←back to thread

169 points thelastgallon | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
zmmmmm ◴[] No.45674918[source]
Kind of sad to see here on "hacker news" that 80% of the comments are low effort cheap shots.

The interesting thing here is the core of it, being Android XR and its deep AI integration, especially the spatial awareness. Devices will come and go, but the OS will be the core that stays and grows and evolves over time. I am very curious to know how much of this is all exposed as OS foundations to build on vs a monolithic app built to look like an OS by Google. This has been a large part of Meta's mistake, where the OS is not providing many of these fundamentals and any app you see doing it is mostly re-inventing it themselves or relying on 3rd party tools like Unity to do the heavy lifting.

The really impressive part of Vision Pro is actually how well thought out the OS is underneath it, exposing fundamentals of how 3D computing can work. Especially the part to do with compositing together multiple spatial apps living together in the same shared space and even interacting with each other (eg: one app can emit a lighting effect that will shade the other's rendering).

I am very curious if Google has done this kind of foundational work. Especially if that is designed (as they claim) from the ground up to interface with AI models - eg: a 3D vision language model can reason across everything in your shared space including your pass through reality and respond to it. This would be truly amazing but there's zero technical information I can see at this point to know if Google really built these foundations or not here.

replies(7): >>45675165 #>>45675237 #>>45675462 #>>45675980 #>>45676993 #>>45677007 #>>45677252 #
AshamedCaptain ◴[] No.45675237[source]
> Devices will come and go, but the OS will be the core that stays and grows and evolves over time.

Say that to my Google Cardboard SDK programs, or the Google VR SDK ones, or Google Daydream ones.

You couldn't have chosen a worse topic on which to dump a generic "ranting about Google abandoning projects is low effort cheap shot", because Google does abandon VR projects (including OSes and APIs, not just devices) every 5 years, almost like clockwork. What I would call "a cheap shot" is to think that this new fancy "OS" will be any different. In fact, I pity the people who still consider jumping on this particular bus _again_.

replies(3): >>45675326 #>>45675500 #>>45675848 #
1. zmmmmm ◴[] No.45675848[source]
It's possible for sure that Google will abandon this and I absolutely recommend anybody considering buying in do so only on the value they can see and realise immediately, not on any future promise.

But none of that takes away from the intellectually interesting part of this : what is new here, what possibilities does it open up? What implications does it have?

The main reason it's less likely this gets abandoned is because the spotlight in the the AI race is quickly moving to how much contextual information you can pour in about the user's ambient environment so that AI can actually do or say something useful for the user. That pretty much means glasses, and glasses mean you need a spatial computing OS to drive the underpinnings that the whole thing can operate on. Right now the technology for true AR glasses is still 2+ years out so the temporary placeholder for all that functionality is these larger headsets. But line of sight to all the pieces falling into place is there, so all the players are effectively in a long game where they are building up their ecosystems to be ready for the main game when it does arrive.

replies(1): >>45676257 #
2. makeitdouble ◴[] No.45676257[source]
> The main reason it's less likely this gets abandoned is because the spotlight in the AI race [...]

So we're assuming that it won't get killed in 5 years because it's nicely tied to the current bubble ?

replies(1): >>45676903 #