mattinoz

mpantone said:

It's clear that Apple doesn't have the bandwidth to refresh their entire Mac lineup at the same moment. It's not just a manufacturing issue, it's more about the software as well as hardware engineering. So to mitigate this, they focus on the mainstream/higher volume products first (notebooks, Mac mini, and now iPod Pro, etc.) before pivoting to the M-series Max and Ultra SoCs and the products that rely on those chips.

I also have a hunch that a certain number of hardware and software engineers have been more recently focused on getting Apple Private Cloud Compute systems up and running before directing their attention to Mac Studio, Mac Pro, etc. One thing I don't expect is for Apple to market the Apple Private Cloud Compute hardware -- it will remain in-house for internal use only. It is naive to assume they will resurrect the long-dead Xserve product as a shipping SKU.

StudioSoup said:

eriamjh said:

StudioSoup said:

As an owner of a Vision Pro, I think this is a ridiculous concept for a gen 2 device.  First of all, can they really not bring a decent level of Apple intelligence to the fairly newly released M2 powered device?  I mean, an iPhone 15 with an A series chip can handle Apple Intelligence and not an M2 powered Vision Pro which has 16 GB of RAM?  Give me a break!

Also, the software/user interface isn't the issue.  It's truly an incredible piece of hardware, but the focus needs to be on cost cutting, weight reduction, increasing the field of view, and battery life, all while maintaining the current high resolution which makes the experience so special.  Personally, the first thing I'd axe would be the external displays.  They're so unnecessary and I'm sure they add a lot to the weight and price, while also draining system/battery resources.

The Vision Pro needs an M2 just to process the visual input and do the eye and gesture tracking.   There’s not enough left for the so-called AI features.   But the biggest thing the VP needs is a killer app.   Without it, it’s just a gimmicky computer.

Sorry, but that’s not accurate. The AVP features a dual-chip design, per below.

Also, I think we’re beyond “killer apps” as long as a device has overall utility and user value. What’s the “killer app” for all users on the iPad? For me, the best use case for the AVP thus far is as a media consumption device, especially while traveling, but different users may value other functionality more, just like on any device. 

• M2 chip: Runs visionOS, advanced computer vision algorithms, and provides graphics. 
• R1 chip: Processes input from cameras, sensors, and microphones to stream images to the displays. The R1 chip is designed to process input quickly to eliminate lag and provide a real-time view. 
   

danox said:

bala1234 said:

This is probably the most sarcastic article I've read in apple insider and I've read a few d.e.d. rants . While vision pro is a released product by your own admission its not going anywhere currently. And despite the dorky look Orion looks to be an impressive engineering feat. I am never going buy a meta hardware for the 'said' reasons, but Zuck has a lot more determination and focus than Google ever did.

Answer the question if Meta had the hardware/OS chops to fit inside of those dream prototype glasses as shown in a picture, they can build not only those glasses, but they could build also build top of the line laptops, smartphones, tablets and watches. Where are those items and where is that modem? Note, Microsoft and Google have been struggling over the last few years in some of those categories and Meta isn’t even in their zip code other than having plenty of money to spend/waste.

The only thing that Zuckerberg has going for himself is that he’s the owner founder of the company with complete control but not even that’s gonna help.

blitz1 said:

Meta’s Orion made Vision Pro obsolete