If it was made by Boeing they could probably make a quick escape…I'm trying to picture the scenario of someone pulling that headset off someone's face and running away on a plane....
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
If it was made by Boeing they could probably make a quick escape…I'm trying to picture the scenario of someone pulling that headset off someone's face and running away on a plane....
D.B. Cooper stole my headset!!!If it was made by Boeing they could probably make a quick escape…
I agree, and when it comes to the subject of tech, tend to subscribe to the philosophy that friends don’t let friends listen to DukenukemX. Some people aren’t qualified to and won’t be able to critically evaluate new tech. That’s fine, in my opinion. Someone’s got to be “that dude” with the flip phone and the hand cranked car….I'm trying to picture the scenario of someone pulling that headset off someone's face and running away on a plane....
Paging Zarathustra[H]!Someone’s got to be “that dude” with the flip phone and the hand cranked car….
I agree, and when it comes to the subject of tech, tend to subscribe to the philosophy that friends don’t let friends listen to DukenukemX. Some people aren’t qualified to and won’t be able to critically evaluate new tech. That’s fine, in my opinion. Someone’s got to be “that dude” with the flip phone and the hand cranked car….
Paging Zarathustra[H]!
...I used an iPhone to record a bunch of spatial video
I finally flew to see them, and since they’ve both recently had cataracts surgery which largely corrected their vision,
You do realize that iPhones have more than one lense, right? .wait I'm just learning about this whaaaat 3D with a monocular lens WOW. Seriously impressive.
sure sure haha but they're too close for 3D parallax. One's wide, one's telephoto, one's for low-light?? I know there's an ultrasonic or LIDAR rangefinder in there somewhere? Anyway, 3D video from (effectively) one camera is just bonkers cool and smartYou do realize that iPhones have more than one lense, right? .
There's only one vowel in lens.You do realize that iPhones have more than one lense, right? .
https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/lenseThere's only one vowel in lens.
"You should never use “lense” in any message or expression, because this word does not exist in any notorious English language dictionary and is always considered a wrong spelling." - Linky Link
Ahhh, cool. I could have sworn I read it had a depth camera too , my bad.sure sure haha but they're too close for 3D parallax. One's wide, one's telephoto, one's for low-light?? I know there's an ultrasonic or LIDAR rangefinder in there somewhere? Anyway, 3D video from (effectively) one camera is just bonkers cool and smart
I bet you DID hear that it has a depth camera, but that's probably marketing-speak for an ultrasonic or laser type rangefinder. I'm guessing they put it in for precise focus, but the depth info can turn images into two different images! I can't find the forum where I read about this, but it mentioned something about needing to generative-fill areas of the image that would be visible from an inch away from the lens to either side. Y'know because eyeballs.Ahhh, cool. I could have sworn I read it had a depth camera too , my bad.
Depth cameras are super useful for automated systems. It’s a lens configuration that allows for accurate distances to be measured between objects in the shot not just between the lens and the focal point of the shot. It can allow a system to accurately create a 3D realtime map of a moving environment when paired with object identification and vector analysis on those objects. Add in thermal imaging or other inputs into the mix and you have a system that is capable of building a complex and relatively complete map of the surrounding space. But to use it you need a crapload of throughput and bandwidth and you need a significant amount of processing power to work all that data in real time with room to spare for disaster avoidance and decision making.I bet you DID hear that it has a depth camera, but that's probably marketing-speak for an ultrasonic or laser type rangefinder. I'm guessing they put it in for precise focus, but the depth info can turn images into two different images! I can't find the forum where I read about this, but it mentioned something about needing to generative-fill areas of the image that would be visible from an inch away from the lens to either side. Y'know because eyeballs.
I saw Titanic in 3D IMAX recently, and knowing that it was filmed in 2D and was converted to 3D is ludicrously cool. The amount of work. On the other hand, the one CG clip that's a drone-view of the deck, with a man walking through a door looks very very CG
You probably did hear them call it a depth camera, normal camera + lidar and a little bit of software object recognition and you have a relatively accurate camera for short range depth of field. Good enough for facial recognition inside a medium sided room at the very least.I bet you DID hear that it has a depth camera, but that's probably marketing-speak for an ultrasonic or laser type rangefinder. I'm guessing they put it in for precise focus, but the depth info can turn images into two different images! I can't find the forum where I read about this, but it mentioned something about needing to generative-fill areas of the image that would be visible from an inch away from the lens to either side. Y'know because eyeballs.
I saw Titanic in 3D IMAX recently, and knowing that it was filmed in 2D and was converted to 3D is ludicrously cool. The amount of work. On the other hand, the one CG clip that's a drone-view of the deck, with a man walking through a door looks very very CG
Oof, but not surprising. Either the headset experience just doesn't fly (and might be true for any headset) or they realize they aren't using it as much as they thought they would. There are certain people for whom the Vision Pro is a real treat, but it's not universally appealing like a smartphone or computer... not at this kind of pricing, anyway.If you're in the market for an Apple Vision Pro, you may wanna check Ebay.
https://www.theverge.com/2024/4/27/24142810/apple-vision-pro-ebay-low-prices
"On Wednesday, a 1TB Vision Pro, complete with all the included gear, Apple’s fluffy $200 travel case, $500 AppleCare Plus, and claimed to have been “worn maybe about an hour” sold for $3,200 after 21 bids. The listed shipping estimate was $20.30. Brand new, that combination is $5,007.03 on Apple’s site for me. Another eBay listing, this one with my headset’s configuration (but sans optical inserts) went for just $2,600 — again with most, if not all, of the included accessories. Several other 256GB and 512GB models sold for around that amount this week."
Buyer's remorse paired with a simply whelming experience was bound to result in these popping up all over.Oof, but not surprising. Either the headset experience just doesn't fly (and might be true for any headset) or they realize they aren't using it as much as they thought they would. There are certain people for whom the Vision Pro is a real treat, but it's not universally appealing like a smartphone or computer... not at this kind of pricing, anyway.
I now suspect this kind of tech is still a few years off (maybe more) from really clicking with the mainstream. Lower prices, reduced weight, and a broader ecosystem will help.
Sounds about right. It's not that the Vision Pro is a terrible product; it's that it was only going to be an instant hit if it was so mindblowing that people couldn't put it down. And the likelihood of that happening was slim no matter how well Apple executed.Buyer's remorse paired with a simply whelming experience was bound to result in these popping up all over.
And with Meta releasing the Horizon OS to vendors to they can make their own headsets, Apple might have a lot more competition in that space then they would have had otherwise.Sounds about right. It's not that the Vision Pro is a terrible product; it's that it was only going to be an instant hit if it was so mindblowing that people couldn't put it down. And the likelihood of that happening was slim no matter how well Apple executed.
If I were running the product strategy, I'd focus on getting that mainstream Vision headset below $1,500, and the lower the better. And see if I can bring the next-generation Vision Pro below $3,000.
If you're in the market for an Apple Vision Pro, you may wanna check Ebay.
https://www.theverge.com/2024/4/27/24142810/apple-vision-pro-ebay-low-prices
"On Wednesday, a 1TB Vision Pro, complete with all the included gear, Apple’s fluffy $200 travel case, $500 AppleCare Plus, and claimed to have been “worn maybe about an hour” sold for $3,200 after 21 bids. The listed shipping estimate was $20.30. Brand new, that combination is $5,007.03 on Apple’s site for me. Another eBay listing, this one with my headset’s configuration (but sans optical inserts) went for just $2,600 — again with most, if not all, of the included accessories. Several other 256GB and 512GB models sold for around that amount this week."
Oof, but not surprising. Either the headset experience just doesn't fly (and might be true for any headset) or they realize they aren't using it as much as they thought they would. There are certain people for whom the Vision Pro is a real treat, but it's not universally appealing like a smartphone or computer... not at this kind of pricing, anyway.
I now suspect this kind of tech is still a few years off (maybe more) from really clicking with the mainstream. Lower prices, reduced weight, and a broader ecosystem will help.
The Vision Pro isn't a bad product, but the Meta Quest 3 is just better and for a fraction of the price. What you're seeing is buyers remorse because while the technology behind the Vision Pro is extremely impressive, the software for it is not. Vision Pro doesn't support VR gaming like every other headset does, plus you gotta pay more for features that devices like the Meta Quest 3 has included. The Vision Pro depends too much on Macbook for productivity and even there it still doesn't work that well, as no audio from the Macbook is passed through to the Vision Pro.Sounds about right. It's not that the Vision Pro is a terrible product; it's that it was only going to be an instant hit if it was so mindblowing that people couldn't put it down. And the likelihood of that happening was slim no matter how well Apple executed.
If I were running the product strategy, I'd focus on getting that mainstream Vision headset below $1,500, and the lower the better. And see if I can bring the next-generation Vision Pro below $3,000.
When the article say, I would return mine to buy one with the larger harddrive, my first thought what one can put on it anyway ?
Say a movie collection ? That imply watching movie outside the house and not on your disney+ account because you sleep in hotel with bad wifi or something
I wouldn't call the Quest 3 uniformly better. It's better at a few things (games most notably), and of course the value for money is definitely there. But I'd much rather have a Vision Pro if I'm either pairing with a computer or can get my work done using the available apps. The resolution is considerably higher, the passthrough is more natural, and I understand those hand gestures quickly become intuitive.The Vision Pro isn't a bad product, but the Meta Quest 3 is just better and for a fraction of the price. What you're seeing is buyers remorse because while the technology behind the Vision Pro is extremely impressive, the software for it is not. Vision Pro doesn't support VR gaming like every other headset does, plus you gotta pay more for features that devices like the Meta Quest 3 has included. The Vision Pro depends too much on Macbook for productivity and even there it still doesn't work that well, as no audio from the Macbook is passed through to the Vision Pro.
Well, downloading movies is a frequent use case for me since a travel a decent amount. That said, movies don’t take a lot of space in the grand scheme of things. Now recording spatial video would be a different matter altogether but I find myself using the Vision Pro to record video very infrequently. Phone is much more convenient. So, yeah I think one can live with it without needing a ton of space.When the article say, I would return mine to buy one with the larger harddrive, my first thought what one can put on it anyway ?
Say a movie collection ? That imply watching movie outside the house and not on your disney+ account because you sleep in hotel with bad wifi or something
Ah this answer the question, I can see this taking a lot of space.Now recording spatial video would be a different matter
55-75GB 3d HD movies can fill what is left on a 256GB device quick enough, if one use it for that because streaming does not work well in hotel, you can see the use.That said, movies don’t take a lot of space in the grand scheme of things.
If there are any streaming services that allow offline download and viewing of movies at such a high quality that they have that kind of footprint, I’d love to know about that service. All the ones I use - Amazon, Disney, Max, etc. - have a max of maybe 2-3GB for a 2 hour movie.Ah this answer the question, I can see this taking a lot of space.
55-75GB 3d HD movies can fill what is left on a 256GB device quick enough, if one use it for that because streaming does not work well in hotel, you can see the use.
I had more people using their UHD disk file than streaming downloadIf there are any streaming services that allow offline download and viewing of movies at such a high quality that they have that kind of footprint, I’d love to know about that service. All the ones I use - Amazon, Disney, Max, etc. - have a max of maybe 2-3GB for a 2 hour movie.