Unpopular Opinion

6161 readers

379 users here now

Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!

How voting works:

Vote the opposite of the norm.

If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.

Guidelines:

Tag your post, if possible (not required)

If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].

Rules:

1. NO POLITICS

Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.

2. Be civil.

Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...

Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.

5. No trolling.

This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.

Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Google Glass had a better see-through solution than the Apple Vision Pro (lemmy.world)

submitted 6 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

16 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Whatever use cases they try to push for social settings, I think Google Glass was still the better solution. Nobody uses their Vision Pro outside, and it's way too expensive as just another VR headset to use at home.

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

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I think AR and VR will become much more interesting when they can get tweaked by the consumer and a hobbyist market develops.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (2 children)

That’s Apple’s hope as well. They started allowing even hobbyist devs to test on the device almost a year before the public release.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

They don't do that to allow consumers or hobbyists tweak the device in ways they want. They want to establish a functional ecosystem, so they need apps. Once it's running, apple is the first to shut it down again and charge whatever they want

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

They don't do that to allow consumers or hobbyists tweak the device in ways they want. They want to establish a functional ecosystem, so they need apps.

Those two statements, allowing consumers and hobbyists to tweak the device in the ways they want, and having a functional ecosystem of apps, are loosely equivalent.

I know the difference is you want hobbyists to be able to change more than Apple allows. But it isn’t a binary hobbyists or not.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

That may be true but if you're looking to Apple to encourage open source enhancements for their products you must not be very familiar with their corporate philosophy. It's technically possible that could evolve but it would require a complete change in direction compared to where they have always positioned themselves which seems pretty unlikely.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

There are open source apps for all of Apple’s Products. I’m using one to type this comment.

They do put restrictions on what you can make, but they absolutely want the open source and hobbyist devs.