Oh it could be worse lol.
Did you know scat is also a fetish where people eat fecal matter?
From Wikipedia:Coprophilia (from Greek κόπρος, kópros 'excrement' and φιλία, philía 'liking, fondness'), also called scatophilia or scat (Greek: σκατά, skatá 'feces'),[1] is the paraphilia involving sexual arousal and pleasure from feces.[2][3
I didn't know I could buy a vision pro equivalent several years ago. Which headset would that be?
Apparently necessary reminder that having barely-functioning proof-of-concept "see we checked the box" technology scattered across five different headsets is not the same as a single, polished product that actually works well.
While we're on the "har har Apple has no engineers they just market things!" topic, point out to me all of those laptops over the last decade that had great screens, good speakers, and equivalent trackpads? There must be so many. Which non-Apple laptop has equivalent performance and power consumption to Apple silicon? Since Apple does nothing but copy tech, it must be all of them.
The point is that apple is using the term spatial computing instead of the already established VR/AR or mixed reality. That's the point of my comment. They do this all the time. You absolutely could have spatially computed years ago. I spatially compute weekly already. In fact, I did it yesterday.
Okay so if everything is "spatial computing" then how do I search for apps with the kind of spatial computing where I'm not still in my boring room looking at my own boring walls and furniture, aka VR but they can't say VR. Is it supposed to be "immersed spatial" or something now?
I didn't necessarily hate it. I... was okay with it. Then again im okay with chill games so walking around wasn't a big deal for me. The story was a big let down for me though, as a big mgs fan. It's no metal gear solid for sure. Was full of pretentious Kojima nonsense this time and not particularly deep either.
If you're talking about "strand" type silent coop games. Games like Journey were more memorable to me.
I am a developer. Not for Apple devices though. Apple is about to spend money pushing Spatial Computing as the next big thing. I see this as them just giving developers a heads-up. I'd call it whatever as long as they are paying for the marketing.
I do think everyone will end up calling it VR in the end though.
Calling it "spatial computing" in the hopes that everyone will forget that the VR industry has already existed for about 10 years now, is beyond asinine.
Hey, it worked for 'Smart Phone'. The years of PDAs with mobile network connections existing beforehand (with touchscreens, installable applications, and fantastical features like the ability to copy&paste at launch) were somehow not 'smart'.
Well, that was still a bit different.
Basically all the tech from PDAs got shoved into phones, so that's why it was phones that became smart.
With the apple vision pro there is literally nothing different compared to the current VR market.
>Basically all the tech from PDAs got shoved into phones, so that's why it was phones that became smart.
They were already 'phones that were smart'. They were handheld devices with large touchscreens that could make calls, send text messages, install applications, etc. They merely lacked a shiny fruit on the reverse. Even the old O2 XDA was a superset of the iPhone 2G's features, 5 years prior to launch.
Ah okay, i gotta admit i didn't know that PDAs also had phone functionalities.
But then again, i think Smartphone is still a fair distinctive term. Nowadays phones are huge, but especially back then the first iPhone was a lot closer to a normal phone than a normal PDA. And simply calling it a PDA would've been kinda weird.
Also, Smartphone is just a general term, which isn't really bad for anyone. Every manufacturer uses Smartphone. Where it becomes insufferable is when manufacturers go AGAINST it and try to claim their device is something different because it has a different name, such as apple is doing now (it's not a Smartphone, it's an iPhone, it's not VR it's spacial computing).
> but especially back then the first iPhone was a lot closer to a normal phone than a normal PDA
The first iPhone was *larger* than most equivalent network connected PDAs at the time.
> They were already 'phones that were smart'.
No, not really, I had a few of those Compaq, Dell etc, from PocketPC (about 2002) up to Windows Mobile.
Using them was always a struggle, from simplest things like manually having to switch networks, scrolling by tapping tiniest arrow down the scrollbar, to using halfbaked community made apps that were hobbyist at best, it was always some sort of a problem.
It was a gimmick and it was fun for what it was, but let's not try to pretend they were the actual first smartphones. UI was terribly bad, there were no multitouch gestures we now take for granted, oftentimes interface would crap itself or display at 10 fps (even with 624MHz blazingly fast cpu at the time) it was really bad in retrospect and okish at best back then.
Why do people bend over backwards trying to pretend Apple is shit and did nothing ever? Sure they do a lot of crap, anti consumer and all, but credit where credit is due. I don't recall any other smartphone working this fluently and having features that well rounded at the time, and certainly not before.
The difference is going to be doing iPhone stuff in a helmet, which is actually appealing to lots of folks. Do you know there’s not even a native image viewer on the quest?
*"The Rimac Nevera is just flashy marketing! It's LiTeRaLlY tHe SaMe as a Model T! That had a motor and four wheels and some wires too!"*
\^ The absolute state of the argument of anti-Apple segment of the VR community right now.
It was called spatial computing a long time ago - the issue is that spatial computing refers to just 1 application of the tech. VR isn’t spatial computing unless you’re doing computer stuff in it, and banning people from using these terms is silly.
Yes, especially since the term VR was coined well before Apple was founded and has been a common sci-fi trope before as well.
Trying this "rebranding" is straight up revisionist lol
Why does everything have to be interpreted in the most negative possible light? It's not a sinister scheme to try to make people "forget" that VR has existed. VR has had about 10 years to figure out how to appeal to the mainstream, and they've failed. Apple might succeed, and people are mad about that.
Just as likely they want to distance themselves from the community of people who look at new products (only if Apple made them) and go *"well um ackshually that's nothing new at all! Look, you can find barely-functional versions of most of those things in these six different headsets! What do you mean you can't wear six headsets at once?"*
Nobody bitched about the Quest release by saying "well the Nintendo Virtualboy thing also had you look through two lenses at a screen! This is absolutely nothing new they're just copying old designs!" Nobody complains when LG puts out a new display. "OMG they're not calling it a CRT! That was also a screen and it already existed!"
Everybody always compares Apples latest product to the IPhone. Sure the Iphone was a success. Doesn't mean they know what they are doing when it comes to VR/AR. For every success Apple has had, they've also had several failures. Some noteworthy examples of Apple Epic failures are the LISA and the Apple III.
The Apple Vision Pro just looks as if they are throwing random darts are a dartboard to see what sticks.
And iPod...and iPad...and the watch...and Airpods...and Macbooks...
It doesn't mean the VP will be an automatic success. It does mean, however, that they know a hell of a lot more than you do about designing and marketing and shipping consumer products.
The commentary people make is akin to someone who has never seen a real car going "All those engineers at BMW are STUPID! Why don't they just put a windmill on the roof to charge the battery?"
Everything is simple and obvious when you have no experience and have never even been near the actual industry you're critiquing. Being a consumer doesn't qualify.
I'm pretty sure that the average 10 year old, who owns a VR headset and plays Vr games knows infinitely more about VR than Apple at the moment. Perhaps even more than you. Apple is 10 years too late to the VR/AR party.
As far as working in Design, I've personally been working as a Software Engineer, then a project manger for a 25 person development team for the past 25 years.
No amount of hype, or Internet shills paid to post about the usefulness of Apple products is a substitute for good market research. LOL
Lol are you trolling? Those examples are over 20 years old.
You say the market has existed for 10 years now? What market? It isn’t even a blip on apples radar. Apples worst selling hardware category sells an order of magnitude more units than the “VR market” you point to.
Apple does not care about current VR users. It is such a small market it is worthless to them. They want to get people who would otherwise not use VR and it means differentiating the product. The current VR market might as well not exist.
The company that I work for creates cross-platform applications that exist both on the play store and app store. For something going to the play store, it's rather simple and streamlined for the most part, especially when setting up build pipelines on cloud resources.
Apple though is tricky and annoying, if you set up a build pipeline you're most likely going to need to get an apple computer of some kind, and set up your pipeline on it and deploy using xcode. You can't use cloud resources since they need hardware IDs and whatnot. There are fees for their developer program, and you need their devices to test on. And they take 30% of your apps revenue.
Tacking on annoying guidelines on top of it requiring developers to push their own marketing is just salt in the wound in my opinion.
Tl;Dr yeah most applications will either be labeled as ar/vr in the end
>You can't use cloud resources since they need hardware IDs and whatnot
Haven't cloud providers been putting Mac Minis in racks for a while now? Even AWS has M1 and M2 instances.
They do have those however if I remember correctly, they're limited on configurations compared to other ec2 instances, especially if it's being used as a build pipeline. You'd be better off buying the devices if you have them constantly on, or you can set up some lambda functions to potentially turn them on/off when needed. Which adds more weird overhead and a slightly more complex build pipeline, but does alleviate concerns about not having cloud resources for remote workers.
It always kind of surprises me that despite Apple's rather annoying restrictions there are literally thousands of crapware free-with-in-app-purchases apps in the Apple app store (in fairness most of those same apps are in the Play Store too). I guess it's still better to have a huge user-base of millions playing your game and conceding Apple their 30% extort.. I mean "cut of in-app purchases than to sell a just a handful of copies at full price on a much less successful platform. All about those margins I guess.
That is strange. For the past decade I mainly see Macbook pro and High End Android phones used by developers.
My reason For using an android is that it has always been super easy to set the thing to developer mode and load my own developed utility apps. I don't have to deal with becoming an official android developer or any of that BS Apple makes me do.
Same goes for most developers and sys admins I interact with. On a side note, I just LOVE my foldable. I rarely carry my kindle anymore. It also works great as a chart plotter when sailing.
Personally, I don't see it as unreasonable. Apple includes all the build tools and xcode as part of the hardware, just like the OS. Unlike Visual Studio, which if you're using for commercial purposes, you are supposed to be paying for at least the Professional license at 45/mo. A brand new mac mini will run about 500usd, so in the grand scheme, it's not the most expensive offering out there. 30% is the price of doing business through an app store. Last I checked Google charged the same amount. It's not like they aren't providing a service though. Saves you from having to get payment processing. All you need to do is upload your app. The fees are what? 99$ per year for the entire company, of which is used offset the testing process.
It's not just the price of the computer. You also need to pay for its licences and the hours solving issues caused by working on an additional machine.
These costs add up.
I can see that, I mostly wish that they weren't gatekept to the hardware mostly. Virtualization is important for a lot of companies, and increasingly so as time goes on. Templatizing pipelines and whatnot for other platforms is generally a lot more convenient and easy, and sometimes you'd have to hire specifically for ios deployments or train people up on their proprietary equipment, which ultimately costs a lot. There are virtual machines with macOS but because it requires hardware, you have to in some form have on-prem solutions for these things
>Apple is about to spend money pushing Spatial Computing as the next big thing.
I seem to recall another tech giant trying to strongarm a "next big thing" down our throats. Metaverse any day now, Zuck....
First creepy sad looking avatars that nobody wants to look at... Now creepy sad looking eyeball goggles that nobody wants to look at...
Yeah, i think Apple and marketing firms did a bunch of workshops and found as soon as AR or VR is included in the title or summary, people switch off. I think also that’s apple’s experience with apps that had tablet or ipad in the title when those first launched.
Resident Evil IV, 7, and village i think also demonstrate that adding VR each time is reductive and unnecessary as they all have been well received. Just say the title and let the associated package manger inform the user that this is a made-for-headset version.
Fallout 4 VR and Skyrim VR were ports and they didn’t work great, and i think there is that association of bad ports when you add the platform to the title. Like when gameboy advance had all those bad ports with Advance in the title.
Same with apps. Don’t say netflix VR or netflix AR. People are downloading the apps to their headset, the VR/AR is assumed.
(Much less true for PC apps that have a vr version and a flatscreen version)
No problem 😉 I am so excited about the future of AR and MR, yet confused about what Apple Vision Pro will bring to this space and their detachment from these terms that I thought video was fitting :)
VR Dev: On steam and meta headsets we've just launched our VR game, Shooty Bang VR for 19.99 And on an unrelated note, we've just released our first spacial computing app experience, Shooty Bang Spacial Experience, for 99.99/mo. Apple only. These products, while identical to each other in every way are as different as possible as required by these ridiculous guidelines.
I know this is a joke but that may be what happens honestly. Even the per month thing, people may opt for subscriptions for their apps versus a static one-time fee because one-time purchases will yield 30% of revenue sent to Apple versus Apple taking around 15% from subscription-based pricing models
This exact same phrase, verbatim, is said so many times in response to almost anything, I'm starting to wonder if you aren't all the unique special super-smart individuals you pretend to be in an attempt to feel superior to those \*snort\* \~1.5B people on earth that use Apple products.
Way to piss off developers even before they are building for your platform. Apple is setting this up to fail, and will most likely blame developers for it.
You will not like this comment but overall VR kinda did fail in a sense, VR hasn’t exactly taken off from when it was first released but yeah this isn’t going to change anything anyways it’s 3.5k dollars
Apple loves taking an existing product and pretending to have invented it, or at the very least created an entirely different category where none exists.
It's not a phone, it's an "I phone". It's not a personal computer, it's a "mac". Now they're doing the same in AR/VR space.
Luckily for them this imaginary exclusivity plays very well with their fanbase. There's a saying in my language: "As long there is sheep, there will always be wool".
Interesting. So no if a company does a cross platform app for Apple and quest, it will need to be referred to as spatial computing for both, otherwise they’d be marketing it as VR outside of the App Store
Normalize breaking every one of these rules.
VisionOS running in Apple's new headset is pretty sick! I hope they get some good VR games in their app store by the time it gets more adopted.
Apple can be annoying and I'm far from a fanboy but I think there is a method to their madness.
They understand how important branding is and seeming "cool". Friends literally bullied me into getting an iPhone because of the green bubbles.
Compare this to Android ecosystem for instance which is a hot mess and all over the place, but sure they are more permissive and anything goes
Apple requirements are far from the only thing you need to comply with. unless you're failing to comply and getting nailed for it, it's no different than having to comply with things like the GDPR. it's all compliance overhead you should be billing for either way, the client isn't asking the details on every regulatory and platform compliance issue you have to deal with, that's your job.. unless you tried to ignore the requirements and got caught. then yeah, that would not be a fun conversation to have.
You can't argue with the "Apple bad" crowd.
I'm also a dev and there is no such thing as "extra time" to satisfy well documented pre-requisites. It means you fucked up the initial scoping of the project and/or lack experience. Nothing to do with Apple.
Of course there is a method to their madness. They want people to stay in their walled garden and not use anything outside of it. Many people love that, and it's not inherently a bad thing if it works for you. The problem is that if you want to leave, or if parts of it don't want to work for you, it can start to cause more and more issues.
Personally, I have more of an issue with apple fanboys (like those who bullied you) than with Apple themselves. Apple provides good competition for other device manufacturers, and competition is good (it drives progress). But when people get defensive of their bad practices (like forcing the green/blue bubbles distinction, forcing all app purchases to go through the app store with their fees, actively preventing self-repair, etc), that is disappointing to me.
The Android ecosystem can be a mess at times, sure, but it has its benefits too - more open source security, more customization, better interfacing with other systems, etc.
I agree with all your points and what you described is a well documented principle for consumer products called the *network effec*t.
My point is that's Apple's *thing*. It's literally their whole business model and their playbook since inception so it's not really noteworthy or worth griping about.
Anything is worth griping about for most people xD.
My main concern is that this could cause a deeper divide between Apple and other systems. Personally I was hoping that this could be something that Apple could contribute to and work with other companies to grow the tech as a whole. Obviously this was idealistic of myself haha.
I think most game developers will stay outside of the apple ecosystem, especially if this specific bullet point means that devs won't be able to market a product as VR, which means they likely won't be able to release on Meta, Steam, or other platforms/systems (I don't see those platforms wanting to encourage the terminology of "spatial computing").
For example, Beat Saber - if they were to release on Vision Pro, wouldn't this mean that they would have to change all their usage of "VR" to "Spatial Computing" on their website/promotions?
Ah yeah that makes sense.
The way I'm reading this right now is they're steering clear of the gaming market.
Which is obviously an L, but it's consistent with all their other OSes. That's Apple for ya \*shrug\*.
Yeah my take is that they are avoiding the gaming market too, the main indicator of which is the lack of controllers.
We will have to see if their productivity/media elements are strong enough to carry the product line. I'm not too convinced as of yet.
Gaming is what has kept VR/AR alive this past decade. Nobody is using current headsets for productivity and social apps, with the exception of maybe VRChat on Steam. The METAVERSE is all but ignored by owners of the Oculus / Meta headsets. Apple doesn't have any killer apps upon release of a headset that would probably be excellent for gaming. It's a real head scratcher.
Yes, but to be fair, current headsets are kinda crap for productivity, and the rest of tech hasn't quite gotten to the point where you can link VR social aspects with non-VR tech. It looks like Apple is making some pretty good steps towards solutions for both of those. I don't think Vision Pro is the answer, but maybe in another generation or two they could be in a good spot.
You can't brand VR and AR. It's already been in existence since 2016, and even earlier if you count the virtual boy from the late 1980s - early 1990s. Consumers aren't going to suddenly forget about the VR experiences that already exist and suddenly say, "Wow Apple just invented this Spatial computing thing, that is totally not VR/AR that is exactly the same as this new invention". LOL
I think most people grossly underestimate how effective branding and marketing is. More often than not, it works at a level you're not even conscious of.
By your argument, shoes have been around for thousands of years so there's no way you could brand those right? Then why do people pay thousands of dollars for some basic branded sneakers with the Gucci, or LV logo on them?
Why does the Tylenol brand makes billions of dollars a year when you can buy identical generic Acetaminophen for much cheaper?
You can brand anything and it can absolutely be effective. Like it or not.
In this case, I doubt the effectiveness of marketing AR/VR under another name. Most people, who would want a headset, are pretty informed about what already is on the market, and are already used to calling it VR and AR.
Aside from that, the price. JFC, the price/ Commercial VR headsets like the VARJO, that are used by professionals for flight sim training and engineering, range in price from 1K - 4K already. You need a ton of PC horse power to run those. Since you can't hook the Apple vision pro to a PC, I guess it isn't targeted at real professionals either. Makes you wonder who this headset is actually for.
I hear you, but I have no doubt Apple fanboys will line up in droves to pay almost $4K for this headset.
Doesn't make sense to me either, but that's where we're at these days.
Someone makes a TikTok and they're fying off the shelves
Yeah, some people will buy it no matter what. They're the same type of people who would buy the cybertruck.
Pay attention to the second hand market about a month or two after release. There might be a flood of used Vision Pros being sold on Ebay, as people begin to have buyers remorse when they realize they can't do anything practical with the headset.
Many people here are saying “well I’ll never buy a Vision Pro but I’m happy Apple is about to take VR mainstream!”
Then they see some marketing bs and get all bent out of shape without realizing….this kind of marketing is *how* Apple is going to take VR mainstream.
10 years from now, I just hope that what I would call VR now - HMDs and games - is in a better place, with every company. I couldn’t care less about what names companies use for their apps.
Apple currently have no market share in the consumer XR industry. Devs can fight it now, but won't. Most will play along. It's also not that big of a deal.
Well releasing a consumer headset for $3,499.00 isn't exactly a good way to get market share. If this new headset was just supposed to be a DEV kit, they should have said so. Maybe the marketing staff are to blame. IDK
They're only able to make 60-80,000 headsets for launch, and every single one will be sold. Right now, it's not about mass adoption. It's a no-compromise endeavor, similar to an early expedition into uncharted territories. They're testing the waters, learning what's possible. This isn't the version to rival the Quests. It's the trailblazer, laying the foundation for what's to come.
> “By controlling the language, Big Brother controls the way that the people think. With a limited vocabulary, the people are limited in how much they can think, as well as, what they think about.”
>-George Orwell *1984*
I kind of agree with Apple on this one. VR has acquired a certain reputation. If you are approaching new customers with a product, it’s best that you avoid said reputation.
This is dumb, but I do kind of get this. VR/AR/MR/whateverR has been so slow to grow over the past decade and has been filled with so many false promises and missteps that a lot of the existing terms have been poisoned. Call it mixed reality, AR, virtual workspace, meta verse, or any other common term and people are going to have bad associations with subpar products that have come before. Low resolutions with screen door effect, sloppy pass through, blurry text that gives you headaches. This is being pushed as a productivity device aimed at businesses and creatives, the first mainstream consumer device to implement technologies like eye tracking and super high resolutions that can actually allow for monitor-like text rendering, and they probably don’t want it to be associated with mainstream consumer entertainment products that can’t handle that type of use case that most people are likely to have had experiences with in the past.
Assuming that it’s as revolutionary as the specs and some hands on first impressions seem to imply then it makes sense to try and push a new term that hasn’t already been spoiled even before the technology was ready for prime time. But realistically I can’t imagine anyone other than Apple will actually use that term, this will be just like when Microsoft did a huge marketing campaign with the NFL by giving all the coaches Surface tablets and the announcers kept referring to them as iPads. Apple can say “spatial computing” all they want but everyone else is just going to call it VR.
Everyone in this echo chamber has forgotten that most adults have a giant stigma against VR and it extends to any R like AR and XR. ie they won’t buy it unless it’s called something else. Why? Because everyone outside of this subreddit thinks VR is 10 year old Google cardboard garbage and they aren’t even willing to try modern VR.
If Apple’s “spatial computing” marketing campaign fails, I predict a 10 year XR winter in terms of sales and the speed of product evolution.
This is exactly my perception of why they're doing it. I know people who refuse to even try VR because of a "that's nerd shit"-tier of ass backwards bias against it, but it exists regardless of how stupid it is.
Why is everyone non stop bitching about this. Who fucking cares. It’s Apple, they do this shit with every product they have. They don’t call MacBooks laptops. They don’t called iPads tablets. They don’t call the iPhone a smart phone. They don’t call the Apple Watch a smart watch. They literally have done this with every single product line. Let it go people
My complaint is with how they treat developers, this is just the cherry on top with their latest upset. If you work in tech you'll learn this, people do not like developing for their devices. We are usually contractually obligated or have to because they have a bunch of people that like their hardware.
Also your response just highlights this: their annoying rules don't affect you so you don't care. Which is fine; you could've just kept scrolling though if it aggravates you that much.
That’s great and all but are you going to take any action against apple or are you all talk? Like, stop developing apps for their store? Because at the end of the day, it’s all about money which is why people will always develop for Apple. Doesn’t mean a whole lot if all you’re doing is complaining but you take no action.
Yes just drop my career right? Sometimes these contracts come in and we have to do it based off customers needs. And you don't understand how many resources you have to put forward when working with their products, it extends far beyond just the hardware.
And yeah I'm just complaining, however this sentiment has reached over 90k people so far so now 90k people know about how people that develop apps for the app store feel. It is a pushback, and there are a lot of valid criticisms here from others that have also worked with them. I'm not going to jeopardize my career by refusing to work with their projects, I'll simply voice my concerns. Everybody in my office hates working with it. We're not going to go knocking on the doors at our local Apple store demanding them change their guidelines.
How do people not understand what “Style guidelines” are?? It’s not something they are requiring people to use. Style guidelines have been out forever and the point of them are that if you want your app to fit in stylistically within the Apple ecosystem, follow these rules. They are not, and never have been, required and they are constantly ignored by apps. This whole “spacial computing” story is such a non-story pounced on by Apple haters who can’t come up with anything better to insult about the AVP besides, “it too expensive for me” and “it don’t play games”
This just screams "I haven't deployed an application to the app store". If you knew how annoying they are to develop for you'd understand. They'll push back on an application review for small things.
Why is this frustrating? I think it's good to have consistency in terms for the public, makes things clear and explicit. Also VR has a lot of negative connotations due to years of poisoning-the-well with crap like cardboard VR googles. Apple is trying to give a different experience here, I hope they are successful. It will force competitors to step up their products and consumers will benefit.
To me it's something small tacked onto bigger issues that exist with developing for Apple, alongside with the fact that this seems like an overreach. This extends to more than just the app store, this extends to how you market it on your own personal websites, and may have an affect on applications that are deemed cross-platform. As I said to another user:
The company that I work for creates cross-platform applications that exist both on the play store and app store. For something going to the play store, it's rather simple and streamlined for the most part, especially when setting up build pipelines on cloud resources.
Apple though is tricky and annoying, if you set up a build pipeline you're most likely going to need to get an apple computer of some kind, and set up your pipeline on it and deploy using xcode. You can't use cloud resources since they need hardware IDs and whatnot. There are fees for their developer program, and you need their devices to test on. And they take 30% of your apps revenue.
Tacking on annoying guidelines on top of it requiring developers to push their own marketing is just salt in the wound in my opinion.
> This extends to more than just the app store, this extends to how you market it on your own personal websites
I didn't know that and I agree this is overreach. I wonder how strict they are at enforcing this, and what the penalties are.
Yeah that's the part that I highlighted in the second image, the rules about how you reference your application falls underneath this section.
I assume it depends on the traction that your app gets, if it's a lot they may peer more into your own marketing outside the app store. If you make an application that's multi-platform (this SDK may not work too well with others so this may be difficult) and it's on multiple stores, they may strong arm you into using their terminology.
I find it more funny that they are going full grammar Nazi and tell you how to write aPp stORE.
And general not a headset... hopefully someone calls them diving goggles.
Is this real or a hoax?
I have no sympathy for devs on silly complaints about stuff like this. Apple has made a lot of developers A LOT of money by creating platforms they can create for.
Stop crying about the nomenclature that Apple requires you to use. You don’t have to love it but get over it and move on.
They would also be nothing without developers, and it would be nice to not have to put up with annoying rules that force people to push their own marketing in an inorganic manner. It's just the "because we can" kind of rules. This is far from the long list of complaints people have against Apple development.
That's what they're dipping their toes into though is the main thing, and trying to rebrand already-used concepts as something else. Which is definitely not uncommon for them these days.
Yes, but many of the features they are specifically promoting, are already possible with existing devices that use those specific terms. It just seems to me that they are specifically trying to create a strong divide between their system and others - which is gonna wreck havoc on developers. If Apple is going to enforce that line item, then Vision Pro may never be able to see any cross over apps from existing VR/MR space. Maybe they don't mind that. But it seems that a lot of apple fans are hoping for or expecting the Vision Pro to eventually get many existing VR games or apps, which is very unlikely with this requirement...would devs then have to update their descriptions on stores like Steam or the Meta Store? Would they have to replace any instance of "VR" on their websites with "Spatial Computing"? Wouldn't Steam/Meta have an issue with that?
Of course - there are several things that set the Vision Pro apart (other than the exorbitant price), and that's great! And the name "spatial computing" does make sense in the context of those features, for example the 3d image capture, or the ability to link to MacBooks and use a virtual screen, etc.
When I hear VR I think of Oculus/Facebook/Meta and Vive
When I hear AR I think assholes with google glass or the failed leap motion
When I hear XR I think of the Amazon app with cheap 3d overlays using my phone
When I hear MR I think of Microsoft's platform thats now dead aside from hololens
I can see why they are pushing spatial computing. When you google VR/AR/XR/MR the Vision Pro won't be the first thing that pops up. When you google Spatial Computing after it launches it'll be the first thing that pops up. Makes perfect sense from a business standpoint as to why they want to push the term. It has less stigma associated with it.
Copy/pasted something I wrote to someone else:
The company that I work for creates cross-platform applications that exist both on the play store and app store. For something going to the play store, it's rather simple and streamlined for the most part, especially when setting up build pipelines on cloud resources.
Apple though is tricky and annoying, if you set up a build pipeline you're most likely going to need to get an apple computer of some kind, and set up your pipeline on it and deploy using xcode. You can't use cloud resources since they need hardware IDs and whatnot. There are fees for their developer program, and you need their devices to test on. And they take 30% of your apps revenue.
Tacking on annoying guidelines on top of it requiring developers to push their own marketing is just salt in the wound in my opinion.
I really do wonder how successful this will be, $3500 is a lot of money and needing a mac with enough RAM is a lot of money too.
I bought a used hololens 1 for $300 on ebay and I just bought a magic leap 1 AR headset for $100 on ebay as a consumer toy. Augmented reality is amazing but $3500 is just...so much money.
bro who cares? Only wealthy studios with PR teams will be able to abide by these marketing rules anyways.
And honestly its on brand for apple to differentiate themself from other XR platforms, they don’t wanna be associated with lower quality companies
This isn’t frustrating. Style guideline are incredibly important and are the massive difference that makes IOS so seamless and enjoyable to use. Android is a mess where every developer does their own thing and the App Store is filled with trash. Every phone can have its own UI and idea of what to call things etc.
Apple at least keeps things very consistent in what to name things, how to talk about these things, and even how to depict UI element and navigation decisions etc.
If anything it’s Apple showing they love making developers lives easier because they don’t need to invent the wheel. Just do what Apple sets forth and that’s it, no extra thinking necessary. And now every single person in the entire world using an Apple device knows what you are talking about and how to interact with your app. Magic.
The frustrating part is this in addition to many other things, this is what I said to a few others:
The company that I work for creates cross-platform applications that exist both on the play store and app store. For something going to the play store, it's rather simple and streamlined for the most part, especially when setting up build pipelines on cloud resources.
Apple though is tricky and annoying, if you set up a build pipeline you're most likely going to need to get an apple computer of some kind, and set up your pipeline on it and deploy using xcode. You can't use cloud resources since they need hardware IDs and whatnot. There are fees for their developer program, and you need their devices to test on. And they take 30% of your apps revenue.
Tacking on annoying guidelines on top of it requiring developers to push their own marketing is just salt in the wound in my opinion.
This is nothing new and not Apple specific. Anyone who has developed an app to run on an Apple device or an Android device know that Apple and Google are very particular in how your phrase things. At least in this case, Apple is being transparent. Many times, particularly with Google, they reject your app but won't tell you why. Then it's trial and error until you can get it accepted. I appreciate Apple being specific.
VRChat in shambles
Spatial Computing iChat Pro
iCommunication\*, or better yet - Social iCircles.
Apple: "write that down,WRITE THAT DOWN"
I'm half expecting a cease-and-desist in my Reddit inbox any minute now.
Copyright on speed-dial
Abbriv to iCum.
SCChat Person 1: "I love SCChat" Person 2: "Ski-bi dibby dib yo da dub dub Yo da dub dub" Person 1: "No, I said SCChat not Scat.... nevermind"
> SCChat I assume that's pronounced "shat."
Just scchat myself
Oh it could be worse lol. Did you know scat is also a fetish where people eat fecal matter? From Wikipedia:Coprophilia (from Greek κόπρος, kópros 'excrement' and φιλία, philía 'liking, fondness'), also called scatophilia or scat (Greek: σκατά, skatá 'feces'),[1] is the paraphilia involving sexual arousal and pleasure from feces.[2][3
get special characters for only $200
[удалено]
apple doing what they always do. Using new flashy words for tech that has already existed for years for marketing purposes.
I didn't know I could buy a vision pro equivalent several years ago. Which headset would that be? Apparently necessary reminder that having barely-functioning proof-of-concept "see we checked the box" technology scattered across five different headsets is not the same as a single, polished product that actually works well. While we're on the "har har Apple has no engineers they just market things!" topic, point out to me all of those laptops over the last decade that had great screens, good speakers, and equivalent trackpads? There must be so many. Which non-Apple laptop has equivalent performance and power consumption to Apple silicon? Since Apple does nothing but copy tech, it must be all of them.
The point is that apple is using the term spatial computing instead of the already established VR/AR or mixed reality. That's the point of my comment. They do this all the time. You absolutely could have spatially computed years ago. I spatially compute weekly already. In fact, I did it yesterday.
Okay so if everything is "spatial computing" then how do I search for apps with the kind of spatial computing where I'm not still in my boring room looking at my own boring walls and furniture, aka VR but they can't say VR. Is it supposed to be "immersed spatial" or something now?
Fully immersive is their term. FI games.
They will definitely have tags to seperate them, I don’t think that’s any cause for concern
Lol. Is Apple *still* trying to distance themselves from video games?
I think they’re trying to distance themselves from the common notion that VR causes motion sickness.
You mean, spatial sickness.
I mean, spatial computing disorientation
That’s why they are genius cuz this is a real issue people hear VR and say “no”
✨Spatial Computing✨ Kind of reminds me when Kojima decided to name Death Stranding's genre a revolutionary "Strand-type" game.
Still the best and most successful Strand-type game to date!
Such a great game tho. Although I can definitely see why some people might hate it.
I didn't necessarily hate it. I... was okay with it. Then again im okay with chill games so walking around wasn't a big deal for me. The story was a big let down for me though, as a big mgs fan. It's no metal gear solid for sure. Was full of pretentious Kojima nonsense this time and not particularly deep either. If you're talking about "strand" type silent coop games. Games like Journey were more memorable to me.
And it turned out to be Spintires: Hoofing It Edition
I'm still convinced Kojima experienced playing MudRunner while on acid, and then deciding he wanted to make that, but on foot.
GrassWalker - Season 1: Tumble & Roll
I am a developer. Not for Apple devices though. Apple is about to spend money pushing Spatial Computing as the next big thing. I see this as them just giving developers a heads-up. I'd call it whatever as long as they are paying for the marketing. I do think everyone will end up calling it VR in the end though.
Calling it "spatial computing" in the hopes that everyone will forget that the VR industry has already existed for about 10 years now, is beyond asinine.
Hey, it worked for 'Smart Phone'. The years of PDAs with mobile network connections existing beforehand (with touchscreens, installable applications, and fantastical features like the ability to copy&paste at launch) were somehow not 'smart'.
Well, that was still a bit different. Basically all the tech from PDAs got shoved into phones, so that's why it was phones that became smart. With the apple vision pro there is literally nothing different compared to the current VR market.
>Basically all the tech from PDAs got shoved into phones, so that's why it was phones that became smart. They were already 'phones that were smart'. They were handheld devices with large touchscreens that could make calls, send text messages, install applications, etc. They merely lacked a shiny fruit on the reverse. Even the old O2 XDA was a superset of the iPhone 2G's features, 5 years prior to launch.
Ah okay, i gotta admit i didn't know that PDAs also had phone functionalities. But then again, i think Smartphone is still a fair distinctive term. Nowadays phones are huge, but especially back then the first iPhone was a lot closer to a normal phone than a normal PDA. And simply calling it a PDA would've been kinda weird. Also, Smartphone is just a general term, which isn't really bad for anyone. Every manufacturer uses Smartphone. Where it becomes insufferable is when manufacturers go AGAINST it and try to claim their device is something different because it has a different name, such as apple is doing now (it's not a Smartphone, it's an iPhone, it's not VR it's spacial computing).
> but especially back then the first iPhone was a lot closer to a normal phone than a normal PDA The first iPhone was *larger* than most equivalent network connected PDAs at the time.
> They were already 'phones that were smart'. No, not really, I had a few of those Compaq, Dell etc, from PocketPC (about 2002) up to Windows Mobile. Using them was always a struggle, from simplest things like manually having to switch networks, scrolling by tapping tiniest arrow down the scrollbar, to using halfbaked community made apps that were hobbyist at best, it was always some sort of a problem. It was a gimmick and it was fun for what it was, but let's not try to pretend they were the actual first smartphones. UI was terribly bad, there were no multitouch gestures we now take for granted, oftentimes interface would crap itself or display at 10 fps (even with 624MHz blazingly fast cpu at the time) it was really bad in retrospect and okish at best back then. Why do people bend over backwards trying to pretend Apple is shit and did nothing ever? Sure they do a lot of crap, anti consumer and all, but credit where credit is due. I don't recall any other smartphone working this fluently and having features that well rounded at the time, and certainly not before.
The difference is going to be doing iPhone stuff in a helmet, which is actually appealing to lots of folks. Do you know there’s not even a native image viewer on the quest?
*"The Rimac Nevera is just flashy marketing! It's LiTeRaLlY tHe SaMe as a Model T! That had a motor and four wheels and some wires too!"* \^ The absolute state of the argument of anti-Apple segment of the VR community right now.
Way beyond 10 years
Lol yeah I went to a VR arcade in 1993...
It was called spatial computing a long time ago - the issue is that spatial computing refers to just 1 application of the tech. VR isn’t spatial computing unless you’re doing computer stuff in it, and banning people from using these terms is silly.
Yes, especially since the term VR was coined well before Apple was founded and has been a common sci-fi trope before as well. Trying this "rebranding" is straight up revisionist lol
I no longer “play pinball in VR.” I now “simulate physics based amusement devices on my spatial computing apparatus.” Gets women in the mood.
The point isn’t to win cred with VR enthusiasts it’s to avoid association with cardboard porn viewers people associate with VR.
Hey cardboard porn was a game changer when it came out! :D
😂
Why does everything have to be interpreted in the most negative possible light? It's not a sinister scheme to try to make people "forget" that VR has existed. VR has had about 10 years to figure out how to appeal to the mainstream, and they've failed. Apple might succeed, and people are mad about that. Just as likely they want to distance themselves from the community of people who look at new products (only if Apple made them) and go *"well um ackshually that's nothing new at all! Look, you can find barely-functional versions of most of those things in these six different headsets! What do you mean you can't wear six headsets at once?"* Nobody bitched about the Quest release by saying "well the Nintendo Virtualboy thing also had you look through two lenses at a screen! This is absolutely nothing new they're just copying old designs!" Nobody complains when LG puts out a new display. "OMG they're not calling it a CRT! That was also a screen and it already existed!"
Obviously that is the whole reason. They don’t want to be associated with the vr of the prior decades.
The only way to not be associated with prior decades VR is to not make a VR/AR device. Renaming your product's use case, isn't the way.
They did pretty well with iphone, and they are the best consumer marketers ever…. but yeah I’m sure you are thinking of something they overlooked
Everybody always compares Apples latest product to the IPhone. Sure the Iphone was a success. Doesn't mean they know what they are doing when it comes to VR/AR. For every success Apple has had, they've also had several failures. Some noteworthy examples of Apple Epic failures are the LISA and the Apple III. The Apple Vision Pro just looks as if they are throwing random darts are a dartboard to see what sticks.
And iPod...and iPad...and the watch...and Airpods...and Macbooks... It doesn't mean the VP will be an automatic success. It does mean, however, that they know a hell of a lot more than you do about designing and marketing and shipping consumer products. The commentary people make is akin to someone who has never seen a real car going "All those engineers at BMW are STUPID! Why don't they just put a windmill on the roof to charge the battery?" Everything is simple and obvious when you have no experience and have never even been near the actual industry you're critiquing. Being a consumer doesn't qualify.
I'm pretty sure that the average 10 year old, who owns a VR headset and plays Vr games knows infinitely more about VR than Apple at the moment. Perhaps even more than you. Apple is 10 years too late to the VR/AR party. As far as working in Design, I've personally been working as a Software Engineer, then a project manger for a 25 person development team for the past 25 years. No amount of hype, or Internet shills paid to post about the usefulness of Apple products is a substitute for good market research. LOL
Lol are you trolling? Those examples are over 20 years old. You say the market has existed for 10 years now? What market? It isn’t even a blip on apples radar. Apples worst selling hardware category sells an order of magnitude more units than the “VR market” you point to. Apple does not care about current VR users. It is such a small market it is worthless to them. They want to get people who would otherwise not use VR and it means differentiating the product. The current VR market might as well not exist.
The company that I work for creates cross-platform applications that exist both on the play store and app store. For something going to the play store, it's rather simple and streamlined for the most part, especially when setting up build pipelines on cloud resources. Apple though is tricky and annoying, if you set up a build pipeline you're most likely going to need to get an apple computer of some kind, and set up your pipeline on it and deploy using xcode. You can't use cloud resources since they need hardware IDs and whatnot. There are fees for their developer program, and you need their devices to test on. And they take 30% of your apps revenue. Tacking on annoying guidelines on top of it requiring developers to push their own marketing is just salt in the wound in my opinion. Tl;Dr yeah most applications will either be labeled as ar/vr in the end
>You can't use cloud resources since they need hardware IDs and whatnot Haven't cloud providers been putting Mac Minis in racks for a while now? Even AWS has M1 and M2 instances.
They do have those however if I remember correctly, they're limited on configurations compared to other ec2 instances, especially if it's being used as a build pipeline. You'd be better off buying the devices if you have them constantly on, or you can set up some lambda functions to potentially turn them on/off when needed. Which adds more weird overhead and a slightly more complex build pipeline, but does alleviate concerns about not having cloud resources for remote workers.
wtf this feels so backwards I never understood why they do this and not just release build tools for every os
if the release build tools for every os they would sell less macs
It always kind of surprises me that despite Apple's rather annoying restrictions there are literally thousands of crapware free-with-in-app-purchases apps in the Apple app store (in fairness most of those same apps are in the Play Store too). I guess it's still better to have a huge user-base of millions playing your game and conceding Apple their 30% extort.. I mean "cut of in-app purchases than to sell a just a handful of copies at full price on a much less successful platform. All about those margins I guess.
It's the reason your technical people carry androids and everyone else has iphones.
I’m an android developer and my daily driver is an iPhone lol most of us don’t care that much
I have honestly observed the opposite of this.
Most technical people I've met just don't care.
Every developer I know has either always used an iphone or begrudgingly switched to one
That is strange. For the past decade I mainly see Macbook pro and High End Android phones used by developers. My reason For using an android is that it has always been super easy to set the thing to developer mode and load my own developed utility apps. I don't have to deal with becoming an official android developer or any of that BS Apple makes me do. Same goes for most developers and sys admins I interact with. On a side note, I just LOVE my foldable. I rarely carry my kindle anymore. It also works great as a chart plotter when sailing.
Personally, I don't see it as unreasonable. Apple includes all the build tools and xcode as part of the hardware, just like the OS. Unlike Visual Studio, which if you're using for commercial purposes, you are supposed to be paying for at least the Professional license at 45/mo. A brand new mac mini will run about 500usd, so in the grand scheme, it's not the most expensive offering out there. 30% is the price of doing business through an app store. Last I checked Google charged the same amount. It's not like they aren't providing a service though. Saves you from having to get payment processing. All you need to do is upload your app. The fees are what? 99$ per year for the entire company, of which is used offset the testing process.
It's not just the price of the computer. You also need to pay for its licences and the hours solving issues caused by working on an additional machine. These costs add up.
What other licenses?
https://youtube.com/shorts/qRQX9fgrI4s?si=sQUayCcWj2dX9s4w This shorts sums it up
I can see that, I mostly wish that they weren't gatekept to the hardware mostly. Virtualization is important for a lot of companies, and increasingly so as time goes on. Templatizing pipelines and whatnot for other platforms is generally a lot more convenient and easy, and sometimes you'd have to hire specifically for ios deployments or train people up on their proprietary equipment, which ultimately costs a lot. There are virtual machines with macOS but because it requires hardware, you have to in some form have on-prem solutions for these things
It's complete BS and par for the course for apple. It's 100% marketing and dumb AF.
>Apple is about to spend money pushing Spatial Computing as the next big thing. I seem to recall another tech giant trying to strongarm a "next big thing" down our throats. Metaverse any day now, Zuck.... First creepy sad looking avatars that nobody wants to look at... Now creepy sad looking eyeball goggles that nobody wants to look at...
Why vr? VR is its own thing and AR seems to be this.
Yeah, i think Apple and marketing firms did a bunch of workshops and found as soon as AR or VR is included in the title or summary, people switch off. I think also that’s apple’s experience with apps that had tablet or ipad in the title when those first launched. Resident Evil IV, 7, and village i think also demonstrate that adding VR each time is reductive and unnecessary as they all have been well received. Just say the title and let the associated package manger inform the user that this is a made-for-headset version. Fallout 4 VR and Skyrim VR were ports and they didn’t work great, and i think there is that association of bad ports when you add the platform to the title. Like when gameboy advance had all those bad ports with Advance in the title. Same with apps. Don’t say netflix VR or netflix AR. People are downloading the apps to their headset, the VR/AR is assumed. (Much less true for PC apps that have a vr version and a flatscreen version)
Well I don't know why the downvoters are shitting on you, I think this is a decent analysis as to why Apple would do things this way.
remember what defines Retina Display? yeah me neither, I totally agree with you
This whole spectacle reminds me of [https://youtu.be/qvCGqhShNnk?feature=shared](https://youtu.be/qvCGqhShNnk?feature=shared)
I have no idea how this Onion video eluded me this whole time, thanks for that 🙌
No problem 😉 I am so excited about the future of AR and MR, yet confused about what Apple Vision Pro will bring to this space and their detachment from these terms that I thought video was fitting :)
Haha, yeah I remember that.
Spacial computing sounds stupid af tho 💀
I will just call it a VR headset and not buy it anyway.
VR Dev: On steam and meta headsets we've just launched our VR game, Shooty Bang VR for 19.99 And on an unrelated note, we've just released our first spacial computing app experience, Shooty Bang Spacial Experience, for 99.99/mo. Apple only. These products, while identical to each other in every way are as different as possible as required by these ridiculous guidelines.
I know this is a joke but that may be what happens honestly. Even the per month thing, people may opt for subscriptions for their apps versus a static one-time fee because one-time purchases will yield 30% of revenue sent to Apple versus Apple taking around 15% from subscription-based pricing models
VisionOS >Apple fucking dies
[reminds me of this](https://youtu.be/AzODx3WLarQ?si=KUchvejblKmYEZJX)
Such a pathetic way to try and be “first”. This is peak Apple marketing
And Apple fanboys will eat it up
This exact same phrase, verbatim, is said so many times in response to almost anything, I'm starting to wonder if you aren't all the unique special super-smart individuals you pretend to be in an attempt to feel superior to those \*snort\* \~1.5B people on earth that use Apple products.
The stereotype exists for a reason. Don't like it, look to the assholes that make it reality, not to those that point it out.
They also want a name they can copyright.
Unfortunately they didn't invent the term and don't own it. It dates back to the 80's. So they can get bent if they try to trademark it.
Oh they will try
Way to piss off developers even before they are building for your platform. Apple is setting this up to fail, and will most likely blame developers for it.
There are a lot of bigger issues that have pre-existed this, but this definitely just rubs salt in the wounds
For us this was the deathblow to even consider developing for the damn thing. The more we looked into it the more we saw the writing on the wall.
You will not like this comment but overall VR kinda did fail in a sense, VR hasn’t exactly taken off from when it was first released but yeah this isn’t going to change anything anyways it’s 3.5k dollars
Apple loves taking an existing product and pretending to have invented it, or at the very least created an entirely different category where none exists. It's not a phone, it's an "I phone". It's not a personal computer, it's a "mac". Now they're doing the same in AR/VR space. Luckily for them this imaginary exclusivity plays very well with their fanbase. There's a saying in my language: "As long there is sheep, there will always be wool".
This is EXACTLY the reason they're doing this...
We can call BoatyMCGlassFace Visor Unit whatever we want
Interesting. So no if a company does a cross platform app for Apple and quest, it will need to be referred to as spatial computing for both, otherwise they’d be marketing it as VR outside of the App Store
This behaviour is just to remind third party developers that they actually work for Apple.
A thought crime, I see 👁️
Can‘t wait what the French will make of this. Informatique spatiale?
I'm not masturbating, it's genitalStimulation. Get it right!
Normalize breaking every one of these rules. VisionOS running in Apple's new headset is pretty sick! I hope they get some good VR games in their app store by the time it gets more adopted.
Apple can be annoying and I'm far from a fanboy but I think there is a method to their madness. They understand how important branding is and seeming "cool". Friends literally bullied me into getting an iPhone because of the green bubbles. Compare this to Android ecosystem for instance which is a hot mess and all over the place, but sure they are more permissive and anything goes
That's great for Apple but you can't expect the people who get asked to do their marketing for them to be happy about it. PS: get better friends.
>PS: get better friends. It was a girl I was into at the time who was teasing me about it. It's not that serious but please go on
Devs dont care lol. This is just enthusiasts doing the usual "apple bad" circlejerk.
apple bad
Yes we do since we're the one billing our clients for the extra time caused by [Apple requirement]. That's not a fun conversation to have.
Apple requirements are far from the only thing you need to comply with. unless you're failing to comply and getting nailed for it, it's no different than having to comply with things like the GDPR. it's all compliance overhead you should be billing for either way, the client isn't asking the details on every regulatory and platform compliance issue you have to deal with, that's your job.. unless you tried to ignore the requirements and got caught. then yeah, that would not be a fun conversation to have.
You can't argue with the "Apple bad" crowd. I'm also a dev and there is no such thing as "extra time" to satisfy well documented pre-requisites. It means you fucked up the initial scoping of the project and/or lack experience. Nothing to do with Apple.
Of course there is a method to their madness. They want people to stay in their walled garden and not use anything outside of it. Many people love that, and it's not inherently a bad thing if it works for you. The problem is that if you want to leave, or if parts of it don't want to work for you, it can start to cause more and more issues. Personally, I have more of an issue with apple fanboys (like those who bullied you) than with Apple themselves. Apple provides good competition for other device manufacturers, and competition is good (it drives progress). But when people get defensive of their bad practices (like forcing the green/blue bubbles distinction, forcing all app purchases to go through the app store with their fees, actively preventing self-repair, etc), that is disappointing to me. The Android ecosystem can be a mess at times, sure, but it has its benefits too - more open source security, more customization, better interfacing with other systems, etc.
I agree with all your points and what you described is a well documented principle for consumer products called the *network effec*t. My point is that's Apple's *thing*. It's literally their whole business model and their playbook since inception so it's not really noteworthy or worth griping about.
Anything is worth griping about for most people xD. My main concern is that this could cause a deeper divide between Apple and other systems. Personally I was hoping that this could be something that Apple could contribute to and work with other companies to grow the tech as a whole. Obviously this was idealistic of myself haha. I think most game developers will stay outside of the apple ecosystem, especially if this specific bullet point means that devs won't be able to market a product as VR, which means they likely won't be able to release on Meta, Steam, or other platforms/systems (I don't see those platforms wanting to encourage the terminology of "spatial computing"). For example, Beat Saber - if they were to release on Vision Pro, wouldn't this mean that they would have to change all their usage of "VR" to "Spatial Computing" on their website/promotions?
Ah yeah that makes sense. The way I'm reading this right now is they're steering clear of the gaming market. Which is obviously an L, but it's consistent with all their other OSes. That's Apple for ya \*shrug\*.
Yeah my take is that they are avoiding the gaming market too, the main indicator of which is the lack of controllers. We will have to see if their productivity/media elements are strong enough to carry the product line. I'm not too convinced as of yet.
Gaming is what has kept VR/AR alive this past decade. Nobody is using current headsets for productivity and social apps, with the exception of maybe VRChat on Steam. The METAVERSE is all but ignored by owners of the Oculus / Meta headsets. Apple doesn't have any killer apps upon release of a headset that would probably be excellent for gaming. It's a real head scratcher.
Yes, but to be fair, current headsets are kinda crap for productivity, and the rest of tech hasn't quite gotten to the point where you can link VR social aspects with non-VR tech. It looks like Apple is making some pretty good steps towards solutions for both of those. I don't think Vision Pro is the answer, but maybe in another generation or two they could be in a good spot.
You have been sucked into their marketing already. The android ecosystem is not a hot mess. There's options. It's nice.
I used Android for almost ten years. I don't really have a strong preference. They both have their pros and cons. Whatever gets the job done.
I just don't agree (at all) with your assessment of android being a hot mess.
i love the mess
You can't brand VR and AR. It's already been in existence since 2016, and even earlier if you count the virtual boy from the late 1980s - early 1990s. Consumers aren't going to suddenly forget about the VR experiences that already exist and suddenly say, "Wow Apple just invented this Spatial computing thing, that is totally not VR/AR that is exactly the same as this new invention". LOL
I think most people grossly underestimate how effective branding and marketing is. More often than not, it works at a level you're not even conscious of. By your argument, shoes have been around for thousands of years so there's no way you could brand those right? Then why do people pay thousands of dollars for some basic branded sneakers with the Gucci, or LV logo on them? Why does the Tylenol brand makes billions of dollars a year when you can buy identical generic Acetaminophen for much cheaper? You can brand anything and it can absolutely be effective. Like it or not.
In this case, I doubt the effectiveness of marketing AR/VR under another name. Most people, who would want a headset, are pretty informed about what already is on the market, and are already used to calling it VR and AR. Aside from that, the price. JFC, the price/ Commercial VR headsets like the VARJO, that are used by professionals for flight sim training and engineering, range in price from 1K - 4K already. You need a ton of PC horse power to run those. Since you can't hook the Apple vision pro to a PC, I guess it isn't targeted at real professionals either. Makes you wonder who this headset is actually for.
I hear you, but I have no doubt Apple fanboys will line up in droves to pay almost $4K for this headset. Doesn't make sense to me either, but that's where we're at these days. Someone makes a TikTok and they're fying off the shelves
Yeah, some people will buy it no matter what. They're the same type of people who would buy the cybertruck. Pay attention to the second hand market about a month or two after release. There might be a flood of used Vision Pros being sold on Ebay, as people begin to have buyers remorse when they realize they can't do anything practical with the headset.
I cannot really think about a term less cool than "spatial computing" thou.
Many people here are saying “well I’ll never buy a Vision Pro but I’m happy Apple is about to take VR mainstream!” Then they see some marketing bs and get all bent out of shape without realizing….this kind of marketing is *how* Apple is going to take VR mainstream. 10 years from now, I just hope that what I would call VR now - HMDs and games - is in a better place, with every company. I couldn’t care less about what names companies use for their apps.
Because they can, and people will get in line for it. FOMO etc.
Apple currently have no market share in the consumer XR industry. Devs can fight it now, but won't. Most will play along. It's also not that big of a deal.
It's that arrogance of apple that is annoying.
Well releasing a consumer headset for $3,499.00 isn't exactly a good way to get market share. If this new headset was just supposed to be a DEV kit, they should have said so. Maybe the marketing staff are to blame. IDK
They're only able to make 60-80,000 headsets for launch, and every single one will be sold. Right now, it's not about mass adoption. It's a no-compromise endeavor, similar to an early expedition into uncharted territories. They're testing the waters, learning what's possible. This isn't the version to rival the Quests. It's the trailblazer, laying the foundation for what's to come.
Visionos Can’t be capitalized at the start of a sentence they’re pissing off every English major too.
This is almost as annoying as the guidelines about the iPhone - you can’t use “the” before it. Like, WHAT
Apple's pronouns are *empty character* /*empty character*.
They may want to update the keyboard then because my iPhone automatically correct it to uppercase at the beginning of a sentence... 🙄
The hoops that Apple already had were enough for us to decide we're just not going to target Apple devices. They are just reaffirming that decision.
> “By controlling the language, Big Brother controls the way that the people think. With a limited vocabulary, the people are limited in how much they can think, as well as, what they think about.” >-George Orwell *1984*
I kind of agree with Apple on this one. VR has acquired a certain reputation. If you are approaching new customers with a product, it’s best that you avoid said reputation.
Oh phew. I thought we’d seen the last of these posts. So happy people are still posting about this same topic over and over.
Cool
Apple sucks
Upvotes to the left
People will Apple Stan for their Apple Pro Stand
I WILL SACRIFICE MY LIFE FOR [APPLESTAN](https://youtu.be/0wuwcuIGLrU?t=53)
Agreed, I'm biased and don't like apple
somebody wants to be different
Huh?
This is dumb, but I do kind of get this. VR/AR/MR/whateverR has been so slow to grow over the past decade and has been filled with so many false promises and missteps that a lot of the existing terms have been poisoned. Call it mixed reality, AR, virtual workspace, meta verse, or any other common term and people are going to have bad associations with subpar products that have come before. Low resolutions with screen door effect, sloppy pass through, blurry text that gives you headaches. This is being pushed as a productivity device aimed at businesses and creatives, the first mainstream consumer device to implement technologies like eye tracking and super high resolutions that can actually allow for monitor-like text rendering, and they probably don’t want it to be associated with mainstream consumer entertainment products that can’t handle that type of use case that most people are likely to have had experiences with in the past. Assuming that it’s as revolutionary as the specs and some hands on first impressions seem to imply then it makes sense to try and push a new term that hasn’t already been spoiled even before the technology was ready for prime time. But realistically I can’t imagine anyone other than Apple will actually use that term, this will be just like when Microsoft did a huge marketing campaign with the NFL by giving all the coaches Surface tablets and the announcers kept referring to them as iPads. Apple can say “spatial computing” all they want but everyone else is just going to call it VR.
Apple is Insufferable. Always capitalise Insufferable when referring to Apple.
iNsufferable as they would call it
Really, these guys are super jerks, no matter how you look at it.
Everyone in this echo chamber has forgotten that most adults have a giant stigma against VR and it extends to any R like AR and XR. ie they won’t buy it unless it’s called something else. Why? Because everyone outside of this subreddit thinks VR is 10 year old Google cardboard garbage and they aren’t even willing to try modern VR. If Apple’s “spatial computing” marketing campaign fails, I predict a 10 year XR winter in terms of sales and the speed of product evolution.
I never knew there was a stigma against VR. I've seen it mentioned alot in this post though.
This is exactly my perception of why they're doing it. I know people who refuse to even try VR because of a "that's nerd shit"-tier of ass backwards bias against it, but it exists regardless of how stupid it is.
[удалено]
Why is everyone non stop bitching about this. Who fucking cares. It’s Apple, they do this shit with every product they have. They don’t call MacBooks laptops. They don’t called iPads tablets. They don’t call the iPhone a smart phone. They don’t call the Apple Watch a smart watch. They literally have done this with every single product line. Let it go people
My complaint is with how they treat developers, this is just the cherry on top with their latest upset. If you work in tech you'll learn this, people do not like developing for their devices. We are usually contractually obligated or have to because they have a bunch of people that like their hardware. Also your response just highlights this: their annoying rules don't affect you so you don't care. Which is fine; you could've just kept scrolling though if it aggravates you that much.
That’s great and all but are you going to take any action against apple or are you all talk? Like, stop developing apps for their store? Because at the end of the day, it’s all about money which is why people will always develop for Apple. Doesn’t mean a whole lot if all you’re doing is complaining but you take no action.
Yes just drop my career right? Sometimes these contracts come in and we have to do it based off customers needs. And you don't understand how many resources you have to put forward when working with their products, it extends far beyond just the hardware. And yeah I'm just complaining, however this sentiment has reached over 90k people so far so now 90k people know about how people that develop apps for the app store feel. It is a pushback, and there are a lot of valid criticisms here from others that have also worked with them. I'm not going to jeopardize my career by refusing to work with their projects, I'll simply voice my concerns. Everybody in my office hates working with it. We're not going to go knocking on the doors at our local Apple store demanding them change their guidelines.
This is why apple does whatever they want because developers dont want to put their word in action.
Unemployed response but alright. Lmao I don't know what you expect people to do.
How do people not understand what “Style guidelines” are?? It’s not something they are requiring people to use. Style guidelines have been out forever and the point of them are that if you want your app to fit in stylistically within the Apple ecosystem, follow these rules. They are not, and never have been, required and they are constantly ignored by apps. This whole “spacial computing” story is such a non-story pounced on by Apple haters who can’t come up with anything better to insult about the AVP besides, “it too expensive for me” and “it don’t play games”
This just screams "I haven't deployed an application to the app store". If you knew how annoying they are to develop for you'd understand. They'll push back on an application review for small things.
Why is this frustrating? I think it's good to have consistency in terms for the public, makes things clear and explicit. Also VR has a lot of negative connotations due to years of poisoning-the-well with crap like cardboard VR googles. Apple is trying to give a different experience here, I hope they are successful. It will force competitors to step up their products and consumers will benefit.
To me it's something small tacked onto bigger issues that exist with developing for Apple, alongside with the fact that this seems like an overreach. This extends to more than just the app store, this extends to how you market it on your own personal websites, and may have an affect on applications that are deemed cross-platform. As I said to another user: The company that I work for creates cross-platform applications that exist both on the play store and app store. For something going to the play store, it's rather simple and streamlined for the most part, especially when setting up build pipelines on cloud resources. Apple though is tricky and annoying, if you set up a build pipeline you're most likely going to need to get an apple computer of some kind, and set up your pipeline on it and deploy using xcode. You can't use cloud resources since they need hardware IDs and whatnot. There are fees for their developer program, and you need their devices to test on. And they take 30% of your apps revenue. Tacking on annoying guidelines on top of it requiring developers to push their own marketing is just salt in the wound in my opinion.
> This extends to more than just the app store, this extends to how you market it on your own personal websites I didn't know that and I agree this is overreach. I wonder how strict they are at enforcing this, and what the penalties are.
Yeah that's the part that I highlighted in the second image, the rules about how you reference your application falls underneath this section. I assume it depends on the traction that your app gets, if it's a lot they may peer more into your own marketing outside the app store. If you make an application that's multi-platform (this SDK may not work too well with others so this may be difficult) and it's on multiple stores, they may strong arm you into using their terminology.
I find it more funny that they are going full grammar Nazi and tell you how to write aPp stORE. And general not a headset... hopefully someone calls them diving goggles. Is this real or a hoax?
They made the entire VR community talk about it. Quite extensively really. Seems like it's working to me
I have no sympathy for devs on silly complaints about stuff like this. Apple has made a lot of developers A LOT of money by creating platforms they can create for. Stop crying about the nomenclature that Apple requires you to use. You don’t have to love it but get over it and move on.
This gives off “the beatings will continue until morale improves” vibes.
They would also be nothing without developers, and it would be nice to not have to put up with annoying rules that force people to push their own marketing in an inorganic manner. It's just the "because we can" kind of rules. This is far from the long list of complaints people have against Apple development.
It's not just because, the terms VR/AR/XR/MR carry certain connotations with the average person, and Apple wants to avoid those with this new device.
That's what they're dipping their toes into though is the main thing, and trying to rebrand already-used concepts as something else. Which is definitely not uncommon for them these days.
Yes, but many of the features they are specifically promoting, are already possible with existing devices that use those specific terms. It just seems to me that they are specifically trying to create a strong divide between their system and others - which is gonna wreck havoc on developers. If Apple is going to enforce that line item, then Vision Pro may never be able to see any cross over apps from existing VR/MR space. Maybe they don't mind that. But it seems that a lot of apple fans are hoping for or expecting the Vision Pro to eventually get many existing VR games or apps, which is very unlikely with this requirement...would devs then have to update their descriptions on stores like Steam or the Meta Store? Would they have to replace any instance of "VR" on their websites with "Spatial Computing"? Wouldn't Steam/Meta have an issue with that? Of course - there are several things that set the Vision Pro apart (other than the exorbitant price), and that's great! And the name "spatial computing" does make sense in the context of those features, for example the 3d image capture, or the ability to link to MacBooks and use a virtual screen, etc.
When I hear VR I think of Oculus/Facebook/Meta and Vive When I hear AR I think assholes with google glass or the failed leap motion When I hear XR I think of the Amazon app with cheap 3d overlays using my phone When I hear MR I think of Microsoft's platform thats now dead aside from hololens I can see why they are pushing spatial computing. When you google VR/AR/XR/MR the Vision Pro won't be the first thing that pops up. When you google Spatial Computing after it launches it'll be the first thing that pops up. Makes perfect sense from a business standpoint as to why they want to push the term. It has less stigma associated with it.
Restricting development on Mac seems like an...odd thing to do. it's understandable That pool of people sounds a little low
Copy/pasted something I wrote to someone else: The company that I work for creates cross-platform applications that exist both on the play store and app store. For something going to the play store, it's rather simple and streamlined for the most part, especially when setting up build pipelines on cloud resources. Apple though is tricky and annoying, if you set up a build pipeline you're most likely going to need to get an apple computer of some kind, and set up your pipeline on it and deploy using xcode. You can't use cloud resources since they need hardware IDs and whatnot. There are fees for their developer program, and you need their devices to test on. And they take 30% of your apps revenue. Tacking on annoying guidelines on top of it requiring developers to push their own marketing is just salt in the wound in my opinion.
I really do wonder how successful this will be, $3500 is a lot of money and needing a mac with enough RAM is a lot of money too. I bought a used hololens 1 for $300 on ebay and I just bought a magic leap 1 AR headset for $100 on ebay as a consumer toy. Augmented reality is amazing but $3500 is just...so much money.
Fck Apple, shitty company
Meh Apple, shut the f up.
bro who cares? Only wealthy studios with PR teams will be able to abide by these marketing rules anyways. And honestly its on brand for apple to differentiate themself from other XR platforms, they don’t wanna be associated with lower quality companies
Bro have fun with your Apple Stand Pro
This isn’t frustrating. Style guideline are incredibly important and are the massive difference that makes IOS so seamless and enjoyable to use. Android is a mess where every developer does their own thing and the App Store is filled with trash. Every phone can have its own UI and idea of what to call things etc. Apple at least keeps things very consistent in what to name things, how to talk about these things, and even how to depict UI element and navigation decisions etc. If anything it’s Apple showing they love making developers lives easier because they don’t need to invent the wheel. Just do what Apple sets forth and that’s it, no extra thinking necessary. And now every single person in the entire world using an Apple device knows what you are talking about and how to interact with your app. Magic.
The frustrating part is this in addition to many other things, this is what I said to a few others: The company that I work for creates cross-platform applications that exist both on the play store and app store. For something going to the play store, it's rather simple and streamlined for the most part, especially when setting up build pipelines on cloud resources. Apple though is tricky and annoying, if you set up a build pipeline you're most likely going to need to get an apple computer of some kind, and set up your pipeline on it and deploy using xcode. You can't use cloud resources since they need hardware IDs and whatnot. There are fees for their developer program, and you need their devices to test on. And they take 30% of your apps revenue. Tacking on annoying guidelines on top of it requiring developers to push their own marketing is just salt in the wound in my opinion.
Blame Facebook
Pretty sure this is standard stuffs. Every companies including Sony has such guidelines.
This is nothing new and not Apple specific. Anyone who has developed an app to run on an Apple device or an Android device know that Apple and Google are very particular in how your phrase things. At least in this case, Apple is being transparent. Many times, particularly with Google, they reject your app but won't tell you why. Then it's trial and error until you can get it accepted. I appreciate Apple being specific.
And what's the big deal here? They will do it their own way, we'll see if they succeed.