Recreating the Flying Toasters screen saver for the Vision Pro

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

A nostalgic recreation of the classic “Flying Toasters” screensaver for Apple’s Vision Pro sparks praise for its whimsy and technical execution, along with detailed feedback on graphics, asset size, and even the AI-generated app icon. Commenters reminisce about vintage screensavers like After Dark and XScreenSaver while imagining how such playful visuals could evolve in VR and AR environments. The conversation broadens into a debate over whether Vision Pro is an expensive, niche tech demo or an early step toward mainstream spatial computing, touching on privacy constraints like restricted gaze-tracking data and Apple’s history of iterating from clunky first-generation devices to breakout hits.

Nostalgia and Screensaver Culture

  • Many commenters are delighted to see Flying Toasters revisited and recall After Dark as a formative, whimsical part of early computing.
  • People reminisce about other classic modules (Star Trek, Opus ’n Bill, singing toasters), Johnny Castaway, MOPy Fish, BSOD screensavers, and bouncing DVD logos.
  • Several list all the “historical context” now needing explanation: CRTs, burn‑in, physical software, floppy disks, TechTV, and old Mac/PC eras.

Design and Technical Feedback

  • The current version is seen as a fun “1.0” with room to grow.
  • Suggestions include more reflective/metallic “physically based” toaster materials, better lighting, and possibly environment-like reflections; API support for true environment reflections is unclear.
  • Some note apparent glitches in the App Store video where toasters rotate oddly on interaction.
  • A few wish for ports or expansions like VR versions of other classic screensavers (Windows Maze, XScreenSaver modules).

AI-Generated Icon Reactions

  • Several commenters strongly dislike the AI-generated app icon, calling it off-putting and visually incoherent.
  • Others defend it as acceptable for a solo developer lacking art skills, though some insist even simple “programmer art” would feel more authentic and increase their willingness to pay.

App Size and Technical Constraints

  • The ~150 MB app size is questioned as large for a seemingly simple concept.
  • Comparisons are made to the tiny size of the original After Dark modules, with rough estimates and historical data showing tens of kilobytes per saver.
  • Some speculate the bulk is due to heavy assets or bundled cruft; another Vision Pro dev reports a small app size when using no assets.

Vision Pro, Use Cases, and Adoption

  • Discussion broadens into whether Vision Pro is “dead on arrival” or an early, dev‑kit‑like step similar to early iPods/iPads/iPhones.
  • Some argue it’s impressive but niche and too expensive; others say they use it daily for movies and focused work and find it excellent.
  • There’s debate over whether VR/AR will ever be mainstream, with comparisons to HoloLens, Quest generations, and historical Apple products that only took off after later revisions and better content.
  • Several point out major barriers: cost, comfort, limited “killer apps,” Apple’s developer relations, and dependence on content owners for compelling media experiences.
  • Others counter that screensavers and similar whimsical apps can be valid, enjoyable experiences even without strong functional justification.

Privacy and Gaze Tracking

  • The article’s mention of blocked gaze‑tracking access sparks debate.
  • One side criticizes Apple for restricting powerful hardware features to narrow uses.
  • The other side views blocking third‑party gaze access as essential for privacy, preferring to trust a single platform vendor over many apps.
  • Some remain uneasy that the platform owner still has access but accept that if they don’t trust that, they simply shouldn’t buy the device.