We’ve been equipped with Apple Vision Pro’s to attend a hackathon on spatial computing. I’ve had a chance to experiment it and check my expectations.
From the early beginning of the announcements, Vision Pro was a breathtaking product for me, and I was trying to convince myself to save money and be an early adaptor. My experiment moved me into another conclusion. Vision Pro is 40% Apple-istic product. Here’s why;
-
The display and experience is better than recordings.
-
Great material quality and nice-looking design.
-
Hand gestures are nice, but it’s not perfect.
-
Weight & Balance is the biggest pain point.
-
Usage with glasses is a complete problem!
-
Sum it all; Form factor solves or creates the problems.
1. The display and experience is better than recordings.
The first question mark was the quality of renderings and VR applications. When you browse the videos (even POV recordings), the quality was like a low quality 2D game. And it was a question mark to acquire a vision (pro). After trying it out, I found the visual quality mesmerizing. The shadows of the objects and realistic combination with existing space wouldn’t be described, or shown; but, demonstrable. (I tried with Jig Space application and a few VR games.)
Apple didn’t manage out to provide the same visual quality in recordings. Might be originated from the difficulty of merging left and right images into one. The output images/videos are shadowy; both for Camera and screen recordings/captures.
2. Great material quality and nice-looking design.
When you handle it, the weight and material finishing were just appropriate for an Apple product. When you look into it, it keeps attention, make everyone looking. Like the AirPods first announced. An opposing aspect; it cannot be worn confidently like AirPods.
3. Hand gestures are nice, but it’s not perfect.
The quality and accuracy of hand gestures was favorable. But, while the UI and UX of the Vision is blazing-fast, the handle gestures were not fast enough to match this.
The exception is game playing. During a game play, I didn’t feel a lag.
4. Weight & Balance is the biggest pain point.
Everyone who wear Vision, had the same complaint; heavy or squeezing. To match the weight, users are squeezing the headband, which makes the device tighter to face and allow them to carry the weight. I agree. This device is heavy to interact. The record is 30 minutes. It won’t be an issue how much the battery will keep working…
The exception may be using it while laying.
5. Usage with glasses is a complete problem!
I was thinking on preparing an adaptor with my 3D printer for glass usage. The idea was okay ‘till I experimented. Vision Pro had a difficult on understanding the eye movements. I was able to interact with items under my head level with glasses on usage. When glasses on, Vision was catching whenever I was looking downwards not central nor upwards; a pain to my neck!
I tried to catch a pattern with different glasses to hack and solve this issue, but even with different glasses, there was no reliable finding to hack the experience.
Yes, Apple provide glasses, they thought about it, I know. Still, when I received Vision for a temporary time, and trying to build something with it, I cannot even find a temporary solution. Vision is a personal device, it’s like a waterfall project, while purchasing you shall customize it; like ordering a car, which won’t come with any defaults!
6. Sum it all; Form factor solves or creates the problems.
As a PM, worked in hardware area before; it was our golden motto; Form follows function. When we try to add a feature, which is restricted by form factor, we were calling it a suboptimal improvement. And none of the suboptimal improvements has worked out. If form factor disables the function; there is two possibility; don’t do suboptimal improvements, or prepare and adapter / case to the product which resolves the form restrictions.
Apple does both of them; they didn’t pushed FaceId while it’s suboptimal, the competitors launched multiple suboptimal biometric authentication. And Apple also solves the problem with apparatuses; like iPad cases with keyboard. Still, using iPad productively is an issue, because it lays flat on desk, you cannot look directly, or handling it tires you. An adapter alters the form then solves the problem.
We imagined lots of use cases for vision, but Vision’s heavy form factor was a killer of ideas; we cannot suggest it using while moving, or in a vehicle; it became a stationary device, or a device can be used in a room. It’s a good gaming or movie-watch device. Immersive technology is outperforming. Spatial accuracy and tech stack is reliable enough. But; with this form factor, the use cases limited, and (except the entertainment purposes) cannot be compared with using a Mac or iPad.
I think the appearance is Apple-ish, but the rest of the functionalities are not Apple-ish. At maximum, it’s 40% Apple-ish product. Apple didn’t applied its principles; they may solve a portion of the weight and balance problems. The current Vision with this price tag is not fitting to the market. The interest is coming from the question of what might be coming.
It’s so much told; “when a product is launched perfectly, it’s too late.” And “remember the first iPhone” Sure. Let’s remember; First iPhone was a restricted phone which was functioning device, and first iPad, first AirPods, first Watch, first Apple Pencil were fitting into a need, and was serving the function reliably. The following series outperformed the first one.
I also see the advancement in spatial technologies of Apple, by following Vision kit, ARKit, MLKit, Lidars, and others, Apple has worked on these technologies and reached an remarkable point spatial computing possibilities.
Plus
- Sometimes, the vision cannot keep the spatial references consistent enough, when you move, the spacial references moves by inches or tickles. I think, when multiple objects exists, Lidars of Vision Pro bounces through objects. Not a big problem. But it is better to keep your desk and home tidy to have the best result.
- The travel mode has some restrictions, it puts you into a stationary point and create your own egocentric spaces. So it’s not feasible to use in movement while in a vehicle.