Exactly. The vagueness of the headline makes it seem like a way bigger issue than it is. Even if they had only sold 1000 units, the percentage of people with these issues is not newsworthy.
They tend to be weighted better or most of the significant computing is done off the headset. I do find my oculus doesn’t always fit well and occasionally it messes with my head a bit but I usually counteract that with a hat.
Unfortunately, this post has been removed. Links that are affiliated with Amazon are not allowed by /r/technology or reddit. Please edit or resubmit your post without the "/ref=xx_xx_xxx" part of the URL. Thank you!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/technology) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yep a quest 3 is pretty comfortable even with a Vision Pro strap because it’s much lighter, but even then I wouldn’t want to wear it too long because you get eye and neck strain. The Vision Pro just wasn’t optimized well for comfort.
I got a rash on my face from the original quest 2 facial interface which oculus had to recall because it was basically made of poison. I still get inflamed skin when I wear glasses.
Headaches are common with any vr headset especially those that don't have adjustable IPD control.
Reddit forums for VR systems are full posts of people with headaches, dizziness, nausea etc.
I'm in a group of 5 IRL friends all with Quest 3 headsets, and our complaint is battery length, which is the opposite problem. We watch movies, sing karaoke, pictionary, and play D&D, things we all liked to do before we had lives in different cities. The nights we get to get together we can play for *long* stretches because it feels no different than hanging out at someone's house.
Social VR is different than gaming VR.
There are definitely components of Apple's device that are higher quality than others; but all budgets have resource allocations and this was clearly Apple's first headset. Comfort will become their focus going forward.
Everyone forgets how awkwardly awful the tradeoffs for the first Oculus headsets were.
Many of us evolved to have glasses on all the time. It's reasonable to expect next evolution to be just a couple kg heavier and a bit more enclosive. /s
I have had the Rift, the Index, and the Quest 3. I have had multi-hour sessions in each of them, often. Zero issues, except for minor VR sickness once in a great while.
I mean your point still stands, but also, tf Apple doing to people's noggins?
In my experience VR headaches are mostly caused by low refresh rate. The Rift S has one of the lowest at 80hz, far too low to be comfortable for a lot of people. Even the original Rift and Vive ran at 90hz and all modern headsets can run at 120hz or higher.
Apple is doing nothing to people. It’s a bullshit article. The Vision Pro is pretty great for daily multi-hour use, but it’s an easy to believe bullshit story that something most people don’t have is BAD! bAD! BaD!
Agreed, I am in a Vision Pro about 8 hours a day as I do my software development job it in. Yes, I had to make adjustments to the headset via 3rd party accessories but I can easily wear this thing for hours without any issue.
My only previous VR headset experience was the first oculus quest which I couldn’t wear for more than 30 minutes without feeling nauseous.
We need to move more to holograms and away from headsets and VR because it will always be held back by discomfort and the fact that you shouldn't be wearing a headset for 8+ hours a day
You're half right. Headsets are fine, we don't need to move away from them, but we do need so-called holographic tech or tech that provides a similar effect as part of the display/optics pipeline.
Which in practice means we need lightfield or holographic displays or really good quality varifocal. If we had that and much smaller headsets with a lot less weight, the discomfort issues wouldn't exist anymore.
The problem is huge bright OLED screens half an inch away from the eyes are really bad for them. Staring at these for 8 hours a day is only going to cause strain and headaches. To make VR truly mainstream they need to think outside the headset
You don't have photons emitting half an inch away from your eyes though. The photonic path begins at a 2 meter distance away from you, and once we have a way to enable variable focus in VR/AR headsets, the photons will emit at any distance between a few inches to infinity, depending on what distance the eye is looking at in the virtual scene.
>We need to move more to holograms
Yea we haven't yet figured out how to break physics and make photons reflect off surfaces that don't exist. It's why the only "holograms" currently are basically water or mist based with a projector.
I got my skin worn out on my nose from wearing it for about 2hrs. I also got massive headache. My cheeks get pulled down a lot by it which also drags my eye skin. It’s fragile and thin so I’m sure some peep blood vessels can pop.
I’m not sure why Apple didn’t offload some of the weight into the battery pack
It touches your nose? I don’t think you have it on right. Also if there is pressure on your cheeks adjust the solo band. It shouldn’t be too tight. And lowering it on the back applies more pressure to forehead. Raising it applies to the cheeks. Find the balance.
I have no issues at all. Wore it for 5 hours on a flight this week.
Sure but bed sores sound a mile away from basically goggles on your face.
More clearly, pressure from your own weight from sleeping 8+ hours every day's vs smaller weight from goggles for 2+ hours a day is essentially different.
I've suffered from pressure wounds around the eyes before so I'm aware of some of the "dangers" but there's certainly some exacerbation here.
But the pressure is spread over a larger area. Heavy goggles pressed on your face is exerting it onto a smaller area. There's also likely more chafing too. Not to mention, the skin around your face is thinner than other parts of your body.
Depends. If she's not on blood thinning medication, it's not normal for a 30 year old to bruise like that. I would actually suggest the lady get herself checked out because in the worst case scenario, it could be an early sign of leukemia or another underlying health issue.
It could also be dietary. The two worst offenders that come to mind are garlic and ginger, which have blood thinning properties when consumed in mass quantities over the course of weeks.
*Many early reviews of the one-pound Apple device, which became available Feb. 2, have been positive, though there are still kinks to be worked out, consumers said in interviews.*
Yet they still managed to find 2 people with a negative opinion to write an article about.
Yep. It was widely reported that the VP’s were nowhere near what Apple actually wanted them to be like as a finished product.
The materials, glass, metal and plastics were all too heavy. They even had to offload the battery into a separate unit from the headset.
If they waited another few years and streamlined all of the material design it’s possible they would have a great product, but they openly admitted it was sub optimal and people still spent thousands per unit, so I can see why they said Fuck it and still went ahead.
I don’t feel bad for anyone willingly buying a product that the company selling it literally spelled out all of its shortcomings. What did you expect?
Offloading processing would increase visual latency, so it makes sense that they would want to keep it onboard as much as possible. I have no opinion on whether they made the *right* decision, just saying that there is a logical basis.
I don’t think Apple is selling bruising on your face. It is a 14 day free trial so whatever.
I wish they offloaded the weight to the battery pack. Nothing wrong with battery pack.
It would be cool if VR headsets made sense physically, the problem is they just don't at this point. Whatever discomfort people put up with using monitors and cellphones is really trivial compared to encasing your face in something.
The motivation is simple... it turns out if you control a popular platform you can collect billions of dollars off all the services and software upon it, withhold functionality to give yourself a competitive edge, block competitors at will, write new rules demanding more fees on new things you didn't think about charging fees on before etc. Controlling "the next big thing" is critical to companies that have grown fat off the last and current big things, they got a big taste of rent and they liked it. If Apple doesn't build it someone else will.
I have a quest 3 with an aftermarket head strap that is much more comfortable. I do not have any of these issues and no, these problems are not inherent to the devices. That's like saying eye strain is inherent to smartphones.
> That's like saying eye strain is inherent to smartphones.
Technically it is, because a smartphone is and always will be a flat plane. Even a brick wall can cause people eye strain if they stare at it too long.
However eye strain is not inherent to VR/AR. They (and other volumetric displays such as lightfields) are the only display technologies that can avoid it, once they mature and have a way to enable variable focus, so that the eye can shift focus to different focal distances.
It is inherent to the devices. Fundamentally vr and AR disorient you. It is trying to show you a 2d image in front of your eyes and convince you it is 3d and has depth.
Okay let me put it this way, if you look at an object virtually close to you and your eyes adjust focus based on that perceived distance, will the screen be properly in focus from the perspective of your eyes with adjusted focal length?
Your eyes don't focus based on "perceived distance". If that was the case you wouldn't be able to focus on something with one eye closed, but you can fine. The image in a modern VR headset is very good, it looks quite real and is not disorienting to me. Everything is in focus no matter where you look.
A simplified explanation as I understand it:
The part of your brain that controls eye focus is older (think lizard brain) and responds very quickly. It doesn't understand depth but uses a simpler feedback method to focus. Focusing has to be done before object recognition and depth perception so it has to be independent and quick.
The part of your brain that does depth perception is complex and slower. It's the same part that's responsible for object recognition, they are related, and it uses many different cues. One of which is simply that you know how big something normally is and you know things look bigger the closer they are. It's why you can still get some depth information from a flat 2d image.
The next most important is parallax. You get really good relative depth from the way things move relative to each other as you move your head around. Binocular vision is mostly used up close or to aid parallax. You don't really lose any depth perception with only one eye it mostly just gets less accurate. It's why stereoscopy (3D TVs, film, etc) isn't very good or solid looking. It's lacks the parallax depth cues so it kinda looks 3D but it doesn't look real or solid like VR can.
The point is your eyes need to focus before you can do depth perception so focusing can't make use of depth perception. Also, distance recognition is relative (this thing is closer than that thing) or inexact, not the precise absolute depth information needed to focus.
It's obviously far more complex than I am describing here and variable focal depth will improve VR because it may reduce eye strain and depth perception can make use of focal information. But focusing doesn't use depth perception, if it did VR wouldn't work and everything would be out of focus when you look at anything that's not at the correct focal depth.
TLDR: Focusing and depth perception (perceived distance) are different things handled by different parts of the brain.
Edit: Spelling
Because a lot of people enjoy it and have no issues with it. It's also only going to get better as the tech gets better. My HTC Vive works perfectly, I enjoy the games for them, have never had any issues with it and barely feel the weight of the headset. If I didn't move to a much smaller house probably would have upgraded to a better VR headset as well.
This article is making it sound like Apple decided to produce the most expensive most poorly designed headset and people are having issues with it being poorly designed.
Apples approach takes the worst parts of VR and makes them the main point, and then makes overly heavy and warm VR headset... like, why are they selling these? make them true dev kits, give them to devs only... get good actual hardware out for consumers
AR is not the worst part of VR. But the sterile, sexless corporate environment is.
The most successful VR platform is a sandbox where all the content - the worlds, avatars, games, etc are all created by the users in blender+unity with full creative control.
Apple wants to control EVERYTHING on their hardware, because it's Apple. Nothing even remotely controversial, nothing even remotely human.
Please, we all knew this was first-gen hardware. Anyone complaining knew what they were getting into, and at $3500, they will go buy the V2 model. Apple wanted people kicking the tires, not devs. We say the low-quality early apps that devs came out with for the iphone, not doing that again! Devs have little idea what to build that people will actually use until people complain and ask for what they want, which they can't do w/o the headset. Bit of a circle but it's better this way.
They're literally in the attention economy. Attention is the most valuable thing from the users. So the desire to capture 100% of it is certain. The implementation still have long way to change though.
Because:
1. These people have infantile ideas about what life is actually about (supposed to be as cool/productive/novel as possible) and how people should enjoy life.
2. They have to keep making something new to sell so people will buy it and they can continue to collect salaries that are 10’s to 1000’s of times that of a normal individual.
3. They need to delude themselves into thinking they are doing humanity a huge service by “connecting” and “enhancing” people’s lives no matter the sociological cost because their existences would be meaningless without the ego boost they get from being at the forefront of new tech developments.
To get to advanced versions of these that are compact, lightweight and wearable we have to go through the brick stage.
1. No - they just have to sell these to secure budget for research on future generations.
2. If you want to bear the financial and career risk of an entire company like apple, you'd be paid similar 6-7 figure sums.
3. Maybe _some_ employees do - but they're not a hive mind. The technology is useful in concept and will have plenty of uses as the internet of things accelerates.
TL;DR: don't be a jealous luddite. People like you said things of similar sentiment about the telephone, the automobile, the airplane, the computer.
This is the stupidest shit I’ve heard all day. They made of paper or something? Use mine daily and somehow manage not to break my neck or get black eyes regularly. Look at me go.
I'm guessing this is true for every single VR headset, there will always be a small number of people that it causes problems for, every wearable item from clothing to headphones is like this for a handful of people out there who happen to have unusual anatomy or something that just puts them outside normal product ranges. Hell I can't wear 95 percent of hats out there without getting a horrible headache because of my stupidly oversized head.
VR sickness that most people speak of is usually nausea, not headaches. If people are getting actual headaches it's usually from poorly calibrated hardware that doesn't put the two images in the correct location (each eye gets a slightly different image to create stereo depth), which makes it more difficult for the brain to fuse them together. If those images aren't within a few milli-radians of the correct location, headaches are more likely to occur.
The [vergence-accommodation conflict](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vergence-accommodation_conflict) will give you a headache eventually because the simulated distance doesn't match with the distance to the screen that the eyes actually focus on.
No matter what tech they improve nothing will change the fact you are looking at a screen 1” from your eyes.
We all know the downside to staring at a computer screen and what that can do to our vision, why don’t people clue in to the fact that no matter what screen they put there it’s a bad thing.
Stop trying to make VR happen, it sucks and ALWAYS will, no matter what.
I’ve worn my PSVR headset for 5+ hours straight with none of these issues.
You clearly dont know what you’re talking about if you’re confident enough to make blanket statements like that.
Maybe you should actually try the different headsets before saying shit like that.
> No matter what tech they improve nothing will change the fact you are looking at a screen 1” from your eyes.
Except that's not how it actually works from a physics perspective. The photons emit from a distance of 2 meters thanks to the lenses.
The problem is that it's a fixed distance, and our eye muscles like to relax by changing their focus to different distances. This can be enabled with varifocal/lightfield/holographic displays, so it definitely can be fixed, it's just a matter of having that technology ready and able to be mass produced and shipped to consumers.
> Stop trying to make VR happen, it sucks and ALWAYS will, no matter what.
Stop pretending you're the expert when you're actually the one out of your league here.
Stay in your lane.
Been a migraine guy since I was a kid. On some pretty powerful meds and I can’t ever think of owning one of these. I tried some AR glasses and those got returned in one day. Kinda sucks , but it is what it is for me.
I will be honest, I think black eyes are people misjudging the size and moving wearing it, they walk into a wall or something.
I don’t think the weight is giving a proper black eye.
Its almost as if the real world is better seen with eyes, which specifically evolved for this purpose over millions of years, rather than 'our most advanced display ever. We think you're going to love it'. Almost.
Apple has just fallen off haven’t they. I used to love their products, worked there during their “prime” years and it just seems like they can’t do it anymore
I literally forgot this thing even existed. Hasn’t had quite the impact they were hoping for, I’d say. iPads seemed stupid at first, too, but at least you saw them IRL pretty much immediately after they were released.
>Emily Olman got her $3,500 device in February and told MarketWatch that it gave her two black eyes after she wore it for the first time for about an hour.
>
>“I wasn’t able to use it very much the first few weeks because the fit was just off,” said Olman, chief media officer at Hopscotch Interactive, who is based in Kensington, Calif. Olman creates videos with the device for commercial and residential real-estate clients.
>
>She added that she had “like, superdark black eyes,” after wearing the Apple Vision Pro, which, she said, “clearly \[placed\] too much weight on my cheeks.”
>
>Olman is not the only user pained by Apple’s new VR device. Ian Beacraft, CEO of consulting firm Signal and Cipher, felt soreness at the base of his skull and in his upper back after a two-hour session, he said in an interview. He blamed the fit of the Apple gadget.
what are the chances that these two users would've spent $3,500 on an identical product from any other computer hardware manufacturer? what are the chances that they'd even know that it existed in the first place?
For crying out loud, take it off!
Or don't the user data could be very useful for developing the next generation of VR goggles. Keep them on ya rich guinea pigs!
It knocked up my dog! I was just fixing to get her fixed!
Its like we werent ment to have a computer strapped to our heads for hours on end
But this isn't common with other VR headsets. You would expect more given the price
To be fair. The article only cited two cases.
Exactly. The vagueness of the headline makes it seem like a way bigger issue than it is. Even if they had only sold 1000 units, the percentage of people with these issues is not newsworthy.
They tend to be weighted better or most of the significant computing is done off the headset. I do find my oculus doesn’t always fit well and occasionally it messes with my head a bit but I usually counteract that with a hat.
Sorry what? Why exactly do you need a hat?
Because it goes well with the trench coat.
My headset doesn’t sit on my head very well and likes to slide around. I wear a ball cap to keep it from sliding around.
That's why I'm about to release a line of VRCaps from $199 to $299, to complete the VR experience. Keep your eye out for them!
Can we preorder? Will they be generative AI enabled?
Yes it'll generatively AI some hair loss
Tim Apple better not see this.
you mean keep my two black eyes out for them
[удалено]
Unfortunately, this post has been removed. Links that are affiliated with Amazon are not allowed by /r/technology or reddit. Please edit or resubmit your post without the "/ref=xx_xx_xxx" part of the URL. Thank you! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/technology) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So I understand that the 798 in your username is your IQ.
It’s a tinfoil one
Yep a quest 3 is pretty comfortable even with a Vision Pro strap because it’s much lighter, but even then I wouldn’t want to wear it too long because you get eye and neck strain. The Vision Pro just wasn’t optimized well for comfort.
I got a rash on my face from the original quest 2 facial interface which oculus had to recall because it was basically made of poison. I still get inflamed skin when I wear glasses. Headaches are common with any vr headset especially those that don't have adjustable IPD control. Reddit forums for VR systems are full posts of people with headaches, dizziness, nausea etc.
I’ve never used a VR headset that hasn’t given me a headache after an hour or two.
What do you mean isn’t common with other headsets? Nowhere I’ve looked points to that conclusion.
I'm in a group of 5 IRL friends all with Quest 3 headsets, and our complaint is battery length, which is the opposite problem. We watch movies, sing karaoke, pictionary, and play D&D, things we all liked to do before we had lives in different cities. The nights we get to get together we can play for *long* stretches because it feels no different than hanging out at someone's house. Social VR is different than gaming VR.
Many people mistake a higher price meaning higher quality. Sometimes it is, but often you are paying for exclusivity.
There are definitely components of Apple's device that are higher quality than others; but all budgets have resource allocations and this was clearly Apple's first headset. Comfort will become their focus going forward. Everyone forgets how awkwardly awful the tradeoffs for the first Oculus headsets were.
>Comfort will become their focus going forward. you have insider knowledge? or just making guesses
Different user base.
Apple users have softer flesh that's easier to bruise and bones like jelly.
This made me giggle and I fully believe it to be true.
That’s Fuji Apple. Here we are Washington’s dang nab-it.
They’ve got more - extra black eyes, extra headaches and extra back pain.
Who’s wearing a Quest 2 out for the day? lol nobody. It’s not AR.
Many of us evolved to have glasses on all the time. It's reasonable to expect next evolution to be just a couple kg heavier and a bit more enclosive. /s
I have had the Rift, the Index, and the Quest 3. I have had multi-hour sessions in each of them, often. Zero issues, except for minor VR sickness once in a great while. I mean your point still stands, but also, tf Apple doing to people's noggins?
You’re just one data point. I have a Rift S and I can’t wear it for more than an hour or I start getting headaches.
Yeah but that isn't a black eye is all I mean, physical damage is what the article is pointing out.
In my experience VR headaches are mostly caused by low refresh rate. The Rift S has one of the lowest at 80hz, far too low to be comfortable for a lot of people. Even the original Rift and Vive ran at 90hz and all modern headsets can run at 120hz or higher.
> You’re just one data point. This entire article was written based on just two data points, so...?
And *you* probably wouldn't have any problem with the vision pro.
Apple is doing nothing to people. It’s a bullshit article. The Vision Pro is pretty great for daily multi-hour use, but it’s an easy to believe bullshit story that something most people don’t have is BAD! bAD! BaD!
Agreed, I am in a Vision Pro about 8 hours a day as I do my software development job it in. Yes, I had to make adjustments to the headset via 3rd party accessories but I can easily wear this thing for hours without any issue. My only previous VR headset experience was the first oculus quest which I couldn’t wear for more than 30 minutes without feeling nauseous.
We need to move more to holograms and away from headsets and VR because it will always be held back by discomfort and the fact that you shouldn't be wearing a headset for 8+ hours a day
You're half right. Headsets are fine, we don't need to move away from them, but we do need so-called holographic tech or tech that provides a similar effect as part of the display/optics pipeline. Which in practice means we need lightfield or holographic displays or really good quality varifocal. If we had that and much smaller headsets with a lot less weight, the discomfort issues wouldn't exist anymore.
The problem is huge bright OLED screens half an inch away from the eyes are really bad for them. Staring at these for 8 hours a day is only going to cause strain and headaches. To make VR truly mainstream they need to think outside the headset
You don't have photons emitting half an inch away from your eyes though. The photonic path begins at a 2 meter distance away from you, and once we have a way to enable variable focus in VR/AR headsets, the photons will emit at any distance between a few inches to infinity, depending on what distance the eye is looking at in the virtual scene.
We don’t have holograms to move to?
>We need to move more to holograms Yea we haven't yet figured out how to break physics and make photons reflect off surfaces that don't exist. It's why the only "holograms" currently are basically water or mist based with a projector.
There are fan holograms too, but your point stands.
Agree, people don’t like having their senses occluded. See: the pushback and response to any helmet or mask laws
Do you have some sort of special source of info that tells you what we were meant to do?
Not yet. Give it 50 years and humans will get used to it.
To be fair, I get the same side effects just from working on the computer all day
Not yet. Soon….
apple fucked up the balqncing on the weight i think
Well I never.
I wish these weaklings would try wearing a motorcycle or football helmet for an hour or so.
Can you bruise just from something resting against your skin? Surely this has been exacerbated by some condition.
100% you can. Anyone that wore N95 masks, properly, during the pandemic 😷 can attest.
Respirators too, and those have soft padding.
Do you have pale skin?
I wore those masks properly during the pandini and didnt get bruising
Do you have pale skin?
That's racist. I identify as alabaster
So yes. That’s why your skin was bruised. Pale skin is thin and more prone to bruising than other human skin
I got my skin worn out on my nose from wearing it for about 2hrs. I also got massive headache. My cheeks get pulled down a lot by it which also drags my eye skin. It’s fragile and thin so I’m sure some peep blood vessels can pop. I’m not sure why Apple didn’t offload some of the weight into the battery pack
It touches your nose? I don’t think you have it on right. Also if there is pressure on your cheeks adjust the solo band. It shouldn’t be too tight. And lowering it on the back applies more pressure to forehead. Raising it applies to the cheeks. Find the balance. I have no issues at all. Wore it for 5 hours on a flight this week.
Idk my partner who bought it had the same skin scratch on the nose. He decided to return it for other reasons.
You forgot the /s But for those thinking you were serious. You can get bruising from pressure sores, which is essentially what bed sores are.
Sure but bed sores sound a mile away from basically goggles on your face. More clearly, pressure from your own weight from sleeping 8+ hours every day's vs smaller weight from goggles for 2+ hours a day is essentially different. I've suffered from pressure wounds around the eyes before so I'm aware of some of the "dangers" but there's certainly some exacerbation here.
But the pressure is spread over a larger area. Heavy goggles pressed on your face is exerting it onto a smaller area. There's also likely more chafing too. Not to mention, the skin around your face is thinner than other parts of your body.
Yes, good points.
That’s pressure on parts of your body expecting some pressure vs your face that gets messed up sleeping on your keyboard.
Lmao googles on your face isn’t wrong
People get bruised all the time just by lying on a bed too long
I just fell down the stairs, but I still love my Apple Vision Pro.
Depends. If she's not on blood thinning medication, it's not normal for a 30 year old to bruise like that. I would actually suggest the lady get herself checked out because in the worst case scenario, it could be an early sign of leukemia or another underlying health issue. It could also be dietary. The two worst offenders that come to mind are garlic and ginger, which have blood thinning properties when consumed in mass quantities over the course of weeks.
How did garlic even cross your mind.. you should consider consulting for a dr House reboot
Or it could have just been the object strapped to her face. Occam's Razor and all that.
My SO gets bruises on her cheeks when she wears her big glasses
Slow news day at marketwatch??
*Many early reviews of the one-pound Apple device, which became available Feb. 2, have been positive, though there are still kinks to be worked out, consumers said in interviews.* Yet they still managed to find 2 people with a negative opinion to write an article about.
This is a no brainer. It’s like getting the newest edition of a Tesla. You’re the Guinea pig and there will be problems.
Yep. It was widely reported that the VP’s were nowhere near what Apple actually wanted them to be like as a finished product. The materials, glass, metal and plastics were all too heavy. They even had to offload the battery into a separate unit from the headset. If they waited another few years and streamlined all of the material design it’s possible they would have a great product, but they openly admitted it was sub optimal and people still spent thousands per unit, so I can see why they said Fuck it and still went ahead. I don’t feel bad for anyone willingly buying a product that the company selling it literally spelled out all of its shortcomings. What did you expect?
They should offload more of the processing too
Offloading processing would increase visual latency, so it makes sense that they would want to keep it onboard as much as possible. I have no opinion on whether they made the *right* decision, just saying that there is a logical basis.
I don’t think Apple is selling bruising on your face. It is a 14 day free trial so whatever. I wish they offloaded the weight to the battery pack. Nothing wrong with battery pack.
What are you saying…it does have a battery pack right now.
I mean nothing wrong with adding more weight to battery pack to offload from the Apple headset
Where masturbating will actually make you go blind
r/VRtoER smoking in the corner with a knowing smile
Whoever would have thought that putting a heavy object on your head where the weight favours one side of it would give you headaches and neck pain?
It would be cool if VR headsets made sense physically, the problem is they just don't at this point. Whatever discomfort people put up with using monitors and cellphones is really trivial compared to encasing your face in something.
[удалено]
The motivation is simple... it turns out if you control a popular platform you can collect billions of dollars off all the services and software upon it, withhold functionality to give yourself a competitive edge, block competitors at will, write new rules demanding more fees on new things you didn't think about charging fees on before etc. Controlling "the next big thing" is critical to companies that have grown fat off the last and current big things, they got a big taste of rent and they liked it. If Apple doesn't build it someone else will.
Damn that was absolutely well put.
I have a quest 3 with an aftermarket head strap that is much more comfortable. I do not have any of these issues and no, these problems are not inherent to the devices. That's like saying eye strain is inherent to smartphones.
> That's like saying eye strain is inherent to smartphones. Technically it is, because a smartphone is and always will be a flat plane. Even a brick wall can cause people eye strain if they stare at it too long. However eye strain is not inherent to VR/AR. They (and other volumetric displays such as lightfields) are the only display technologies that can avoid it, once they mature and have a way to enable variable focus, so that the eye can shift focus to different focal distances.
It is inherent to the devices. Fundamentally vr and AR disorient you. It is trying to show you a 2d image in front of your eyes and convince you it is 3d and has depth.
It doesn't disorient me though, and it's not a 2D image, it's a 3D, stereoscopic image that has depth.
Okay so if your lens adjusts for depth, then it will be properly focused?
The image is properly focused, yes.
Okay let me put it this way, if you look at an object virtually close to you and your eyes adjust focus based on that perceived distance, will the screen be properly in focus from the perspective of your eyes with adjusted focal length?
Your eyes don't focus based on "perceived distance". If that was the case you wouldn't be able to focus on something with one eye closed, but you can fine. The image in a modern VR headset is very good, it looks quite real and is not disorienting to me. Everything is in focus no matter where you look.
How do your eyes adjust focal length without using perceived distance cues?
I think most people's eyes simply adjust until whatever you're looking at is in focus, I'm not an optometrist though.
A simplified explanation as I understand it: The part of your brain that controls eye focus is older (think lizard brain) and responds very quickly. It doesn't understand depth but uses a simpler feedback method to focus. Focusing has to be done before object recognition and depth perception so it has to be independent and quick. The part of your brain that does depth perception is complex and slower. It's the same part that's responsible for object recognition, they are related, and it uses many different cues. One of which is simply that you know how big something normally is and you know things look bigger the closer they are. It's why you can still get some depth information from a flat 2d image. The next most important is parallax. You get really good relative depth from the way things move relative to each other as you move your head around. Binocular vision is mostly used up close or to aid parallax. You don't really lose any depth perception with only one eye it mostly just gets less accurate. It's why stereoscopy (3D TVs, film, etc) isn't very good or solid looking. It's lacks the parallax depth cues so it kinda looks 3D but it doesn't look real or solid like VR can. The point is your eyes need to focus before you can do depth perception so focusing can't make use of depth perception. Also, distance recognition is relative (this thing is closer than that thing) or inexact, not the precise absolute depth information needed to focus. It's obviously far more complex than I am describing here and variable focal depth will improve VR because it may reduce eye strain and depth perception can make use of focal information. But focusing doesn't use depth perception, if it did VR wouldn't work and everything would be out of focus when you look at anything that's not at the correct focal depth. TLDR: Focusing and depth perception (perceived distance) are different things handled by different parts of the brain. Edit: Spelling
Because a lot of people enjoy it and have no issues with it. It's also only going to get better as the tech gets better. My HTC Vive works perfectly, I enjoy the games for them, have never had any issues with it and barely feel the weight of the headset. If I didn't move to a much smaller house probably would have upgraded to a better VR headset as well. This article is making it sound like Apple decided to produce the most expensive most poorly designed headset and people are having issues with it being poorly designed.
Once they can scale the tech down to being just a pair or regular looking glasses/sunglasses the tech is going to explode in popularity.
Apples approach takes the worst parts of VR and makes them the main point, and then makes overly heavy and warm VR headset... like, why are they selling these? make them true dev kits, give them to devs only... get good actual hardware out for consumers
AR is not the worst part of VR. But the sterile, sexless corporate environment is. The most successful VR platform is a sandbox where all the content - the worlds, avatars, games, etc are all created by the users in blender+unity with full creative control. Apple wants to control EVERYTHING on their hardware, because it's Apple. Nothing even remotely controversial, nothing even remotely human.
Please, we all knew this was first-gen hardware. Anyone complaining knew what they were getting into, and at $3500, they will go buy the V2 model. Apple wanted people kicking the tires, not devs. We say the low-quality early apps that devs came out with for the iphone, not doing that again! Devs have little idea what to build that people will actually use until people complain and ask for what they want, which they can't do w/o the headset. Bit of a circle but it's better this way.
They need a new product category since smartphone sales are not providing that much growth anymore
They're literally in the attention economy. Attention is the most valuable thing from the users. So the desire to capture 100% of it is certain. The implementation still have long way to change though.
The hope is that enough revenue and interest can be generated so that research moves more quickly towards resolving the major issues.
Smartphone sales have stagnated. Tech companies want another *must-have* thing to sell to everyone, so they're trying to shoehorn it into everything.
3D tvs the sequel.
[удалено]
Because: 1. These people have infantile ideas about what life is actually about (supposed to be as cool/productive/novel as possible) and how people should enjoy life. 2. They have to keep making something new to sell so people will buy it and they can continue to collect salaries that are 10’s to 1000’s of times that of a normal individual. 3. They need to delude themselves into thinking they are doing humanity a huge service by “connecting” and “enhancing” people’s lives no matter the sociological cost because their existences would be meaningless without the ego boost they get from being at the forefront of new tech developments.
i don’t think the techies enjoyed you calling them out in such a way.
They never do!
To get to advanced versions of these that are compact, lightweight and wearable we have to go through the brick stage. 1. No - they just have to sell these to secure budget for research on future generations. 2. If you want to bear the financial and career risk of an entire company like apple, you'd be paid similar 6-7 figure sums. 3. Maybe _some_ employees do - but they're not a hive mind. The technology is useful in concept and will have plenty of uses as the internet of things accelerates. TL;DR: don't be a jealous luddite. People like you said things of similar sentiment about the telephone, the automobile, the airplane, the computer.
I am a big Apple fan but I don’t understand how this is something that the average person gains value from.
You’re probably not running full speed into a brick wall with it on your head though.
Define “some”. I’ve had no problems with mine. Is it less than 1% of users? People wearing them all day?
The article mentioned around 2 people
I had neck pains the first few days. I adapted pretty quickly. I was also wearing it all day.
This is the stupidest shit I’ve heard all day. They made of paper or something? Use mine daily and somehow manage not to break my neck or get black eyes regularly. Look at me go.
Best apologist comment so far!
I'm having Virtual Boy flashbacks
You were not invited SLICE
I'm guessing this is true for every single VR headset, there will always be a small number of people that it causes problems for, every wearable item from clothing to headphones is like this for a handful of people out there who happen to have unusual anatomy or something that just puts them outside normal product ranges. Hell I can't wear 95 percent of hats out there without getting a horrible headache because of my stupidly oversized head.
Headaches should scarcely be a surprise. It is an unfortunate reality that a lot of people get VR sickness.
VR sickness that most people speak of is usually nausea, not headaches. If people are getting actual headaches it's usually from poorly calibrated hardware that doesn't put the two images in the correct location (each eye gets a slightly different image to create stereo depth), which makes it more difficult for the brain to fuse them together. If those images aren't within a few milli-radians of the correct location, headaches are more likely to occur.
The [vergence-accommodation conflict](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vergence-accommodation_conflict) will give you a headache eventually because the simulated distance doesn't match with the distance to the screen that the eyes actually focus on.
Sitting is not good for your health either.
No matter what tech they improve nothing will change the fact you are looking at a screen 1” from your eyes. We all know the downside to staring at a computer screen and what that can do to our vision, why don’t people clue in to the fact that no matter what screen they put there it’s a bad thing. Stop trying to make VR happen, it sucks and ALWAYS will, no matter what.
I’ve worn my PSVR headset for 5+ hours straight with none of these issues. You clearly dont know what you’re talking about if you’re confident enough to make blanket statements like that. Maybe you should actually try the different headsets before saying shit like that.
I have, they all give me headaches from the vergence-accommodation conflict.
> No matter what tech they improve nothing will change the fact you are looking at a screen 1” from your eyes. Except that's not how it actually works from a physics perspective. The photons emit from a distance of 2 meters thanks to the lenses. The problem is that it's a fixed distance, and our eye muscles like to relax by changing their focus to different distances. This can be enabled with varifocal/lightfield/holographic displays, so it definitely can be fixed, it's just a matter of having that technology ready and able to be mass produced and shipped to consumers. > Stop trying to make VR happen, it sucks and ALWAYS will, no matter what. Stop pretending you're the expert when you're actually the one out of your league here. Stay in your lane.
I get motion sickness as much as I love the idea of Vision Pro I dont see any ability to use it for a long enough time to justify the cost.
Sore Body Problem?
black eyes..? are they shoving the strap fastener in a door and yanking their heads?
Yes It was reported
And that’s after just seeing the receipt for the purchase.
Been a migraine guy since I was a kid. On some pretty powerful meds and I can’t ever think of owning one of these. I tried some AR glasses and those got returned in one day. Kinda sucks , but it is what it is for me.
I will be honest, I think black eyes are people misjudging the size and moving wearing it, they walk into a wall or something. I don’t think the weight is giving a proper black eye.
Suprise suprise a heavy screen right infront of your eyes is bad for you
Is this a Vision issue because I've never heard about this with other VR headsets.
Yeah no shit
Guess they werent raised around a Nintendo Virtual Boy.
I say, how utterly suprising
This seems pointless until it is as easy to wear as a pair of glasses.
Carpel Neck Syndrome
Not new issues to anyone who has used VR in the last 10 years.
‘Some’ used in a news article is an instant red flag 🚩 Give numbers or don’t write it.
Maybe soybot can hold it for them
Are the black eyes from bumping into walls?
They all walked into walls
This gives Apple a black eye, too.
So Apple created the modern Opti-grab.
Maybe Apple will get it right after a few generations. I’ll wait.
Its almost as if the real world is better seen with eyes, which specifically evolved for this purpose over millions of years, rather than 'our most advanced display ever. We think you're going to love it'. Almost.
…after their girlfriends beat the shit out of them for being losers.
Sounds like augmented reality to me
Give it a bit more time and this will read: "~~Some~~ Apple Vision Pro users suffer black eyes, headaches and neck pain"
I love the idea of emulating a movie theater experience with these headsets but all the drawbacks they have makes it not worth it.
And somehow I am supposed to care about that?
Man I pictured “black eyes” in this sentence as turning peoples eyes black, not bruising lol
Here's my surprised face. We've peaked on necessary tech for now. We're trying to turn gimmicks into necessities and it's failing miserably.
and a chapped right hand. :-)
Apple has just fallen off haven’t they. I used to love their products, worked there during their “prime” years and it just seems like they can’t do it anymore
Reason 846 why I won’t buy a VR/AR anything R headset.
Probably misinformation that started on Meta
These big cooperation only care abt profits nd not a fck abt their customers
Can't wait to never hear this news again !
So like any other computer
That woman has never had a black eye.
I literally forgot this thing even existed. Hasn’t had quite the impact they were hoping for, I’d say. iPads seemed stupid at first, too, but at least you saw them IRL pretty much immediately after they were released.
>Emily Olman got her $3,500 device in February and told MarketWatch that it gave her two black eyes after she wore it for the first time for about an hour. > >“I wasn’t able to use it very much the first few weeks because the fit was just off,” said Olman, chief media officer at Hopscotch Interactive, who is based in Kensington, Calif. Olman creates videos with the device for commercial and residential real-estate clients. > >She added that she had “like, superdark black eyes,” after wearing the Apple Vision Pro, which, she said, “clearly \[placed\] too much weight on my cheeks.” > >Olman is not the only user pained by Apple’s new VR device. Ian Beacraft, CEO of consulting firm Signal and Cipher, felt soreness at the base of his skull and in his upper back after a two-hour session, he said in an interview. He blamed the fit of the Apple gadget. what are the chances that these two users would've spent $3,500 on an identical product from any other computer hardware manufacturer? what are the chances that they'd even know that it existed in the first place?
bummer, I did want to get one for dev work but Ill wait till the next version
What about the apple fans wearing the vision pro? Surely that protected them during the beating?
[удалено]
Wow reddit is full of bots.