• PatFusty@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Would you call Google glass or hololense a VR machine? No you wouldn’t. Apple fits right in there with them

    • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Glass were glasses with a small HUD.

      Vision Pro are goggles with a full opaque display and video passthrough. Like an Oculus/Meta device. Just higher quality passthrough.

      It’s a VR headset, despite how much apple insists on it actually being a “spacial computer”, and some people saying it’s an AR device.

    • bandwidthcrisis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Glass was just a heads-up display in the corner of vision, nothing like any sort of vr/ar/xr system. I don’t know why you would consider that comparable to any of the headsets. Hololens and Magic Leap were augmented reality, but by not using camera passthrough they were limited filed-of view and could not do opacity. Quest 3 is much more similar to the Vision Pro in terms of what it can do (aside from the outer display). For instance, it’s possible to place large browser windows around your room, and replace your monitor with a larger virtual version.