Testing the Vision Pro usability
We added the Vision Pro to our development devices. This video shows the UX/UI, primarily how it interacts with the WebGL website. Soon, we will post immersive WebXR demos.
Here we list a series of differences between Apple's Vision Pro and the Meta Quest 2/3 products:
Pros of having one:
1— It looks and feels outstanding. The pass-through is not as good as Meta's counterpart, but the UI and images as incredible crips and sleek.
2—WebXR Development-wise, a Vision Pro is needed to test UX/UI and debug Vision Pro-specific issues and bugs (We spotted render order issues in some apps; for example, in the xr-shooter app ( • Destroy geometries with physics in VR... , we have render order issues in the Vision Pro)
3—The Vision Pro uses a different user interface: see and click. This differs from the fingers/joystick user interface the Quest has. We had to find a workaround for an app we did a year ago, as the Vision Pro won't let us press a button. What is funny is that in the X-code simulator, it works fine.
Const:
1—You don't need a Vision Pro to create a powerful VR app. However, the Vision Pro's UX/UI is ideal for high-end projects.
2— The Quest 3 has mostly the same features and quality at 20% of the cost. However, the Quest 3 doesn't have eye tracking or multitasking.
3— The Meta Quest 3 requires less time to set up in people's heads. So, in this case, quest 3 might be ideal if the configuration time matters, like if you have a stand where thousands of people pass by daily.
Смотрите видео Testing the Vision Pro usability онлайн без регистрации, длительностью часов минут секунд в хорошем качестве. Это видео добавил пользователь OHZI Interactive Studio 12 Июль 2024, не забудьте поделиться им ссылкой с друзьями и знакомыми, на нашем сайте его посмотрели 38 раз и оно понравилось 3 людям.