From what I understand the thing isn't see through and the eyes are actually projected outside. Can somebody explain why they had to add tech to do it?

[–] MossyFeathers@pawb.social 55 points 1 year ago (8 children)

Because there are screens in the way? The choice was to either not have the viewer's eyes be visible, or use a screen to display eyes (not even real eyes, you can supposedly have cat eyes for an example). Considering the device is meant to be AR (augmented reality) and not VR, it kinda makes sense to show the user's eyes since they're still "connected" to the outside world. Otherwise you'd have a bunch of blank visors walking around and then people can't tell if you're looking at them or your furry waifu.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 year ago (7 children)

You know how Microsoft solved this problem?

With glass.

[–] Robbsen1@discuss.tchncs.de -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Then go and buy Microsoft's product. Nobody forces you to get a Vision Pro

[–] ModsAreCopsACAB@lemm.ee -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Lmao look at this bozo defending the shittiest apple product.

[–] Robbsen1@discuss.tchncs.de -2 points 1 year ago

What? Where did I defend the Vision Pro? I just don't get why people get so emotionally invested about something nobody ever forces them to buy or use.

load more comments (5 replies)

load more comments (29 replies)