The new goggles have a feature that merges digital apps and one’s surroundings into one immersive space
Isn't this just AR? We've had that for years. Or is it somehow different from existing AR?
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
The new goggles have a feature that merges digital apps and one’s surroundings into one immersive space
Isn't this just AR? We've had that for years. Or is it somehow different from existing AR?
Ah, you seem to have made a rookie mistake, poor people are using AR, apple users are using spatial computing
It is ~slightly~ different, but in a way that's worse.
AR uses a transparent overlay over reality perceived through a translucent surface, or at most a small subset of your vision is replaced. Think sunglasses with a screen you can see through, or a small corner of your vision is blocked by a tiny screen.
In Apple's "spatial computing" cameras recreate and alter reality, nothing you see is with your own eyes because no part of the display is transparent.
Exactly, it's VR with passthrough.
I have to laugh at "spatial computing" though.
And VR with passthrough has been a thing at least in pro grade VR for like a decade.
Ima call it vr with passthrough from now on
AFAIK there is no strict definition for AR how current reality has to be implemented, and both transparent and reprojected have their advantages and disadvantages. For example it's much harder to "pin" augmentation on transparent AR, on the other hand latency and FOV are big issues for reprojected AR.
You ever seen the myth busters episode where they try to drive a car through cameras and computer monitors?
It didn’t go well
While I completely agree that it is a very bad idea to drive with one, you have to give credit where credit is due. Apple really did an amazing job at reducing latency of the passthrough. That being said it's still added latency and it's a very very narrow FOV so please don't go driving/walking around with that thing.
Oh shit. That makes them less appealing, then.
I wish I could say this scenario is unlikely, but nowadays? Who knows! So, picture this:
That wouldn't happen if the goggles were truly transparent.
AR uses a transparent overlay over reality perceived through a translucent surface
No. Apple even has an entire library called ARKit to do Augmented Reality on a screen. For them, it has never meant transparent.
Just because developers name libraries things doesn't make them accurate. Generally when something is misnamed it's because of backwards/intercomaptibility or just design decisions that differ from original implementations and it's no longer feasible/reasonable to refactor to a different name.
Examples: windows 7 was version 6.1, windows 8 was version 6.2, windows 8.1 was version 6.3 Java 5 was versioned as 1.5, continuing the convention from previous releases 1.2-1.4 Hell, where I work we use an automation workflow with functions called stuff like "create_and_assign_citrix_security_groups_to_static_containers" that has long since been adapted to work with vmware and other non-virtualization platforms like k8s. Refactoring those functions would mean refactoring any external automation that uses these libraries, just like refactoring versioning schemas would break compatibility with any external software that relies on an assumption that windows >xp would be 6.X.
I understand what you’re saying, but politely disagree. The OP of this thread asked “isn’t this just AR”. In the context of Apple - yes, it is.
No hate if you disagree, your reasoning is sound. I just think that naming, especially in the new tech space, goes beyond pedantry. We have words that are specific enough to describe two similar technologies, but we only retain shared understanding of those words if we collectively use them. It may be the case that AR evolves to be commonly understood as encompassing both technologies but they are fundamentally different in how they work, whatever we choose to call them.
Oh shit I don't want to be a poor people I need to get something with spatial computing!
That's the point where you sell your fridge and cut on baby diapers for your kids
AR just means augmented reality, it says nothing of how it should be implemented
I watched some reviews about it. Yes, it's basically like having an iPad screen taped to your eyes.
And Jesus wept for there were no more worlds to conquer
Stop saying Jesus wept
Stop saying stop saying Jesus wept
I wonder if your downvoters know that this was a line from the episode
Probably not
World's within worlds!
First we had the Glassholes, now there's Prolapses.
So there was a guy in the "viral video" thread yesterday fighting tooth and nail for how harmful the video is even if it's staged, mainly on the premise thats bunch of people would copy and recreate it. They were getting downvoted to oblivion.
Here we are a day later.
They were getting downvoted to oblivion.
Downvotes are a fucking curse. They were never meant for disagreement. They've just turned into low-effort echo-chamber creators.
Ironically, I've been downvoted for saying this in response to somebody sympathizing with my previous downvoted comment that was expanding in support of somebody's highly upvoted comment with some background.
I think the general sentiment on Lemmy is that any comment reply must surely be in disagreement and receives an automatic downvote. Mostly I visit the comments for discourse and upvote interesting threads of conversation.
In my opinion, really there should be no downvote button.
As soon as i disagree with someone i get downvoted. Lemmy or anywhere else. Most are children so whatever
I rarely downvote. If I disagree with someone that means no up vote most times. Downvote should be limited to spam, harmful or completely irrelevant.
I've been downvoted to oblivion before just because I don't agree with the hive mind. That to me is scary and people should be concerned that's even a thing.
I prefer to have downvotes because they give you a better picture than, say, upvotes only.
Popular or important comments in an upvote-only system will still float to the top. And now we don't know how many people disagreed (HA!) with them.
I expect nothing less from Tesla drivers
How can people be so stupid.. At least, a VR headset is easy spottable by police and those bastards can be removed from the streets.
Dante Lentini, 21, who posted a video of himself behind the wheel of a moving Tesla while wearing a Vision Pro headset, said in an interview, “It was all just for content.”
Well, maybe when they revoke their licence they can tell them "it was all just for other people's safety".
Better yet, stop driving Tesla.
it's basically just hololens right?
also visionos is not the first "spatial os", windows 10 was the first. (ever notice how stuff has circular glow effect around it? it's supposed to show up around the pointer while using the os in vr/ar)
Microsoft quickly abandoned the idea tho as well as basically the whole uwp platform (which was supposed to bring the same apps on pc, windows mobile, xbox and hololens)
It's camera pass-through, so while it is the same idea as hololens (overlaying windows on reality). The hololens would actually be a safer thing to wear while driving, given it fully transparent. There are not screens blocking your vision with camera feeds overlayed on top.
Very important distinction. When the apple vr battery dies, or the software fails, you're suddenly blind.
Hololens is slightly more advanced. At least the last I saw it uses waveguides etc. to overlay the content over a transparent panel. Much like Google glasses, but way, way more advanced (and therefore justifiably expensive - last I saw, again, it was something like $15000). AVP is no different to a $300 Quest (plus internal cameras for iris and expression tracking and obnoxiously bad FOV) - it's 10x Apple tax.
Hololens is still alive and kicking btw, but it's exclusively enterprise.