Yeah but if you get lost in your thoughts there’s no way to just lose focus or focus on something way off in the distance (like a bird in a tree seen through a window). Everything is going to be roughly the same focal length all the time.
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.
Why is no one talking about risks for eye health?
- Thread starter johnsterdam
- Start date
-
- Tags
- vision pro
- Sort by reaction score
Oh, I can lose focus when people are standing right in front of me if they are boring... my mind realizes that what is in front of me is not important at all and my eyes glaze over and the eyes as a result relax into a glazed over look... if you are focusing on a bird in the tree - it is still focusing on something... though if I am lost in my thoughts - the bird ... it is not there because I lose focus on pretty much everything.
Not the same. Your eyes need to focus on the distance.
The concerns around AVP are very real and it’s true that the majority of people here are ignoring them. This device places screens across your entire field of vision. Screens emitting artificial light. Screens with refresh rates. Screens of unknown color fidelity. Screens displaying information that we know from demos is compressed and shows compression artifacts in some conditions.
So the notion that a couple of very high resolution screens millimeters from your eyes is the exact same thing as looking at the actual world with your eyes is just patently absurd. Your brain may be fooled into thinking that you’re seeing reality, but you’re not and the health (mental and physical) implications of that are, so far, completely unknown.
One of my concerns is that they're promoting this for office work, as an alternative to a multi-display setup. Even if you take regular breaks, as they recommend, I have a hard time imagining it's going to be healthy wearing this 8 hours/day.
Agree, and the issue is deeper than that. Apple is basically just shotgunning potential use cases. Is anyone going to want an employer to tell them “you’re going to work inside this headset from now on. IT is coming up to take your desktop tomorrow.” Is anyone going to want their spouse to put on this ugly, alienating almost-helmet to lurk creepily around their little kid’s birthday party taking 3D pictures and video?
Apple clearly has no idea. They’re just spitballing and hoping one of these ridiculous scenarios will stick.
If your company, sight unseen, is somehow planning on taking your workspace away to be replaced by this you have two options:
1. Leave that workplace
2. Return to reality, touch some grass, and not focus on a ludicrous hypothetical that an IT department is making procurement decisions to replace all hardware for a device they won’t even be able to touch for almost a year from now. That’s not how anything works.
1. Leave that workplace
2. Return to reality, touch some grass, and not focus on a ludicrous hypothetical that an IT department is making procurement decisions to replace all hardware for a device they won’t even be able to touch for almost a year from now. That’s not how anything works.
Ludicrous? Not even remotely. Once you introduce the idea of using these in a workplace you also get the idea of being COMPELLED to use it in a workplace.
You think there are any IT departments in the world, today, that are cooking up plans to force employees to strap new tech to their face…without anyone in that department even physically seeing one of these?
Yes, ludicrous to be thinking this is a hypothetical worth discussing today, June 20th 2023.
No, that isn’t my contention. You’ve altered the terms.
I don’t think you really want to work in this kind of system for 8 hours a day. Your rather hostile reaction to the very real possibility basically says it all. My point stands.
If your employer is in AR/VR then you are likely to use it.
But people who are unable to learn this new tech will lose their jobs.
Those who are able to learn it will be able to use it.
Not really, they were focused on demoing the units... but only with the Application software that is ready or near ready that is included with the OS... They left out a lot on the demos because it is an introductory session on what is built into the device, not on what 3rd parties will offer going forward. This will be in the hands of proven 3rd party developers that have good relations with Apple (if they are interested in the bleeding edge development) and before this actually starts being sold they will have another event (likely shared event) where they will show more of what is being done with it with a more complete Vision OS and 3rd parties that have something cool to show. This was not Apple telling you how to use them, this was all about the device/VisionOS and possibilities.
I would put money on - NO employer is going to make it mandatory... other than those that use it to show physical 3D CAD designs and demos. In fact NO employer other than those, are going to make this available without a budgetary fight. Then you will have to show cost vs additional revenue/additional profit and it paying for itself fully, with nearly 100% assurity, in the first 12 months. Even then it would likely still be a battle since it is a new technology currently not authorized or approved.
That way of thinking must have come up in the 70s, 80s & 90s with the PC.
But here we are today... a smartphone in every hand, a computer on every desk and in every home
That way of thinking... is business... we are in business to make money... Now there are HR related things to make it attractive to work here, especially if the market is competitive, like a pool table etc... but then if we are dictating this is part of the requirement.. then it is no longer a toy to attract talent... Even new companies, are in the business to make money - though that might just be enough to make it attractive as a takeover (and cashing out - still money profit motive) - then you would expect the company taking it over has an idea on how they will make money from it. And yes, it did come up in the 80s & 90s when our upgrades required a complete replacement of the PCs used from 286 to 386 and more memory... and the businesses (customers) would require lead time in advance so they had the budget to do that. Effectively, until the device has proven itself as financially rewarding - it is a toy... However, if you are a company developing software for it - you might have some leeway to do pilot projects to demonstrate and make available software for the device with the projects that one day it will be rewarding (more than investment) and you want to be the first on the top of the hill... because it is easier defending a hill than taking it. That, however would not make it a requirement since you still need the same base skills to develop for other Apple platforms and if you don't want to be on the bleeding edge (rare that a developer would not jump at it)... there is always room for the right candidates elsewhere (even if we have to fire a lower productivity 'resource').
The same motive should be in the mind of the employee... what value can I provide to make me more valuable and hence the company more willing to pay me more... then you have money to buy your own toys.
They failed to present a compelling use case. You can rationalize that all you like but it’s a fact.
Wow. That’s how far you’re willing to go? You’ve got people losing their jobs over AVP?
Again, this is just showing how absurdly willing some people are to buy into an obviously problematic platform because it has an Apple logo on it.
If the skill is missing then you retrain or get replaced. That has been the norm for centuries.
All the fear about A.I. taking over people's job? A.I. is a tool... those who refuse or are unwilling to learn will be replaced by those who can.
That’s part of the problem. In order for it to be a success people have to 1) develop for it 2) broadly adopt it 3) use it in a professional environment. Those are huge hurtles for it to leap when it faces intrinsic problems on so many levels.
Again illustrating my point. Are people going to be willing to work inside this thing for hours on end? That’s a pretty big ask.
No, a professional environment would be nice, but Macs for the most part were not successful because businesses wanted them (they often went cheaper)... it was because home users wanted them. Understand this is an interim step in the target Apple has in their development, they are looking for success in the Spacial Computing platform when/if the Glasses come to fruition. They never expected to sell it in huge volumes, and not to businesses for the most part other than a few niche areas. If this eventually sells anywhere close to the number of Macs they sell - they will be over the moon... and Macs still are not big in businesses (though some consulting services companies give you the option - and Macs are favoured by their employees)... but they are still good business even if small compared to the iPhone. They have been building up the foundation developmentally now for 5 years with the iPhone, now they will do that for 5 more years using the Vision Pro line, and when they are eventually able to come out with Apple Glasses... all the pieces are in place. This is a long play... Apple will likely only be able to make around 500,000 in year 1, they might only be able to make a million or so in year 2, but they will sell them ALL. This is currently a very difficult device to mass produce... but it will provide revenue, it will provide a platform for 3rd parties to make of it what they will... and it will offset some of the R&D going into the long play of Apple Glasses.
You better go back and read up on Apple history. Pay attention to their relationship to Adobe in particular.
One thing the Googles and Facebooks of the world learned is that employees are stupid when it comes to compensation. If you give them free lunch and laundry service they'll give up much more money in salaries that compound year to year.
A tax deductible $3500 headset paid over 3 years is nothing if you're fighting for a high value work force that over values working for a "cool" company.
Do not dismiss the convenience and luxury of a gourmet chef and someone who'll do housework for you while you do the work you actually want to do.