The first flat screen I ever saw in a friend's home was in 2003, it was a 42 inch 720p Phillips that he got for "only" $7000 because it had like a big 6 inch scratch right underneath the display up front. Now you can get a TV that's significantly better and much larger for like $400. Early adopters pay back the R&D so things can get affordable for everyone else.
@@da7me22 thats not the point, all the hand tracking and ar stuff existed before apple circumcision even was released. Occulus already had all of that before
He is spot on. I never thought about buying Meta Quest 3 before Vision pro dropped. Now that I see the potential,I am starting research on whether MQ3 is worth it.
I had an Oculus Go. While waiting for the Vision Pro, I bought the Quest 3 as soon as it was available. It's totally worth it. It's hard to justify spending $4000 on Apple's headset. Hard, but not impossible. I bought Vision Pro, and I'm keeping it. The kids use the Quest 3 for playing Gorilla Tag. I'll still use it for games and content that Vision Pro doesn't (yet) support.
It's a great headset and will show you what VR/AR and MR is all about. If you have a high-end PC then you also get to enjoy very high-end experiences like Microsoft Flight Simulator, Assetto Corsa, Half-Life: Alyx and Google Earth: VR for a start. If you don't have a PC with Steam VR and WIFI 6, it still has tons to offer natively.
The first Macintosh computer came out in 1984 for $2500 which in today's price is $7000. That stopped lots of people from buying it, but lots of other people DID buy it! It's all relative ....
Great to see Palmer sharing his thoughts here. And thanks for your initiative back years ago to make VR a reality. I have dreamed of this my whole life and consequently been one of the first to jump on VR as it became available. When the Oculus Rift preorders went life back then, I ordered within the first couple of minutes. I was very tempted by DK1 and DK2, but held out for the finished product.
First time I tried VR was in the 90s, I have no idea what the device was called, I tested it at a local computer store, playing doom (or doom2), and I immediately got sick due to the low framerate and non existent head tracking. It’s kinda surprising that it took this long before the tech went anywhere. Even the quest 2 from a couple of years ago was a pretty terrible device that still made me seasick. Hoping that with Apple in the game, things finally start progressing.
Apple most likely going to dump all the processing data to an iphone in the future. So the headset is going to just have the sensors. Vision Pro uses an M2 chip, iPad Pro has it but not on iphones yet. they might not slap it on the iphone if A series chip catch up
My shelf is going to have my DK1, DK2 and now VP1. I think He has this completely right. Hope Palmer gets back into VR soon. Thanks Palmer for getting this whole thing off the ground again.
He is not completely right. After 12 years, I still hear "Early adopters", "We are still early", "Soon the form of glasses", "Tech will improve quickly", "Give it 5 years". How many more years we will be listen the same? Does he know that we age? He obviously forgot that 12 years have passed, and tech should be already better than it is
Clint Miller why next level ? first you need a Killer App, if nobody does write that, it's just nothing, for some only. Guess you never did try it at all, just crying here ? You have coding skills ?
Wow ok this is really insightful stuff an actual engineer talking about how one would make a headset properly. Fresh and really actually from a point of wisdom that I have not heard.
I get that vr developer must be an enthusiast, but the level of copium is really rising. Want thin ar glasses? Try xreal, they can actually be used for work, unlike vision or oculus. And they can give it to you now, unlike oculus (that i own) and vision (that i wouldn't buy even for 2k)
Palmer is right about most things. I think he is still overly optimistic about mainstream usage. Also, he makes the common mistake of thinking Apple is a marketing company. This may be more true that it was before, but that is not the foundation of their business. He doesn't understand industrial design.
On the Quest, I was in a virtual room with a member of Naughty by Nature. He was a fan of VR, the Quest, and of the program. (It was a Windows social app that's since been shut down, but The social experience was probably one of the best I've had. Apple needs to step it up in that regard. As far as games, I think for sure they will eventually make their own Controllers. They won't pass up the opportunity to charge an insane amount for something like that.
Maybe the second vision pro will have controllers, but the first one is a dud for playing games. The first one is for those with too much money on their hands.
What about a cloud based super thin glasses. Having everything on the glass it's not smart. Probably in the future (and we already have) super fast connection. Why having everything on the glasses when you can stream it?
I was waiting for Apple VR. Then I learned when it was introduced, it was not available and the price. I bought a Quest Pro. Were it available for 2000usd probably I would have bought vision pro.
Palmer Luckey...almost feels like it should be swapped...Luckey Palmer. I swear there was a Lucky Palmer in history somewhere...but Google can't find one. maybe it's just to cigarette companies my parents had around...Anyway. I don't think bringing this tech down to glasses size will be the best, most immersive experience. Naturally, at some point we'll have the tech to create full-peripheral viewing, and stick more of the tech in a puck, but also, we are going to want something that fully form-fits our faces, to keep the light out. I think tech like Big Screen Beyond is getting to the size that would be acceptable for any future headset. If they can keep the weight down, the FOV and battery life up, I think around that size will be the minimum for an actual VR/AR headset. Now, if we are talking about just AR and/or wearing a Copilot around your daily life, then yes, a pair of glasses is the way to go.
The biggest problem of AVP is they separate the battery but Goggles still way heavy against MQ3, it doesn't make sense at all.. of course the Picture quality is better on AVP because it's $3500 device which is 7x the price of MQ3, for now, Mark Zuckerberg is right, that the MQ3 is a better product period. not just on value, but on its usability. AVP for now, is just a Showcase of what Apple can do on VR.. next gen VR will be a different story.. let's see..
I love this technology and Tech in general but what about THE CONTENT? The most advanced cell phones with the best processor, camera, etc are still used to browse dumb things like TikTok trends or Reels of stupid pranks. What type of augmented reality are we going for? Macdonalds' ads in 8k? Fake news on X in 3D?
@1:40. I find this specific comment amusing. Palmer, you yourself went back on your own words on the oculus reddit community which I was apart of just before you sold out oculus. You had very little regard for anyone but a big paycheck. I still have my Oculus DK1 I bought backing your idea and philosophy of what Oculus was building. Then facebook bought you out, jammed facebook signups in everyone's throats with their newly acquired hardware, and only recently went back on that because it slaughtered VR adoption. Sorry Palmer, applying Einstein's definition of insanity which is to say essentially doing the same thing twice expecting a different outcome: I'm done trusting anything that comes out of your mouth. Also, cut your hair my guy.
Apple did a lot of things right except the proprietary power, not having any computer connection to fix the issue that I've seen popping up, but then again it wouldn't be an apple device without the words "proprietary" and "unfixable at home"
5:39 I believe that Palmer Lucky is right here , people are going to spend more of their time in an augmented view ( if that's what you like to call it 😒) or virtual reality (VR) or extended reality (XR) or by its greates name the METAVERSE 😁
Everyone wants to constantly compare new products to the icnonic products of the past, like the Apple II or the iPhone, just like they want to compare every new basketball player to Michael Jordan or every football player to Tom Brady, but these are once in a century devices, they don't come around once every the 10 or so years. Strapping a big ass computer to your face is apples and oranges to earbuds and cellphones, this is a much more niche product than these evangelists want you to think. Also, Apple paid tons of celebrities' and influencers to wear Apple watches and to this day nobody thinks they're cool, everyone who wears them looks like a massive dork...
I wouldn't be surprised if we see a variety of different form factors. They might end up looking like hats, helmets and ski-masks. Imagine wearing around a Mandalorian helmet 😂
Brain computer interface is the ultimate format. Weird that Palmer didn't mention that but is stuck in the trying to make analogies based on the current hardware that's out there. That's like saying 'How will we incorporate all of the extra horses on these new cars as they get more powerful'. Elon, who own Nueralink, has been quoted as saying 'The best part is no part at all' in reference to optimizing production hardware. A brain insert that communicates with your phone/computer is all that will be required.
I love VR but I still have a hard time seeing everyone wearing AR glasses everywhere. I get the benefits it could bring but just don’t see it. I’ll probably be wrong but I don’t see that happening.
The VR experience, as an idea, can and should be reduced to 'New Display', and let's be real, this type of product would do best being oriented for the techbro/gaming market, which IS a very dynamic market. Also, the PC master race has proven, time and time again, that keyboard mouse input is far superior to handheld input in every way, from critical things such as accuracy, to less important things, such as comfort.
Apple's Approach: The Oculus creator praises Apple's Vision Pro strategy. Apple targets high-end, premium features, which is the right starting point, even if the headset is expensive. They'll follow the tech industry trend of driving costs down in future iterations. Inspiration over Affordability: This approach will inspire consumers' desire for the technology, even if it's out of reach financially. This 'lust factor' is valuable and was a core goal early in Oculus's development. The Importance of Cool: VR and AR headsets once seemed strange, like earbuds or cellphones. With social engineering (celebs and influencers), they will become commonplace. Lady Gaga and Will.i.am have already demonstrated how outlandish glasses can pave the way for acceptance. The Future of AR/VR: The Oculus creator is bullish. Headsets will be widely used for both AR and VR daily. The continuous blending of real and digital worlds will transform how we communicate.
The cell phone is a good analogy, I got my first cell phone around 1997 and it felt embarrassing to have one in public, I remember I use to hide to use it and when kids on my block found out I had one they use to crowd around to see it, it was hella embarrassing.
I saw the vision pro and there was nothing really that I want from it, definitely no 'lust' for it. It may be because I'm a former rift s user but unless these things can start to fit in a pocket I'm not buying anything.
Never had an interest in VR. It seems a bit wonky to me... Just wearing that stupid thing on my face being bombarded by close range wireless frequencies is enough for me to say no.
It’s interesting that Apple is all about AI. I have zero confidence that they get it right cause 1) they can’t get Siri right (how the hell they gonna figure out something 1000x more complicated), 2) they still can’t get iCloud syncing right (messages still doesn’t sync with the Apple Watch, among other issues ), and 3) AI means different things to different people, and I doubt that Apple really understands true AI! Yeah, I’m still pissed about the $3500 price tag of the Apple scuba mask!
Interesting that he mentions the external puck, which Apple certainly used with the Vision Pro, but it unfortunately didn't make its headset any lighter than the current ones on the market that are still just a little too heavy. So, with Vision Pro version one you actually have all the weight plus the puck. Not ideal at all. Hopefully future versions will actually make the choice there seem justified.
All hardware and dev stuff aside, Apple should have done a fake "beta release" wide like Gmail and you have to get a referral from someone to get one and register as a developer. In that way it would become inclusive of the actual first-in people who won't feel ripped off in a year like all early adopters do and say they contributed to the actual release. With a commercials release like this Apple is putting too many delicate eggs in an untested basket
I appreciate that the VR market is advanced favorably with Apples product. In saying that, for the "financially challenged" persons, such as myself, that sort of asking price has to be exceedingly justified and supported for the long haul. Though, any BIG tech company's MO is to make money and don't care about the consumer what so ever. If you have a two year old Apple/Samsung/Whatever device, you know, they don't care. I foresee many Apple vision pro users soon thinking.. "I've had my fun, it was cool.... but I shouldn't have spent that much on that experience"... Just for ref, I've had the PSVR 1, Quest 2, and now 3... what makes the hardware? Software...
The platform has to be "un-dorkyfied". From the Inside it looks great, outside you look like a dork. Apple is very good a styling. Much exterior work is required for full consumer adoption. Will we all be wearing Star Trooper helmets in the future ?
@7:35 LOL, Crocs come to mind. When they were writing the movie idiocracy they picked those shoes because they didn't think anyone would actually be caught dead wearing them out in public.
I watched a Dust Anthology movie short about this a while back. Don't remember the title though. It was about a man and his little daughter. It wasn't until the end of the movie that it was understood that his daughter was not really there. She was either an AI of a daughter he lost, or it was an AI of a daughter he just wanted to have. Very interesting concept. AR on this level would certainly make the world a more interesting place to look at, which was also very well represented in the movie.
He's right. I never spend money on entertainment, but I had always wanted an oculus and now I so want a Vision Pro. My entertainment is restricted to RU-vid, shorts, reels etc. just that.
Problem is you can't have a shared experience and allow the people with you to see what you are seeing. Would be better to have a little holographic projector mounted on your head.
I think Holograms are probably not feasible in the way we imagine, so AR is going to be the way to make holograms real in the future. It's just not there yet.
@@sergeayissi939 Analyzing this specifically, there are big issues about scale, privacy and more. I think we might see some kind of shared experiences soon, band maybe prototypes of the "real" big thing, but I don't think we'll see what I'm envisioning as public holograms for a long time.