Technology

59149 readers

2313 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
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, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

245

Apple Vision Pro review: magic, until it’s not (www.theverge.com)

submitted 9 months ago by [email protected] to c/technology

115 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The Apple Vision Pro is supposed to be the start of a new spatial computing revolution. After several days of testing, it’s clear that it’s the best headset ever made — which is the problem.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Surp 23 points 9 months ago (2 children)

I turned the video off immediately when he said it's 34 99 spaced out rather than three thousand four hundred ninty nine dollars so it sounds as fucking terrible as it actually is price wise. Fuck apple and fuck this reviewer

[–] ashok36 10 points 9 months ago

What a weird thing to get hung up on.

[+] [email protected] -19 points 9 months ago (1 children)

What you don’t like people talking to you like you’re a retard ? But 3499,99 is not the same as 3500,00. It would be bad information, the verge « journalist » sure can’t allow it.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I would quote it as $3500 or thirty-five hundred dollars. It's a common practice for radio since $3499.99 is read as thirty-four ninety-nine ninety-nine which is heard as $349,999

This value is too much for any VR/AR goggles in my budget. I'd read this as a thing for very specialized industrial purposes (say CAD/CAM) or a toy for rich people.

And if it's just a toy for rich people, it's not going to be well supported. If it's a CAD/CAM tool or a tool for disabled accessibility then all the software will be proprietary and overpriced as well.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

Roch people pay for apps, so perhaps even if it is just for the rich, it can be successful. The thing about technology, though, is selling those same apps for less to mass market later is still profitable as it costs no more to produce them.