Anyone using the Vision Pro as a virtual Mac screen, with environment bonuses, is someone who would like the option to drag Mac windows for powerful apps off their "Mac screen" and be their own windows.
And those Mac apps would be even better if in "Mac" windows on Vision Pro, I could have 3D models, an interface taking advantage of 3D for plotting, etc.
Instead, Apple believes the Vision Pro is an iPad Minus, instead of being the most powerful working machine they have. More Pro, than Mac Pro.
Sure, produce a "Vision" or "Vision Air" that is basically an iPad with 3D for the low end. But please let the "Pro" in Vision Pro fulfill its potential as the most powerful environment of them all. Stop holding back its potential. The iPhone and iPad need things simplified for their simpler interfaces. But Vision Pro's interface, with keyboard and trackpad, far exceeds a Mac's interface potential. Let' go, Apple!
Importing Mac-level capabilities, even up to the computing power of MacStudio Ultras, but only as a 2D screen in a 3D environment, just screams for so much more. The new top-capability Apple interface/device.
And a new level of computing/interface capability, will pull in the creatives/developers who will go on to add even more use cases. Instead of badly porting iPad apps.
Completely agree with Ben Thompson. Apple doesn't understand the potential of their own product, even as the hardware exists today, or last year.
Well you don't have to use the touchscreen, which was always rather awkward for many tasks, particularly anything productivity oriented. Even on my laptop i basically never use windows, but I still find the ipad to be unusable for anything but browsing and reading books and scrolling.
I'm sure they can do more. I'm just not sure "more" has anything to do with dragging windows around.
But maybe it's just me; I think it's easier to command-tab (or opt-tab) around than use my eyes. Unless I need to drag something between windows, which only happens about once a month or so.
> I'm sure they can do more. I'm just not sure "more" has anything to do with dragging windows around.
You get one Mac "window", with all your other windows jammed into it, as is necessary for physical screens, but entirely unnecessary for real 3D space.
Those "windows" could be frames containing three dimensional graphs, design structures, the list goes on and on.
The combo of eye selection, gestures + keyboard and trackpad are already wonderful. They need a little smoothing out, but work great already.
The contrast in power between Mac-in-Vision vs. the iPad-like-apps in Vision is dismal. The former is power but artificially flat and constrained, the latter is toy but with huge interface potential. The obvious software imposed (not hardware) gap in the middle, when using both, is enormous.
The device is made for so much more. As in, real computing in the "spacial computing". Otherwise, it is just a toy or an expensive Mac screen replacement. A waste of what should be a huge new category win for Apple.
Man, I just want to code from a more relaxing neck angle. I don't think all this is going to be very useful for that. I'm sure these ideas will be useful for something, but.... people have been talking about minority report for decades and trying to materialize it always ends up wasting attention processing too much at once.
For whatever reason, Apple delivered the hardware. But kneecapped the software.
They seem to see everything since the iPhone as a kiosk first, computer second. Which makes some degree of sense, Mac with keyboard/trackpad assumed vs. iOS/touch (with optional keyboard/trackpad) and covering many smaller sized screens.
But the Vision has much wider interface and interaction potential than Mac, not less. If Apple would let the Pro version of Vision, be a Spacial Mac. The new power high end.
(With a Vision Air, for the iOS-like, consumer, lower end market.)
I have no idea if this guy’s thoughts on the device and what would make it special are correct. (In fact I think his one camera for the whole thing idea would get boring quickly.) But it’s damning that no one seems to be able to recommend the device. I want one, but only as a toy and I can’t justify that kind of cost for a toy. I’ve not heard anything that was even remotely compelling.
Anyone using the Vision Pro as a virtual Mac screen, with environment bonuses, is someone who would like the option to drag Mac windows for powerful apps off their "Mac screen" and be their own windows.
And those Mac apps would be even better if in "Mac" windows on Vision Pro, I could have 3D models, an interface taking advantage of 3D for plotting, etc.
Instead, Apple believes the Vision Pro is an iPad Minus, instead of being the most powerful working machine they have. More Pro, than Mac Pro.
Sure, produce a "Vision" or "Vision Air" that is basically an iPad with 3D for the low end. But please let the "Pro" in Vision Pro fulfill its potential as the most powerful environment of them all. Stop holding back its potential. The iPhone and iPad need things simplified for their simpler interfaces. But Vision Pro's interface, with keyboard and trackpad, far exceeds a Mac's interface potential. Let' go, Apple!
Importing Mac-level capabilities, even up to the computing power of MacStudio Ultras, but only as a 2D screen in a 3D environment, just screams for so much more. The new top-capability Apple interface/device.
And a new level of computing/interface capability, will pull in the creatives/developers who will go on to add even more use cases. Instead of badly porting iPad apps.
Completely agree with Ben Thompson. Apple doesn't understand the potential of their own product, even as the hardware exists today, or last year.
> Apple believes the Vision Pro is an iPad Minus
Well you don't have to use the touchscreen, which was always rather awkward for many tasks, particularly anything productivity oriented. Even on my laptop i basically never use windows, but I still find the ipad to be unusable for anything but browsing and reading books and scrolling.
I'm sure they can do more. I'm just not sure "more" has anything to do with dragging windows around.
But maybe it's just me; I think it's easier to command-tab (or opt-tab) around than use my eyes. Unless I need to drag something between windows, which only happens about once a month or so.
> I'm sure they can do more. I'm just not sure "more" has anything to do with dragging windows around.
You get one Mac "window", with all your other windows jammed into it, as is necessary for physical screens, but entirely unnecessary for real 3D space.
Those "windows" could be frames containing three dimensional graphs, design structures, the list goes on and on.
The combo of eye selection, gestures + keyboard and trackpad are already wonderful. They need a little smoothing out, but work great already.
The contrast in power between Mac-in-Vision vs. the iPad-like-apps in Vision is dismal. The former is power but artificially flat and constrained, the latter is toy but with huge interface potential. The obvious software imposed (not hardware) gap in the middle, when using both, is enormous.
The device is made for so much more. As in, real computing in the "spacial computing". Otherwise, it is just a toy or an expensive Mac screen replacement. A waste of what should be a huge new category win for Apple.
Man, I just want to code from a more relaxing neck angle. I don't think all this is going to be very useful for that. I'm sure these ideas will be useful for something, but.... people have been talking about minority report for decades and trying to materialize it always ends up wasting attention processing too much at once.
For whatever reason, Apple delivered the hardware. But kneecapped the software.
They seem to see everything since the iPhone as a kiosk first, computer second. Which makes some degree of sense, Mac with keyboard/trackpad assumed vs. iOS/touch (with optional keyboard/trackpad) and covering many smaller sized screens.
But the Vision has much wider interface and interaction potential than Mac, not less. If Apple would let the Pro version of Vision, be a Spacial Mac. The new power high end.
(With a Vision Air, for the iOS-like, consumer, lower end market.)
I have no idea if this guy’s thoughts on the device and what would make it special are correct. (In fact I think his one camera for the whole thing idea would get boring quickly.) But it’s damning that no one seems to be able to recommend the device. I want one, but only as a toy and I can’t justify that kind of cost for a toy. I’ve not heard anything that was even remotely compelling.
Small discussion (19 points, 3 days ago, 9 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46586881