The market already gave 3D a chance and the answer was a loud NO.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple TV+ 'Monsterverse' Show Filming in 3D for Vision Pro Viewing
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You've obviously never had the experience before - and Apple's headset has NO SCREEN DOOR and is in 4K - it will be outstanding if you can manage to wear it for 2 hours. This is one of the bigger selling points for me - and will be for LOTS of people. It's the cost of a short throw projector that many of us would drop $3500 -$7000 on.
One of the initial highlights from early impressions was how much better this experience is with the Reality Pro.
I believe what you are saying but the way you worded it, you sound like Apple planted you in this forum!
Well, lets see how the Vision Pro pans out in the next few years. At least give them two or three iterations of it before we write them off.
I agree. While the glasses could technically be classified as a computer, I dont see many using them like that. It's more like a device people use for watching or playing stuff. Maybe a cheaper version would only have these video and game functions, and not all the extra computer stuff. I've got these 1080p glasses, and I can use them to watch films and play games, and do all the stuff I usually do on my phone, tablet, or Mac. They're not exactly a computer though. The Apple glasses are still a better product, they're just better made. I'm looking forward to seeing what they do with them next. It'll be interesting to see if they really change the game, or if they just kind of fade away.
They only show images for both eye simultaneously if they have dual projectors. The two theaters nearest to me have only single projector auditoriums.
The projector runs at 144FPS, and shows each image 3 times to each eye, interleaved. So it's LRLRLR. So each eye does get 24 unique frames, but not simultaneously. I notice artifacts from that pattern. VR will have true simultaneous images to each eye.
The latest round of VR has already lasted longer than 3DTV.
3DTVs were released from 2010 to 2016. The first modern VR headsets were released 2016 and will have been continually available until at least 2024, with the launch of the Vision Pro.
There haven't been as many VR headsets sold as 3DTVs, but that's basically just because 3D was a feature included in standard high end TVs that was there whether you wanted it or not.
You might not realize watching a movie on a "3D television" never created an immersive user experience.
Given the capabilities of the device, I doubt this will be merely a 3D movie in the classic sense for which most people are familiar. Think instead of the entire scene spreading out of your "television", the landscape, the rubble, the vehicles, the characters step through the scene, around you, behind you. The scene and action can be front and center or you can be in the center of it all. The buildings and landscape can be all around you, while the focus of action can be in front of you, but then around you. This is a whole new type of entertainment, the next evolution of "movies" and "shows". Even more, given the eye-tracking and body tracking these devices have, the characters and creatures can "know" that you are observing them. They can change their behavior to include you in the action. It doesn't have to be like a game, but it's also not constrained to mere, old-school 3D presentations.
Well let's hope that they provide multi user accounts on the Vision Pro so that one purchase can be used by the entire family. 
Unlike the iPad where there is one account for the entire family and you can't switch users.
Unlike the iPad where there is one account for the entire family and you can't switch users.
If they somehow could make Star Trek TNG retroactively 3D, I’d pay double for it.
Since this is AR, they could just have all players wear Vision Pros, and you could switch to the perspective of any player. 😀
Nice explanation.
Not to mention you can watch it anywhere. I myself will be
- Extreme Skiing in Norway
- Everest Skydive
- Visit the South Pole
- Trekking the Great Himalaya Trail in Nepal
- A Virgin Galatic to Space
- $1.5 Million World Cruise
Uh no. VP is not going to make 3D content attractive. People already hated wearing thin and light weight glasses. Why would they want to wear a computer on their head? Some people experience motion sickness with 3D. While VP has low latency, that still doesn’t resolve the fact that many people get sick with 3D content.
On top of that, my 3D tv came with 4 sets of glasses. 1 tv, and many viewers. 4 VP * $3,500 is $14,000 for a family to watch 3D content. Again, not happening.
VP can be successful but it’s not going to be because of 3D movies nor is it going to make 3D movies popular.
2014 is calling you.
Except that you're not experiencing any of it. You're just watching a movie. You don't feel the cold, the powder snow blasting you in the face with every turn, the rush of the cold air as you jump out of the plane...nor do you taste or smell anything. It's just a fancy movie.
Your list makes me sad for humanity, but I fear this is the future. People sitting alone in their apartments, content with the "experience" of these hollow simulacra.
If you ever used VR before, you know you are wrong. Here is the dictionary of experience: "Experience can be defined as the accumulation of knowledge, skills, and understanding gained through direct involvement or exposure to events, situations, or activities. It is the result of an individual's interaction with their environment, including both external stimuli and internal perceptions." And here is what VR experience: "VR experience refers to the immersive and interactive encounters people have in a virtual reality (VR) environment. The experience is often enhanced by other sensory inputs, such as surround sound, which allow users to interact with and manipulate objects in the virtual environment."
So:
1. You are actually experiencing it.
2. You are not just watching but interacting with it.
3. Your perception of cold and powder blasting your face or the smell is perception based on your imagination, past experience and the visual presentation. You do actually feel all of these in your brain.
Which is why spatial environment is the future, which is why it is expensive, which is why no one can perfect it until the technology is ready (and there are a lot of high tech in it). Suddenly $3500 doesn't sound so expensive anymore right?
Like I said, sad. As a skier who actually skis the kind of "extreme" terrain you think you're going to "experience" with a headset on, VR is nothing - NOTHING - like the real thing.
An audiobook is a fancy book. A B&W movie is a fancy audiobook. A color movie is a fancy B&W movie. Having more accurate simulacra does not make me sad for humanity.
I would like the visual experience of flying with a wingsuit, even if it doesn't recreate all the sensations of doing the actual activity.
The whole thing of consuming so much digital content is getting repulsive. Asking us to watch some digital content all the time is just not a strategy by company like Apple who potrays themselves as caring for one well being. Don’t use (which is difficult) or use may be 1 hour max of digital device for entertainment. This is such a downhill for humankind. Just look around most of our young (and not so young) generation is buried in their devices. We are doomed.
It could be a whirlwind success and it’d still be considered a failure. Because of the filesystem, or the lack of expandable RAM or no external GPU’s or something
Annnnnnndddd.... still a NO from me.
When I want 3D, I turn the TV off and do something interesting instead.
I think I have watched about 8 hours of TV in the last 3 months.
When I want 3D, I turn the TV off and do something interesting instead.
I think I have watched about 8 hours of TV in the last 3 months.