The new goggles have a feature that merges digital apps and one’s surroundings into one immersive space
Isn't this just AR? We've had that for years. Or is it somehow different from existing AR?
this post was submitted on 07 Feb 2024
340 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
68305 readers
4118 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
It's pretty good AR from what I hear but still AR.
pretty good VR*: all of the user's field of vision is digitally (re-)created.
If you load up an AR app on your phone, it will often overlap the augmentation over the camera image. So I think reprojecting the outside world using cameras and augmenting that in VR is also a form of AR. Maybe we need a new name for this specifically, though? I don't know. But maybe AVR or VAR?
We don't need another name because it's a very common - almost expected - feature in VR headsets. My headset has monochromatic cameras for passthrough, but it's still a VR headset.
Also, often the whole idea is that this passthrough layer can be toggled at anytime or even gradually mixed with the computer-generated reality, so creating another name will just increase confusion.
I'm not sure about your definition of AR, but if the camera is showing the real world plus digital content then it's augmented reality.
Here is some definition:
In virtual reality (VR), the users' perception of reality is completely based on virtual information. In augmented reality (AR) the user is provided with additional computer- generated information within the data collected from real life that enhances their perception of reality.
showing the real world plus digital content then it’s augmented reality
But it isn't. AR means direct optical contact with the real world augmented with a digital / computer-generated layer. What Apple's VR does is recreate the real pov digitally using cameras, so it's VR.
Apple's tech builds a digital world and adds a "reality" layer on top - meaning the user only sees displays. AR's like Google Glass do the opposite, adding a digital layer on top of the real thing.
I can assure you, there exists no such consensus on the definition of any of the terms.
The most universal you’ll get for AR is the combination of primarily real-world with some digital aspects.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality–virtuality_continuum
I’ve read extensively on the topic. Albeit a couple of years ago.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
AR just means augmented reality, it says nothing of how it should be implemented
I watched some reviews about it. Yes, it's basically like having an iPad screen taped to your eyes.
AR of that visual quality has required the user to be stationary and tied to a large computer.
And Jesus wept for there were no more worlds to conquer
Stop saying Jesus wept
Stop saying stop saying Jesus wept
I wonder if your downvoters know that this was a line from the episode
Probably not
load more comments
(1 replies)
World's within worlds!
load more comments
(1 replies)
So there was a guy in the "viral video" thread yesterday fighting tooth and nail for how harmful the video is even if it's staged, mainly on the premise thats bunch of people would copy and recreate it. They were getting downvoted to oblivion.
Here we are a day later.
First we had the Glassholes, now there's Prolapses.
I expect nothing less from Tesla drivers
Better yet, stop driving Tesla.
How can people be so stupid.. At least, a VR headset is easy spottable by police and those bastards can be removed from the streets.
Dante Lentini, 21, who posted a video of himself behind the wheel of a moving Tesla while wearing a Vision Pro headset, said in an interview, “It was all just for content.”
Well, maybe when they revoke their licence they can tell them "it was all just for other people's safety".
It's just ~~a prank~~ content bro!
it's basically just hololens right?
also visionos is not the first "spatial os", windows 10 was the first. (ever notice how stuff has circular glow effect around it? it's supposed to show up around the pointer while using the os in vr/ar)
Microsoft quickly abandoned the idea tho as well as basically the whole uwp platform (which was supposed to bring the same apps on pc, windows mobile, xbox and hololens)
Hololens is slightly more advanced. At least the last I saw it uses waveguides etc. to overlay the content over a transparent panel. Much like Google glasses, but way, way more advanced (and therefore justifiably expensive - last I saw, again, it was something like $15000). AVP is no different to a $300 Quest (plus internal cameras for iris and expression tracking and obnoxiously bad FOV) - it's 10x Apple tax.
Hololens is still alive and kicking btw, but it's exclusively enterprise.
load more comments
(1 replies)
It's camera pass-through, so while it is the same idea as hololens (overlaying windows on reality). The hololens would actually be a safer thing to wear while driving, given it fully transparent. There are not screens blocking your vision with camera feeds overlayed on top.
Very important distinction. When the apple vr battery dies, or the software fails, you're suddenly blind.
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Do you fucking job and then maybe I’ll stop wearing Vision Pro goggles while driving my Tesla.
view more: next ›