this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2024
66 points (90.2% liked)

Technology

65819 readers
5167 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
66
Apple Vision Pro review: magic, until it’s not (www.theverge.com)
submitted 1 year ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
23 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Apple Vision Pro review: magic, until it’s not::There’s a lot of pressure on the new Apple Vision Pro headset, which starts at $3,499 and marks the beginning of something called “spatial computing.” The ambition is enormous, but the Vision Pro also represents a series of really big tradeoffs.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] OscarRobin@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nilay's point is that the Vision Pro is by far the best implementation of this kind of device yet - possibly just about as good as is actually possible - and yet still suffers severe issues as a result. Usually Apple waits and learns until they can launch a product that is well considered and that often shows the industry how to move forward, yet in this case it's quite possible that they've actually just demonstrated that this kind of computing fundamentally doesn't work.

[–] hellothere@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago

I understand that.

My point is that that had already been demonstrated.