• onlinepersona@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    22 hours ago

    I’ve seen reviews of it and it seemslike a gimmick. Something you take out at parties to show others or put on your shelf as a souvenir for bad purchases, but nothing more.

    Are there people actually using them? Even for gaming?

    • tekato@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      13 hours ago

      These are essentially development kits until they figure out how to put in in glasses.

      • kittenzrulz123@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Everyone keeps saying these are development kits but quite frankly that doesn’t make any sense whatsoever. For a machine that’s supposedly a developer kit it seems to be missing a few key things including:

        1. Developer tools
        2. Any way to directly interface with the device such as a UART port or a USB C port capable of debugging
        3. Proper dev mode
        4. Proper APIs for development
        5. Physical controllers (it doesn’t make sense to sell devs on a device without tactile feedback)

        If this was acturally a dev kit it probrally would also be a completely tethered headset without a built in processor (maybe their VR coprocessor for image processing)

      • nixon@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        12 hours ago

        Apple seems to do this with most of their new product lines when introduced.

        The AppleWatch started being geared towards a health device around revision 3 or 4.

        The iPhone was a camera/iPod/Phone multi device by the iPhone 4.

        AppleTV was gathering market share in the tv device field for several years before Apple introduced their own streaming platform.

        It took the iPad a few iterations before it settled into having drawing/art/media capabilities.

        The Vision Pro is a dev kit of sorts as Apple measures an emerging market of hardware and user preferences while they figure out what Apple customers would really want out of such a device. No one is forcing anyone to buy a $3500 Vision Pro; some buyers were disappointed that the headset wasn’t as polished as they what they expect from Apple and some knew what they were buying.

        I own two Vision Pros for business and personal use. I have had many VR headsets over the years, the tech has gotten much better over time. I was interested in seeing what Apple could do in the space. The hardware was slick but visionOS 1.0 was spartan and lacking. It has been fun to see how much better the software has become in each iteration. Nowadays I use my Vision Pro for at least an hour or two each day. It is incredibly useful in my daily routines.

        The initial news cycles about it were negative and it is easy to see how and why, people projected onto it what they wanted it to be. The naysayers thought it was too expensive, and for them it was, the Apple zealots wanted it to be everything and more, they were disappointed, and the influencers wanted a drama. I think it was all of those things but I don’t think the product ever really flopped. There are plenty of people who own them and use them all the time. I am happy with my purchase and I don’t plan on upgrading to the latest version because the ones I have are fine.

        I am interested to see where Apple takes this tech.