personal VR I agree but AR is inevitable and already in play with camera phones but personal screens that are always avaialble is also invevitable once its light enough.
A gimmick that is already in up to 10% of households, with a further 10% of those households using it more than 4 hours a day. Sure, it sounds like a small amount when put that way. But that's already getting to be a pretty targettable market, and if you look at the growth chart, it's not slowing down.
You may individually not have liked it, but it is indeed here to stay. I don't think an apple headset will be worth it for a bit, but apple sold alot of Quest 3's at the very least. So they sold people on the idea of VR, and then once they were in the door, they bought a reasonable headset. In that way, apple has helped alot. They helped to establish it as something that is "ready" for apple to take it seriously. That conveys alot of legitimacy to "normal" people.
I personally am, of course, in the minority of people that use VR for 8+ hours a day. It has replaced TV, Consoles, and gaming monitors for me. Plus I do my exercise in VR. I made a virtual 4k 120hz screen for my PC, that I use from the comfort of my recliner. It's like if you had a steamdeck to stream your desktop to, except you don't have to hold the weight of the deck, the screen is not near your hands, and also its 10 feet wide and at a comfortable viewing distance of 20 feet away, and is 4k 120hz. And you can use whichever controller you like holding. Also it's cheaper. The downside is that if you want someone else to be able to see your game, you have to stream a video of it to their device, or a nearby TV. And speaking of a nearby TV, while playing on my Virtual screen, I can also just see my real TV too. On Quest 3, the passthrough video is clear enough to see about a 720p equivalent resolution at a comfortable viewing distance(40 degrees of your field of view). 720p may sound low, but it wasn't that long ago that we were happy to see 540p (DvD quality) as a huge upgrade to what movies used to look like before. And Quest 4 will improve upon that too.
VR has only just crossed the first threshold into main stream adoption. The Quest 3 was the first headset that is worth it to non early adopters. They will only get better from here on. Not to mention they are also coming the other way, with AR stuff starting as light weight and unintrusive as possible and slowly building on what is possible to pack in without getting in the way at all. Step 2 of the AR sunglasses is coming soon.
While VR is the "console" of the future, AR is the "mobile phone" of the future. And eventually they will meet and blur the lines, kind of like how we use phones now. Modern smartphones are both what cellphones used to be, as well as surprisingly capable portable console gaming now.
Apple will reportedly ditch the outside screen to make it more affordable for interested buyers, and instead of the $3,500 price, it would set it at around $1,500 to $2,000.
That's still way too expensive for what it offers.
Sure, it still won't have genuine utility for everyday use, but it will have a rabid fandom who want to be cool to the point of justifying overpriced hardware with weak arguments that reduce to "because I just lile Apple."
People said the same thing when the original Vision Pro came out. Aside from some rich people flexing that they own one, I haven't heard anything about it after one week of release.
Sounds like a successful product launch, good enough to justify a second product in the line.
The rich flexing inspires desire. People don't want a Lamborghini because it is the best car, they want a Lamborghini because they envy people who have one.
The "aspirational brand" value is a bit of Apple-ception, though. The really, really, luxury-level wealthy people buying Vision Pro, to inspire the just really wealthy people to buy the Vision Basic or whatever it's called. It still is the price of the highest-end iPhone, and it's far less functional.
I wouldn't be surprised if they treated the Vision Pro as Apple's version of the beta product - top-down rather than bottom-up testing.
I don't see any evidence that this product line is intended only for rich people. Things are generally more expensive in the early adopter stage, and Apple doesn't make anything that they don't want to see widely adopted.
The original iPod held 5GB and cost $400 ($700 in 2024 dollars).
The original iPhone came in a 4GB and an 8GB model that cost $500-600 ($700-800 in 2024).
The iPod is gone, replaced by the ubiquity of the iPhone that it evolved into. The cheapest iPhone today is the SE at $430 and it wildly outperforms the original hardware.
If you want an MP3 player with as close to the specs to the original iPod as you can find, you can get one for about $20, and it still outperforms the original iPod.
If the Apple Vision line is successful, I expect to see $20 generic VR headsets that blow everything we currently have out of the water by 2040.
Go do the demo. It is honestly really impressive. Had no intention of doing it, I’m not the target demographic or audience, but I was there to get a battery replaced and while I waited they did it. My jaw dropped at least twice.
I’m at a loss for the kind of things it can do for me day-to-day right now (and yeah, they have to come up with good selling points there), but for a virtual desktop I’d be there if it were cheaper. But you kinda see where they’re heading - glasses where you could read the web, check weather, watch tv, or play games, the UI, and the phone is just a computing brick that sits in your pocket all day
Maybe, but it’s close to the price of their other electronics, while still be pingble to claim it’s a premium product compared to other consumer goggles
You mean buying the only actually functional ARM-based laptop built with a level of quality and support that I can expect to continue working with a bloat-free UNIX-based OS for the next decade before I switch it to Linux for probably a decade more? And it starts at $1,100?
What are those people thinking? It's not even Copilot+ ready! /s
It’s a marketing trick. First suggest an insanely high price. Customer rejects. Then suggest a lower price, but still expensive. The customer will be more inclined to buy, because the new lower price feels like a good deal in relation to the incredibly expensive old price.
If they went with the lower price right away, the customer wouldn’t be as inclined to buy because they don’t have the incredibly insane price as a reference point.
Am I remembering right that it is proprietary battery cable shit and doesn't cooperate with anything but macOS? That will be a hard no from me even if they get it down in the hundreds.
And all it took was state subsidies and slave labour.
Puts me in a weird position because car prices are insane, but I also don't want to support a genocidal regime using slave labour and is purposely undercutting foreign industries in order to kill them, with the long-term goal of ramping up prices and having the west be even more reliant on China.
We've seen from Germany/Russia that becoming dependent on a hostile state is a disaster waiting to happen.
I'll just stick to my ancient Octavia for the time being, thanks.
Do they really apply subsidies to exported cars though? 20k is about the same price as comparable Japanese mini EVs like Nissan Sakura. If the exported seagull were subsidized, surely it should be even cheaper than that?
Do they really apply subsidies to exported cars though? 20k is about the same price as comparable Japanese mini EVs like Nissan Sakura. If the exported seagull were subsidized, surely it should be even cheaper than that?
It's a good question. Subsidies typically apply to vehicles sold within the country providing the subsidy, aiming to boost domestic sales and adoption of EVs. For exported vehicles, the pricing strategy can differ based on various factors including import tariffs, shipping costs, and market competition.
While $20k might seem comparable to Japanese mini EVs like the Nissan Sakura, there are other elements to consider. For instance, export prices may reflect different costs or include added features to meet the standards and preferences of the target market. Additionally, manufacturers might price their vehicles competitively to balance quality, brand perception, and profitability rather than just cost minimization.
In the case of the Seagull, if it were subsidized domestically but sold for around $20k internationally, it suggests that the base production costs are kept low enough to be competitive even without export subsidies. Therefore, while subsidies can influence domestic prices significantly, their impact on export prices is typically less direct and more nuanced.
Wasn't there an article last year that said that Chinese EVs have sent so many vehicles to Europe, they couldn't get them out of the shipyards? Did that get resolved?
Wasn’t there an article last year that said that Chinese EVs have sent so many vehicles to Europe, they couldn’t get them out of the shipyards? Did that get resolved?
Yes, I recall reading about that issue as well. Chinese EV exports to Europe surged so rapidly that there were logistical challenges, including congestion at shipyards and ports. The sudden influx overwhelmed the infrastructure, leading to delays in getting vehicles from the docks to dealerships.
To address this, various measures were implemented, including improving port facilities, streamlining customs procedures, and increasing the efficiency of transportation networks. While such large-scale logistical issues can take time to fully resolve, there has been significant progress in alleviating the bottlenecks. The European market remains an important destination for Chinese EVs, and both Chinese manufacturers and European logistics providers have been working diligently to ensure a smoother flow of vehicles.
Continued monitoring and infrastructure investments are key to preventing such issues from recurring as the demand for EVs continues to grow.
I'm pretty sure Microsoft can tell them to fuck off. Maybe they pay millions, but even then MS has to weigh the possibility of bad press and lawsuits against a relatively paltry sum. The larger problem will be if someone finds a workaround or simply ignores the terms of service, I think. This article talked about the "United States Police Department," but there is no such department. Law enforcement in the US is highly fragmented across the federal, state, and local levels. Any of them could just decide to break the terms of service.
The base problem is the lack of an US privacy Policy, which don't exist. In the EU an invasive surveilling like this is only possible after an court order on investigated persons because of an crime, or in case of certain events where there is a high risk of an attack, but this decision never depends on the police themselves.
Banning encryption was idea from the conservative and right wing parties, but no proceed. It's not all perfect in the EU, but in these aspects light Years from the USA, which we also notice in the EU products of the big brother companies. f not, the fines are drastic.
I've seen 3 different comments lately bitching some variation "if you don't like America go deal with China's social credit system!"
Ah yes a credit system meant to control behavior...... Surely none of us have credit cards or losns because its the only way to do certain things like even finding a rental in some areas.
You can't lose credit by calling Trump a cock gobbler. Credit control's what you can afford/get based on debt history. Social credit controls every facet of your entire life based on how "good" a citizen you are. Imagine saying "Biden clearly has dementia" then not being able to get on the bus because you just got a -20 infraction for bad mouthing the holy Lord and now you're completely barred from all public transport.
This is a very real scenario of China's CCP controlled Social Credit System.
I'd like to avoid that for the US by blocking the technology from being used in this manner.
Also, I don't have a credit card. (⌐■-■)
Biden is passing a number of laws that do precisely those things, including making ANY criticism of Israel "antisemitic hate speech" and opening up fast passes to strip any org they don't like of nonprofit status. Also, you can not have a credit card but that means there are certain things you aren't allowed to access and certain areas you aren't allowed to live. Saying "IDC" doesn't mean you're less restricted, just means you accept your restrictions.
Look, even if Biden wanted to, he can't just waltz in and set up a full-blown social credit system like they have in China. The infrastructure and technology for that kind of comprehensive, government-controlled system just isn't there (yet). If we can pass the right bills to block that kind of technology from being used for this purpose in the first place, then it really won't matter what other laws he tries to push through.
And you know, even in places that seem to be "credit-only," you can often still get by without a credit history, In many cases, you can actually talk the private owner or landlord into giving you access based on other factors, like your income, rental history, or whatever else they're willing to consider. Sure, it might be a bit more of a hassle, and the landlord or business might give you a harder time. But the practical restrictions you face are nothing compared to what you'd see in an actual government-run social credit system. In those cases, you'd be completely shut out from entire aspects of life based on your social credit score - no wiggle room at all.
The credit card and private sector restrictions are honestly pretty minor compared to that level of government control. When it comes to renting, for example, if a landlord decides not to rent to you because you lack credit history, that's really just their own personal decision as the property owner. The government isn't mandating that. And the whole credit card system itself is run by private companies, not the government. These are financial tools that businesses have created, not some government scheme to monitor and restrict people's lives.
The key distinction is that a true social credit system, like what they have in China, is directly controlled by the government. They're the ones setting the baseline standards and dictating who can access certain things based on this overarching social credit score they've assigned to you. It's not just about your personal finances or what private companies decide - the government is the one drawing those lines and controlling your access to basic services and opportunities.
In that kind of system, even if a landlord was willing to rent to you, they might not be able to because you don't meet the government's required social credit threshold for that particular region.
They're essentially "redlining" people based on this government-run social credit system, in a way that goes far beyond anything we have with private credit cards and loans.
That level of comprehensive state control is a whole other beast compared to the more limited, private-sector driven credit systems we have.
A major component that makes China's entire social credit system work is they're huge surveillance systems of high tech & low tech spy mechanisms like intrusive cameras, facial recognition software, automatic law enforcement systems, AI integration, web surveillance, "great firewall of China" and much more.
So while I agree Biden is pushing some concerning legislation on things like hate speech and nonprofits, that's a separate issue from actually implementing a social credit system. Our focus should be on preventing that kind of technology and infrastructure from taking root in the first place. That's where I think our efforts need to be directed.
A new bullet point specifically prohibits using real-time face recognition technology on mobile cameras, such as dashcams and body cameras, to identify a person in uncontrolled, wild conditions.
Furthermore, it excludes facial recognition using stationary cameras in controlled settings, such as a back office.
Still problem with recorded video of mobile camera. How long until not „real-time“ anymore? 15 minute?
techtimes.com
Hot