> Spec-wise, that laptop is almost identical to any other laptop
Post-M series I hear this from time to time and always ask people to show me something in the same weight class with equivalent battery life, performance, and screen quality.
Has the market finally caught up to the point where your statement is true? (Not asking you to research, just curious if any spring to mind from any pre-purchase research you did.)
> Putting aside the enormous hardware difference between the two
I think this is far too charitable.
1. We are a largely technical audience.
2. We are discussing a product category where, per the last ten years of discussion about early hardware drawbacks (and the critical consensus on Vision Pro), the screen inescapably defines the experience.
Anyone on HN describing Vision Pro's screen as "the same shiz" as Quest 3 must either be a troll or operating with a knowledge gap so vast as to make meaningful discussion very, very difficult.
Like, if you don't understand the math, read the reviews and trust that this is not a global cabal of Apple apologists making shit up. Occam's Razor: this is a $3500 device where 35% of the BOM is the screens ($550-ish), compared to a $500 device where ~19% of the BOM is screens ($80). Of course they aren't in the same league.
> Post-M series I hear this from time to time and always ask people to show me something in the same weight class with equivalent battery life, performance, and screen quality
Law of diminishing returns. If I
only need 8 hours of battery life, the fact that the M6 MacPro has a 48-day battery won't move me - a Framework/Dell with a 12-hour battery life would be on par as "good enough for me" on the battery life metric.
> If I only need 8 hours of battery life, the fact that the M6 MacPro has a 48-day battery won't move me
But it will. Suddenly you don't need to worry about putting it on charger on the evening, it will still be there second day with enough charge to leave you worry free. It's a fundamental change that competition just doesn't get.
I am still a bit surprised they went with so much aluminium, but I expected the final weight to be bigger. Can't wait for Vision Air. Imagine it supporting OpenXR from windows machine, instant hit for massive gamer audience already used to spending thousands on peripherals.
Post-M series I hear this from time to time and always ask people to show me something in the same weight class with equivalent battery life, performance, and screen quality.
Has the market finally caught up to the point where your statement is true? (Not asking you to research, just curious if any spring to mind from any pre-purchase research you did.)
> Putting aside the enormous hardware difference between the two
I think this is far too charitable.
1. We are a largely technical audience.
2. We are discussing a product category where, per the last ten years of discussion about early hardware drawbacks (and the critical consensus on Vision Pro), the screen inescapably defines the experience.
Anyone on HN describing Vision Pro's screen as "the same shiz" as Quest 3 must either be a troll or operating with a knowledge gap so vast as to make meaningful discussion very, very difficult.
Like, if you don't understand the math, read the reviews and trust that this is not a global cabal of Apple apologists making shit up. Occam's Razor: this is a $3500 device where 35% of the BOM is the screens ($550-ish), compared to a $500 device where ~19% of the BOM is screens ($80). Of course they aren't in the same league.