Apple Reportedly Suspends Work on Vision Pro 2

but it’s utterly useless.

That imo has been the issue with VR/AR for a while now. The Hardware as you said is pretty good by now and looking at something like the quest even afforable. What's lacking is content and use cases.

Smartphones had an easier time being adopted, since it was just moving from a larger to a smaller screen. But VR/AR actually needs a new type of content to make use of it's capabilities. And there you run into a chicken/egg problem, where no one is putting in the effort (and vr content is harder to produce) without a large user base.

Just games and some office stuff (that you can do just as well on a regular pc) aren't cutting it. You'd need stuff like every major sport event being broadcast with unique content, e.g. formula one with the ability to put yourself into the driver seat of any car.

You've nailed it. Ordinarily, Apple is good at throwing its weight (money) around to make things like this happen, but it seems like there weren't many takers this go-round, so we just got an overpriced, beautiful and fascinating paperweight.

That's why the biggest use case for VR has been gaming and metaverses. It's a ready-to-go thing that adapts well, but it's certainly not for everyone. For my part, I'm saving up for a PS VR2, because it's adding PC support soon and I already own a PS5 as well. Far, far cheaper than Apple's device, and likely quite good still.
- Ordinarily, Apple is good at throwing its weight (money) around to make things like this happen, but it seems like there weren't many takers this go-round, so we just got an overpriced, beautiful and fascinating paperweight.
  
  Yeah normally Apple is maybe the only company that has the scale and control over their ecosystem to force rapid adoption. But this was clearly not a consumer product aimed at capturing the masses, but more or less a dev kit sold to anyone willing to shell out the price.
  
  The PS VR2 sounds nice, but feels like it is only aimed at the gaming market and even there sony only captures a fraction.
  
  The Quest as a standalone device imo really would have the best shot at mass market adoption, but Facebook rightfully has an image problem. And despite spending so much on development doesn't seem to create any content or incentivize others to do so.
  
  Edit: actually kind of forgot "bigscreenVR". I am somewhat surprised that the default is to cram all hardware into the headset making it much bulkier instead of a seperate piece on a belt, back, or maybe strap on your upper arm.
  
  Yeah, I'm pretty convinced we need to be able to make the headsets lighter, and put more compute in an accessory and have the headset just do low complexity stuff like low latency last-millisecond angle adjustments to frames as you move.
  
  Have you checked out the bigscreen headset? It's only doing upscaling to overcome the resolution limitations of displayport 1.4, and the form factor might be to your liking.
  
  Shame about the lens glare effect, but otherwise, pretty cool!
  
  I find it unacceptable that a $1000 HMD-only product like this has subpar lenses. You would think they could do a little more R&D to fix that
  
  Apple has a long history of insanely expensive ( but quite high quality) displays.
  
  There are photographers and design professionals out there, but it’s pretty niche market. That’s what the Vision Pro seems to be aimed at. But it’s not very good for mouse based design, and harder to trust in the usual proofing/editing environment. Plus wearing it for an 8-10 hour shift is never going to happen.
  
  You are right, Apple also has some legit professional staff. And if the person using it gets paid a lot, then a one time hardware purchase becomes negligible.
  
  Accurate fine motor control and even basic stuff like typing does seem not quite fleshed out, so that is indeed an issue. But I don't think it's a deal breaker that you can't do long shifts with it, since you'd probably only use it for certain tasks.
  
  Even more of a niche, but I could see it for something like architects. Both for work and to maybe even present to clients.
  
  But they're not at all designed for use as shared devices, not even proper local multiuser support (any devs who want that has to craft it all by themselves from scratch), so collaborative work or simultaneous display and interaction doesn't work well with them. In fact it would be easier to just let a client see 3D stuff on an ipad with an AR app.
  
  This was my feeling after seeing it too. Architects also love to see models and more tangible things, even printouts in my experience.
  
  Offering a fully rendered environment sounds amazing but someone would have to do a lot lore work at the office before presenting it to the client because it would look less complete than simple foam models can.
  
  It may be useful for investor presentations for really large projects (Saudis or UAE style projects), but again, those are pretty narrow audiences and so expensive that bespoke displays could be viable.
  
  Yeah, that’s why I mentioned upcoming PC support for PS VR2.
- To be fair, they have a similar problem with iPad, but they can flog those at a price point where many people are happy to grab one to see how they can make it fit.
  
  The overarching opinion of iPads is that they’re just big iPhones, and because they can share apps, it took a long time to get to where we are now, where most iPad apps are actually developed for it. But ultimately, they’re still iPhone apps, just rejigged to take advantage of the bigger screen. As someone with an iPad and a MacBook, who’s had a really good go at making an iPad my main computer, the platform just isn’t there. So if I do use it, it’s always in the knowledge that what I’m doing is probably easier on my Mac.
  
  VisionPro feels the same to me. Sure, I could surround myself with work, but pinching and tapping nothing in the air has zero tactility and is far less satisfying than clicking a mouse and typing on a keyboard. And comes with having to wear a headset. So in the end, most people will just do the work on their Mac.
When the HTC Vive and Oculus Rift first came out, the rift didn’t yet have full-room support. You had to sit facing the base station and use a video game controller. Meanwhile, on Vive, you could stand up, walk around, and manipulate the world with two tracked remotes.

One pro-con comparison I read at the time actually listed needing to walk around the room as a con against HTC. That is the whole point of VR.

I think the core issue is that every piece of new technology so far has helped us get lazier. People used to walk around an office, then they sat at a computer, now they carry their computer with them and do things from the couch.

Nobody wants to get up to do things if they can avoid it, and that’s the only real benefit VR/AR provides.
- Meanwhile, on Vive, you could stand up, walk around, and manipulate the world with two tracked remotes.
  
  Issue is that if I remember correctly the vive was an outside-in concept that required base stations to be setup. So you lose the cable, but are still bound by location. And importantly also needs a pc aswell. So still far away from standalone.
  
  I think the core issue is that every piece of new technology so far has helped us get lazier. People used to walk around an office, then they sat at a computer, now they carry their computer with them and do things from the couch.
  
  Nobody wants to get up to do things if they can avoid it, and that’s the only real benefit VR/AR provides
  
  But I think VR/AR could make us lazier:
  
  For VR the promise is immersion. You get to experience a concert, sport event, unique experience or exotic place from your own living room. And for many of that it is just fine to sit on a couch and still have a benefit from the technology.
  
  For AR i think it's a bit more productivity focused. For example less need to train personel, if you can project every instruction into their field of view.
  
  Issue is that if I remember correctly the vive was an outside-in concept that required base stations to be setup
  
  But that wasn't the complaint levied. They were literally complaining about needing to walk around.
  
  And for many of that it is just fine to sit on a couch and still have a benefit from the technology.
  
  But everyone knows the people watching at home on traditional 2D TV get the best view. Zooms on the players/performers, slow-mo recap, etc. I can't imagine the nausea of having your entire field of view warped across the court to see every special angle. Not to mention, until whatever VR app has a plug in for every thing you'd want to do on your phone while you're watching the game, you're stuck paying 100% of your attention to the sport.
  
  Hell, even the people at the concert or sporting event spend half their time on their phone.
  
  until whatever VR app has a plug in for every thing you’d want to do on your phone
  
  Isn't that the big difference with Apple's visionOS vs the other VR headsets? It's basically iPadOS, where you can run multiple apps at the same time and move windows around, without anything needing to know what else is going on, and everything uses the standard window and widgets toolkits. Unlike the Meta Quest, which is basically SteamOS where you're switching between Unity games that take over the whole device and they all have to re-invent the world with slightly different controls and everything.
  
  If you are really super deep into the ecosystem and the AR pass through is that good, then I can see it working. On Oculus, I often find myself peering through the gap by my nose to see whatever notification or whatnot on my phone. Apple Vision can fix that.
  
  Though you still have to contend with the comfort factor. It’s a lot to wear on your face when you’re supposed to be casually enjoying content for hours at a time. Heaven forbid you care about how your hair looks.
This may be true for AR, but it is emphatically not true for VR. There are dozens of amazing games that are extremely addictive and fun. Steam VR is no joke, it's a very solid store these days.
- There are dozens of amazing games
  
  …and 99% of them are tech demos.
  
  Compare it to an industry that publishes over 10 thousand games every year, on Steam alone. Then you start to understand how VR is just a niche hobbyist toy. Not a mainstream product. Making VR experiences is several times harder while also aiming at a minuscule tiny market. VR is perhaps today on par to where general computing and gaming was in the 70s. Neat concept, not enough use cases and product development, still way too cumbersome and expensive.
- dozens
  
  😂 I love VR but this is such a sad metric as a positive remark
That would actually be super interesting. Yeah, let me switch between cams on cars, pit crews, stands, helicopter etc., with real sound where possible. Hell yeah.
VR is great for flight sims and... Yeah that's all.
- There are tons of excellent VR games that aren’t flight sims. As an example, Vertigo 2 is an excellent first person shooter and Blade and Sorcery is an excellent fighting game.
  
  Holy shit that guy's whole profile got nuked for some reason.
- There's plenty of amazing VR games of other genres. IMO the lack of wireless options was holding it back. Why would you turn with a stick when you can just... turn around.
Volumetric video for sports is interesting because it offers VR users the option to 'be there', but the provider can also offer desktop/mobile users the option to control their own virtual camera. I can kinda see it taking off in a few years when more cheaper/lighter headsets with good passthrough arrive.

as a VR enthusiast: if the had just added controllers it would have made it so much more useable.

No matter how good your gesture controlls are, it still greatly limits its use. Theres a reason we use mice and styluses with computers, instead of touch and mid-air gestures!

Are there still no 3rd party controllers? It seems like controllers like the quest pro has (that can track themselves) would be an easy match. I guess meta is spending millions on development though, so it’s probably not something easily made by a small company.

I would think Bluetooth should provide enough bandwidth, but IDK if apple’s OS is configurable enough to support something like that.
- I think you can pair something like an xbox controller.. but i havn't heard of any spatial controllers.
  
  Apple is all flash and show, and they advertised it as "you dont need controllers, just use your hands"... which is great for some things, but will never be good for a lot of applications.
  
  The irony is that Apple has UWB direction finding in phones but didn't put it in the AR headset where it would be infinitely more useful. They could even use UWB in controllers for motion tracking relative to the headset, and yet they just didn't.

I use mine daily… primarily as a monitor for my laptop.

Now you might think that’s dumb, but I can go sit outside in the backyard, park, beach, coffee shop, wherever and work on a big, totally private, crisp and clear, glare-free anywhere monitor. I can bring it to the in-laws or on trips and even use it as a monitor for my Steam Deck. Or I can lay in bed or on the sofa or on a lawn chair and use the Steam Link app to play games from my PC.

Taken purely as a private, portable, omni-monitor, it’s absolutely worth the price for me.

As an AR/MR/XR device, it has some MAJOR software problems. Honestly, it makes sense they’d pause hardware development… it’ll be a couple years before there’s anything worth upgrading and they have a long way to go on UX, gestures, inputs, and even basic real-time object recognition and tracking. I bought mine knowing it was a Development Kit and planning to use it to get ahead on AR development experience, but I hit major roadblocks so frequently I’ve just about given up on every interesting use-case I went into this with.

VisionOS 2 is a baby step forward, but Apple has a long, long way to go before it makes sense for regular people. Heck, they aren’t even including all the cool new AI features in VisionOS 2, and it’s the one device that could benefit from that stuff the most.

So, yeah… it can still be worth it to certain people with specific use-cases, but I think it’ll be a solid 5 years before the software and hardware can reach a “normal consumer” level of quality and value.

This is the reason I want one. I really want to take a long haul flight with one paired to my wireless keychron with Mx blue switches, and proceed to code for the entire flight.
- ... long haul flight... mx blue...
  
  I'm not sure if you're joking but it's hilarious either way.
  
  I can't hear you over the din of the kali box whites and the screaming child, what did you say?
  
  I had to suffer through enough ridiculousness before I got noise cancelling headphones. I absolutely am not joking, it would be glorious. The only reason I haven’t done it before is that how the fuck am I gonna type on a keyboard with a laptop on the tray table? I used to travel for work, 3-6 weeks at a time living out of hotels, so I’ve had my keyboard in my carryon duffel while flying, which seeded this dream.
Do you mind sharing if you feel fatigue if you use it as a monitor for long durations. I feel headphone fatigue with my ears getting too warm very quickly for example. Anything of that sort physically, and how about eye strain?
- Two part answer: yes and no.
  
  Default Straps: Bad
  
  The included straps leave all the weight at the front of your head, so you will feel neck strain as a result of the constant weight imbalance. This is a common problem with HMDs… it’s not the weight, but the fact that it’s not balanced, forcing your neck muscles to compensate. Additionally, the design relies on facial pressure to keep the HMD in place… and while the “light shield” is not uncomfortable, it’s still pressure.
  
  Aftermarket Straps: Good
  
  HOWEVER, we are starting to see some creative after-market solutions. I am currently using a BOBOVR M3 Mini with some 3D-printed AVP adapters. To fix the weight balance problem I put adhesive tire weights on the back as a counter-balance (same thing I did with PSVR2). With this solution, it’s infinitely more comfortable than either standard strap… no neck strain, dramatically reduced face pressure… I can go all day. You can get the 3d printed adapters on Etsy, if you’re curious.
  
  As for the eye strain/vision: Ordinarily I need reading glasses for normal things, but on the AVP I don’t need anything. There is no eye strain and everything is crisp and sharp and clear… without any Rx inserts.

It's quite predictable. This is the same story that's been told over and over: "it's really cool but not really practical". Pick it up and play with it for a few weeks, then get bored and never touch it again. iVR certainly moved VR forward but it didn't solve any of the fundamental problems that VR has had since its inception.

VR has 1 practical application, and that is gaming, and Apple has very little in the world of gaming outside of super basic 2D games.

VR in its current form, I agree, has only one real use.

But when improved upon and made smaller, I could easily see it being used to watch TV or similar. I’ve done that on a few flights and it was decent.

Not to mention, VR is a necessary step to get to AR, and AR has many more applications. Screens with anything anywhere, for one. Imagine a computer with one monitor, but numerous virtual monitors. Or a TV on your ceiling.

It’s iterative. Gaming just happens to be the current driver.
- Human will immediately adopt anything they can carry with them. But humans have a very strong repulsion to adopting anything they have to wear or in general have permanently on them. It is uncomfortable, it is hot, it is annoying, it is visible, it is a wall between them and the world. There are people who don't wear their correction glasses because they don't like having something on their faces. There are people who don't even withstand contact glasses. There are deaf people who refuse to use hearing implants. Wrist watches are tolerated because they are more peripheral and easier to remove.
  
  This is a way more fundamental flaw on the concept of VR than technology, applications, software availability, etc. You can make VR as tiny and practical as contact glasses and people will still refuse to adopt it.
  
  The deaf who refuse implants tend towards the “there’s nothing wrong with me why are you trying to fix me” mentality, not the “I don’t want to hear because it looks weird.”
  
  And adoption of eyeglasses is likely higher than most other peripherals. Not to mention, putting in contacts is a chore and requires a little planning, while putting on glasses can be done in seconds in virtually any situation.
  
  Yes, you will get people who refuse to adopt VR/AR. We still have people in the world who refuse to adopt electricity, but if you had asked people 30 years ago if they would carrot a phone around in their pocket you’d have been laughed out of the room… yet here we are.

Then it's just useless...

The blackberry was the exact opposite, it was an unpolished piece of ugly hardware that was, at the time, incredibly useful

Pretty tech that accomplishes nothing is akin to the garbage toy lights they peddled to kids in Disney... Just landfill e-waste

Used or owned? I own one and bought several for my company and they’re not useless at all. They’re just limited in the AR/VR experiences you can do right now. As a computer, productivity, and production device, it’s far from useless.

Blue Steel Look intensifies
- Huh?
  
  Just a light hearted nod to your username
  
  I meant no offense
  
  You know… I totally forgot that I set that as my display name. No offense taken, obviously. I use a third-party Lemmy client so it never shows me that. 🤷‍♂️
  
  What client do you use? I use sync, usernames are pretty prominent here
  
  Voyager. It shows actual usernames and not display names. You’re seeing my display name, not my username.

DARPA is going to have to play with this for a while before it gets to a point where it’s actually useful to the general public. And they are playing with it.

DARPA hasn’t been an innovator in decades. Their budget is pathetic compared to Apple.

"Hey look what we could do at six times the price point" isn't a flex, it's stupidity.

Like why not just release Apple brand Skis, or team up with Nike and make some shoes, or Jewelry if you want to do high priced stuff rich idiots pay for.

It's a flex because the vision pro has the best optics and display technology ever made. It's stupid because it has no use. It's not a flex because it's expensive, it's expensive because it's a flex, if that makes sense.
- Best display technology ever made??
  
  Extremely high density pixels
  
  Yes.