problem here is the price point, which will improve over time and with scale.

[0bytes]

The Newton team might disagree.

[b112]

I think the comments are a bit negative in this thread, however, Newton has nothing to do with Apple now. Or the last decade. Or the last 20 years. It's touching on 30+ years post launch now. Pointing at an "early idea" from 1993, is more the exception to the rule.

Products such as the ipod and then the iphone, were as the parent poster describes. Both ipod like devices, and the iphone were successors to other devices already on the market. It was how they were presented, packaged, and tailored that made them special and unique. Yet the launch of these devices are also in the range of two decades ago.

In the tech world, a few years is a long time let alone 20 or 30 years.

I'd say Apple is barely innovative now, and further, their 'early ideas' are long, long, long gone.

This is why it's such a shame that their products aren't as polished as they used to be. They still have a very strong capacity to do this, and I wish they would. It's a great market, and it's what a lot of people want. Take what's already on the market, as Jobs did with the iphone, or the ipod, and make it ... well, very nice to use.

Yet they seem to be stumbling here a bit, which is a shame.

[serf]

> I don't think people want to live in a fake world.

yeah that's why escapist hobbies , movies & video games do so poorly.

it's not even 'another world' , it's just a slightly different kind of screen, one that you wear. You get to use it for what you want -- maybe escapism is that thing -- but we'd never say that some beancounter working on an excel sheet is living in a fake world (although you should say that wrt a few of them..)

[torben-friis]

There is a huge difference though, and I say that as someone who started his career as a VR dev.

Unless you life fully alone, there is definitely a different level of vulnerability and isolation in effectively blindfolding yourself that is very hard to ignore. Even after months working daily using these devices, it still felt awkward to sink into one in an open plan office. I can't imagine doing it in a living room while your family is around, or near roommates, or a plane.

[basisword]

>> Unless you life fully alone, there is definitely a different level of vulnerability and isolation in effectively blindfolding yourself that is very hard to ignore. Even after months working daily using these devices, it still felt awkward to sink into one in an open plan office. I can't imagine doing it in a living room while your family is around, or near roommates, or a plane.

Tonnes of people live alone. A huge normal of people now work from home. If you're using it as a monitor to work like suggested in the post you're not going to be doing that around family/roommates anyway even on a laptop. You're going to be in a room by yourself.

[nkrisc]

I’ve never met anyone in real life who enjoys a screen strapped to their face. No one I know ever talks about VR headsets as anything other than a novelty thing you do at the mall.

The only place I’ve ever seen anyone say positive things about VR is online.

I may be proven wrong but I’m convinced it’s a small minority who care about VR headsets, and a good portion of them seem to be the terminally online.

[djtango]

We will need some time to iterate on the form factor and user experience but it is hard to imagine a portable AR computer isn't the direction we're heading. While I truly appreciate the value of unplugging and doing things manually, it's hard to deny the utility of environmentally aware computation meshing with virtual work environments.

Arguably a true AR experience brings us MORE into the real world as the need to be rooted to a desk and cubicle is lessened and we're brought closer to product/client/stakeholder without sacrificing digital connectivity.