For my part, the make-or-break part of these kind of visualisations -- assisting home renovation, and interior and exterior design and architecture in general -- has been lighting and materials, not [only] or in any meaningful part 3-D through VR augmentation. I mean I would surely appreciate a fine piece of hardware like Vision Pro put to use here, so the author is on point, it's just that at some point you want to actually see the relative colorimetry at work -- how your beige couch is going to look in that spot illuminated by a giant window facing south etc. It's not as critical as making the house right, since moving a couch is easier by far, obviously, but there are things like kitchen islands that are more costly, featuring slabs of stone that is neither cheap nor easy to move.

Anyway, I've been using Radiance to help me deal with the above issues, but it's for all practical purposes non-interactive. At some point there's bound to be a e.g. Monte-Carlo physically-based ray-tracer for these use cases, featuring radiometry with visually negligible error compared to reference (i.e. if you were looking at the real thing with your eyeballs), that is _interactive_-capable (at least in the frames-per-second category and not seconds-per-frame). It's probably already out there, but people have different preferences as to the tools they wish to employ. I like Radiance because it's text mode and gives you a lot of quality for all the text editing and tool composition (which frankly is a bit weird, Greg Ward was sure a maverick!), but mileage varies there.