10 ms·

Apple Eyes 2022 Release for AR Headset, 2023 for Glasses

99 points by apress 7y ago

anomaloustho 7y ago
Bigger news to me is that this paywall is $40 a month to get through. Wow! Could anyone provide more information about this publication and why the price is so steep?
- SirHound 7y ago
  I think this is geared towards business and rich valley people. The few with deep pockets over a wider audience.
  - snowwrestler 7y ago
    The core of the pitch for the "The Information" is that they do reporting that moves markets; i.e. investors should subscribe to get access to information they can use to make decisions ahead of their competitors. A lot of their reporting, like this article, tries to look down the road on new products and markets. The founder Jessica Lessin spent years at WSJ (as Jessica Vascellaro), but got into trouble for getting too close to her sources; for example traveling to private parties with them. The Information takes more of a utilitarian, service model to their work, where ethical concerns about source relationships are less important than the quality of the information you provide to subscribers (hence the name).
    - anomaloustho 7y ago
      Thanks for that explanation, that makes more sense.
SirHound 7y ago
I think this is turning out to be harder than any of the big companies anticipated. IIRC Xbox had an internal roadmap that put AR in 2014, a year before a VR headset which is an interesting look at our collective ignorance about the type of problems we are looking at. I do think Apple are the best placed to come to market on this though. Everything we’re currently seeing from them, like their over-powered mobile chipsets, seemingly premature ARKit, and Face ID sensor array are IMO all part of the push to cranking the price/performance of their hardware and software specifically for these upcoming headsets rather than addressing the current market. Which is genius, using the momentum of the iPhone to propel them into this new market. I wonder if we’ll see them pull away in capabilities the same way the Watch has.
tpmx 7y ago
No paywall: https://www.theverge.com/2019/11/11/20959066/apple-augmented-reality-ar-headset-glasses-rumors-reported-release-date https://www.theverge.com/2019/11/11/20959066/apple-augmented...
simonh 7y ago
If it's 3 to 4 years away from being real, would they really hold a presentation in the theatre? Not exactly an ideal setting for a discussion, and way too early for any kind of useful demonstration. Also at this early stage in a product's development, Apple very carefully controls and compartmentalises information. The software team wouldn't have any idea what the hardware looks like, or who is working on it. If you know the people in other teams, there's more likelihood of cross-leaking. There's no way their whole road map would be shared with the entire team. They may well have had some sort of meeting, but I suspect this is a case of extrapolating way too far from piecemeal and confusing scraps of information, combined with a fundamental misunderstanding about how Apple approaches projects like this.
- canuckintime 7y ago
  > If it's 3 to 4 years away from being real, would they really hold a presentation in the theatre? Just a few weeks ago both Kuo [1] and Gurman [2] predicted early 2020 for the AR glasses. Tim Cook's public statements, ARKit and all the rumors have suggested that AR is Apple's focus so I would be very surprised if an Apple VR headset came out first. Curious reporting by The Information [1] https://www.theverge.com/2019/10/9/20906113/apple-2020-predictions-release-ar-augmented-reality-glasses-ipad-pro-macbook-pro-iphone-se-2 https://www.theverge.com/2019/10/9/20906113/apple-2020-predi... [2] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-21/why-2020-is-looking-great-for-apple-products-and-consumer-gadgets https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-21/why-2020-...
- tqkxzugoaupvwqr 7y ago
  Could be that Apple is tired of getting the bang taken out of their announcements by internal leakers so they feed them false release dates. Or Apple learned from their apparently terrible management which caused software quality to plummet. If you announce plans well ahead, more people can say if these plans are feasible.
  - notyourwork 7y ago
    It seems like it would be extremely hard to manage a engineering project with a false release date provided to the team.
fyp 7y ago
People are comparing this to the mobile revolution but I am curious to know why history should repeat itself. As far as I can tell there's currently no secret sauce that will make AR usable that Apple is uniquely in the position to monopolize (needing higher FOV, rendering opaque objects, etc). Is it just the ability to drive cultural adoption to avoid "glasshole" stigma?
- batmansmk 7y ago
  Apple has capabilities that others don't have. Apple can design their own batteries, cases, utility chips, CPU, GPU, screens. They have exceptional assembly factories, where they can assemble with very low mechanical tolerance and calibrate HW better than most of the competition. They have patented several new methods for making glass. They have non garbage collected UI capabilities, low level GFX API developers. Apple is in a unique position to get an edge on the AR/VR market.
- gurumeditations 7y ago
  AR technology development is really just about turning the crank, and Apple is best at that nowadays.
ChicagoBoy11 7y ago
People made a lot of fun of me for wearing Google Glass several years for a solid month straight. Like, every day, to work and back. It was in fact clunky and rough around the edges, but even at that stage I experienced moments of the kind of glee I felt when I first used an iPhone. AI and Machine Learning will need to do a lot more heavy lifting in an AR glasses world, but the experience will just blow our phones out of the water. And it'll be amazing.
aphextron 7y ago
Here's hoping it's not just another Hololens flash in the pan. I've been holding out hope for 5 years now that Apple will come in and do it right, and trigger another paradigm shift for computing akin to the mobile revolution. AR is absolutely going to be a game changing technology some day, but the current hardware is simply nowhere near what's needed for mass consumer adoption.
- criddell 7y ago
  As long as you need to wear a headset or glasses, I have a hard time believing it will take off beyond the niches it has already found believers in. A real tech fatigue seems to be setting in with lots of people and the last thing many of us want (including many here) is more tech in their lives. I think it's especially true of tech that isolates you like AR and VR does.
  - zaroth 7y ago
    I don’t think people will think twice about wearing a headset if the content is intensely compelling or the use cases it enables are genuinely revolutionary. Most importantly it needs to be packaged in a way that you don’t need to be a motivated techie to pick apart the offerings, understand specs, setup a bespoke system, and just generally try so hard to get onboard. I’m not sure about the thesis that people want less tech in their lives. Look at the widespread adoption of “smart speakers” which to me seems like the ultimate expression of superfluous technology.
    - ttraub 7y ago
      Smart speakers are superfluous? Only if you don't find them useful. My wife comes downstairs every morning and says "okay Google what's the weather?" My daughter says "Alexa, play [some pop singer]". As a technology person, I tend to agree with you that these devices fall short of real life changing functionality, yet obviously many people out there love it.
    - criddell 7y ago
      > I’m not sure about the thesis that people want less tech in their lives. Look at the widespread adoption of “smart speakers” I think smart speakers aren't fatiguing because they are so passive. They sit idle, doing nothing until you call for them. Then they respond and return to idle. If using an Apple HomePod required special headphones, it wouldn't have sold at all. That said, I think there's a decent market for AR/VR devices but I don't think it's gigantic. It might be Playstation big (10^8), but probably not iPhone big (10^9).
atlasunshrugged 7y ago
I'm pretty excited to see what Apple releases. Generally, it seems like they're later to market rather than on the cutting edge of things but bring a high design quality and make tech approachable for a broader audience but this seems like one of those ones where the market hasn't been really made yet. Although, I've been pretty disappointed over the last few years with the quality of their products, especially software. I usually upgrade every ~2 years but for my last device that was 2 years old I was trying to hold out until a new release but it would constantly freeze up and crash after downloading the new software release they usually do when they announce a new phone (not trying to go into conspiracy theories but it seemed a little too convenient that just then is when my phone would start going on the fritz).
- wavefunction 7y ago
  >it seems like they're later to market rather than on the cutting edge of things but bring a high design quality That was true of Apple under Jobs but Tim Cook's legacy is one of terrible quality assurance and superficial design over considering function. Apple is coasting on their legacy.
  - toddmorey 7y ago
    Remember that Jobs gave us the toaster desktop, which in my mind is still their very best example of superficial design over considering function. (Well that or the early QuickTime player for OS X.) Meanwhile, AirPods are a phenomenal product. Up there with the best work Apple has done.
    - thejohnconway 7y ago
      Do you mean the Cube? It’s a nice computer. Fanless and practically silent, with very easy to access internals. It was too expensive, obviously.
    - wavefunction 7y ago
      headphones? I guess I'm surveying their entire ecosystem
mark_l_watson 7y ago
I hope that they keep pushing for self contained independent devices. My wife and I love our Apple Watches and not needing an iPhone (assuming your watch has a data plan) is a game changer, The Oculus Quest is self contained, a great product, but a bit heavy. I expect an AR headset would also work in VR mode and I hope Apple makes it light and comfortable. It is amazing what functionality is packed into the Apple Watch and AirPods and I have confidence Apple will get it right with a headset. Then the question is, will people want them.
- ghaff 7y ago
  A lot depends on use cases. I, on the other hand, got an Apple Watch with a data plan and I canceled the plan because I never used it outside of my phone's range. That said, there's a lot of potential for comfortable wearables replacing a phone in your pocket for many purposes. We tolerate carrying wallets everywhere just as we tolerated carrying wallets and keys everywhere because that's just the way things are. But it doesn't need to be that way forever. I have a lot of questions about how AR will progress. I can imagine having essentially a high fidelity HUD but I'm not sure either how close we are to enabling something like that technically and how hard it will be to get mainstream consumers over the Glasshole effect of having omnipresent connected video (or maybe even if they should get over it).
- CrackerNews 7y ago
  Like AR, the future of VR mainstream adoption is in self-contained standalone independent devices. John Carmack of Oculus mentioned that user retention for the mobile snapon Gear VR was only one or two uses before never using again. There's too much friction for the common masses to get into VR that way. Hence the Note 10 dropping support for Gear VR and Carmack giving a "eulogy" for the device and Oculus focusing on the Go and Quest (with the Rift remaining for enthusiasts). The Quest has been far more successful than the Rift ever was due to its standalone nature for compelling VR experiences. (game developers could have made up to 3-4x more sales on Quest compared to the Rift) Apple has to make AR standalone. Smartwatches faced flack for not initially being standalone for being so expensive. While it did become more and more standalone, it still isn't a compelling use scenario for the masses to go out and spend that money. AR could have more promise than what Google Glass had, but it would have to be far more compelling than what the masses can already get from their iPhones. As a point of comparison, VR right now is within 1% of the entire Steam population, which is then a fraction of the world's masses. There's interest but people at large aren't biting yet for various reasons. Apple's AR could end up in a similar situation where it would be nice to have but remains out of reach.
ssully 7y ago
Very interested to see what a full AR product from Apple looks like. I am always impressed whenever I toy with their ARKit stuff on iOS devices, but I am curious how that translates beyond toy applications.
nlh 7y ago
Although it feels inevitable, I think what’s interesting to consider is that history would indicate that Apple is likely NOT to be the company that really ushers in the shift from ~5 inch screens we hold in front of us to an AR-based world. In the same way that in early 2000s, yes, Dell definitely moved us forward with a great line of laptops, but the Sony Vaio (and, later, MacBooks) are what brought laptops to consumers in a real way, and yes of course, Motorola and Nokia et al made the first real push at mobile, but Apple made mobile phones a mass-market accessory item. I wonder if Apple will end up being the Dell / Nokia of the AR world, and some company we haven’t yet considered ends up really owning the revolution.
- MuffinFlavored 7y ago
  Why couldn't Apple (who usually makes the highest quality devices in each sector) be the company to repeat what they did for smartphones / laptops for AR gear?
- oflannabhra 7y ago
  I’m not sure what about this article specifically that makes you feel that way. You are correct, in general, that firms that are successful because of an innovative technology, typically get surpassed by the next innovative technology to come to the market. See Clayton Christensen’s The Innovators Dilemma. However, Apple is one company that seems to have broken the trend, several times, in fact. Past success is not always an indicator of future success, but I’m personally not willing to bet against Apple at this point.
- Despegar 7y ago
  This is odd because history actually suggests the exact opposite. It suggests that not only will Apple be the company that makes AR a category for the mainstream (if it is to be one at all), but that they'll also own the revolution as well. Apple Watch and AirPods are two recent examples that make the case for the latter. If you just do a cursory analysis of the potential competitors and what they're good at, it becomes actually very easy to say that Apple will own this market.
- CrackerNews 7y ago
dsalzman 7y ago
Apple's software first approach and last mover mentality will give them a huge advantage in the Augmented Reality Space.
hyperpallium 7y ago
> Apple CEO Tim Cook has previously said that he regards augmented reality as “a big idea, like the smartphone,” IDK about the timeline, but inevitable that they'll want to do it. A heads-up display enables larger displays and smaller devices, and seems inevitable to me, too. Google Glass seemed to fail because of privacy. But subtracting the camera was too much for Google engineers to bear... in contrast, Apple has a history of subtracting features when necessary. They can also design cool eye-wear. The only problem with my theory is that, without a camera, it isn't "AR"...
- woah 7y ago
  The problem with Google Glass was that it was completely useless. The only feature it had was taking pictures with the camera and viewing notification pop ups one at a time. If it had a use, then the awkward start where people got mad about the camera would be remembered as a brief anomaly, like horse riders getting mad about cars.
  - hyperpallium 7y ago
    Was the display that low-res? You couldn't watch video, browse the web, read pdf's, lookup maps etc? EDIT It was 640×360. 360p is low, but typical for mobile youtube not so long ago. You can get an 80x45 xterm, with an 8x8 font.
    - woah 7y ago
      You could theoretically have done any of those things, but it really would have sucked.
      - hyperpallium 7y ago
        Is it just the resolution (which could be improved) or something else?
        woah 7y ago
foobiekr 7y ago
Apple is not a parts manufacturer/inventor; they assemble parts wonderfully with, on occasion, some customization, so the obvious question is: where are the displays? Diffractive waveguides are a very disappointing display for most uses; not bright enough, poor FOV, bleeding, etc. For a summary, see [1]. Without an external vendor to make the breakthrough in displays, Apple is in the same position as everyone else - talking about an AR future that looks great until you get there. [1] https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-making-good-ar-displays-so-hard-daniel-wagner/ https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-making-good-ar-displays-s...
- pokstad 7y ago
  MicroLED in Apple Watch seems to be a step in that direction: https://9to5mac.com/2019/07/22/microled-apple-watch-report/ https://9to5mac.com/2019/07/22/microled-apple-watch-report/
- coldtea 7y ago
  >Apple is not a parts manufacturer/inventor Manufacturer maybe not, but inventor? They have all kinds of patents and inventions of their own, their own CPUs and processing units, etc... >they assemble parts wonderfully with, on occasion, some customization They order custom parts more often than not, with very heavy customization. Does anybody think that the displays for a 2022 Apple VR device (assuming the rumor is true) would be seen anywhere outside of Apple labs, and be e.g. available as off-the-shelve parts with merely "some customization" required on top in 2019?
  - coldtea 7y ago
    Come to think of it, grandparent was probably thinking of the desktop space -- where Apple basically uses Intel, AMD, etc parts + some modifications. But that's absolutely not the case in the iOS, Apple Watch, etc space. They make their own everything, from best of breed mobile CPU designs, to custom DSPs that are the 2019 1000x equivalents of the Amiga of yore (remember Paula, Denise, Agnus?), own boards, and everything in between.
- 1auralynn 7y ago
chooseaname 7y ago
I must be the odd man out. I don't want something that I have to wear. I wear glasses and contacts and I don't want to wear those either. I see AR as being great as, say, a HUD in a car. But I just don't want wearables.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- rglover 7y ago
  Think in terms of iteration. On your desk > on your lap > in your pocket > on your wrist > on your face > on your eyes > in your body.
  - chooseaname 7y ago
    This is even worse. I want to be able to disconnect and just ... be human.
    - Aperocky 7y ago
      But you can always disconnect, there's no reason that you can't put your cellphone or even a physical connection to brain on airplane mode.
KoftaBob 7y ago
I hope they take the approach that Focals by North did with their smart glasses. Non-obtrusive heads up display for notifications/navigation, and glasses that actually look like normal glasses.
akl_bh 7y ago
I somehow read this as the code name for Glasses is "Apple Eyes".
- dawg- 7y ago
  Or maybe just 'i'? The ultimate evolution of product names.

99 points by apress 7y ago

Bigger news to me is that this paywall is $40 a month to get through. Wow! Could anyone provide more information about this publication and why the price is so steep?

SirHound 7y ago
I think this is geared towards business and rich valley people. The few with deep pockets over a wider audience.
- snowwrestler 7y ago
  The core of the pitch for the "The Information" is that they do reporting that moves markets; i.e. investors should subscribe to get access to information they can use to make decisions ahead of their competitors. A lot of their reporting, like this article, tries to look down the road on new products and markets. The founder Jessica Lessin spent years at WSJ (as Jessica Vascellaro), but got into trouble for getting too close to her sources; for example traveling to private parties with them. The Information takes more of a utilitarian, service model to their work, where ethical concerns about source relationships are less important than the quality of the information you provide to subscribers (hence the name).
  - anomaloustho 7y ago
    Thanks for that explanation, that makes more sense.

SirHound 7y ago

I think this is turning out to be harder than any of the big companies anticipated. IIRC Xbox had an internal roadmap that put AR in 2014, a year before a VR headset which is an interesting look at our collective ignorance about the type of problems we are looking at. I do think Apple are the best placed to come to market on this though. Everything we’re currently seeing from them, like their over-powered mobile chipsets, seemingly premature ARKit, and Face ID sensor array are IMO all part of the push to cranking the price/performance of their hardware and software specifically for these upcoming headsets rather than addressing the current market. Which is genius, using the momentum of the iPhone to propel them into this new market. I wonder if we’ll see them pull away in capabilities the same way the Watch has.

tpmx 7y ago

No paywall: https://www.theverge.com/2019/11/11/20959066/apple-augmented-reality-ar-headset-glasses-rumors-reported-release-date https://www.theverge.com/2019/11/11/20959066/apple-augmented...

simonh 7y ago

If it's 3 to 4 years away from being real, would they really hold a presentation in the theatre? Not exactly an ideal setting for a discussion, and way too early for any kind of useful demonstration. Also at this early stage in a product's development, Apple very carefully controls and compartmentalises information. The software team wouldn't have any idea what the hardware looks like, or who is working on it. If you know the people in other teams, there's more likelihood of cross-leaking. There's no way their whole road map would be shared with the entire team. They may well have had some sort of meeting, but I suspect this is a case of extrapolating way too far from piecemeal and confusing scraps of information, combined with a fundamental misunderstanding about how Apple approaches projects like this.

canuckintime 7y ago
> If it's 3 to 4 years away from being real, would they really hold a presentation in the theatre? Just a few weeks ago both Kuo [1] and Gurman [2] predicted early 2020 for the AR glasses. Tim Cook's public statements, ARKit and all the rumors have suggested that AR is Apple's focus so I would be very surprised if an Apple VR headset came out first. Curious reporting by The Information [1] https://www.theverge.com/2019/10/9/20906113/apple-2020-predictions-release-ar-augmented-reality-glasses-ipad-pro-macbook-pro-iphone-se-2 https://www.theverge.com/2019/10/9/20906113/apple-2020-predi... [2] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-21/why-2020-is-looking-great-for-apple-products-and-consumer-gadgets https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-21/why-2020-...
tqkxzugoaupvwqr 7y ago
Could be that Apple is tired of getting the bang taken out of their announcements by internal leakers so they feed them false release dates. Or Apple learned from their apparently terrible management which caused software quality to plummet. If you announce plans well ahead, more people can say if these plans are feasible.
- notyourwork 7y ago
  It seems like it would be extremely hard to manage a engineering project with a false release date provided to the team.

fyp 7y ago

People are comparing this to the mobile revolution but I am curious to know why history should repeat itself. As far as I can tell there's currently no secret sauce that will make AR usable that Apple is uniquely in the position to monopolize (needing higher FOV, rendering opaque objects, etc). Is it just the ability to drive cultural adoption to avoid "glasshole" stigma?

batmansmk 7y ago
Apple has capabilities that others don't have. Apple can design their own batteries, cases, utility chips, CPU, GPU, screens. They have exceptional assembly factories, where they can assemble with very low mechanical tolerance and calibrate HW better than most of the competition. They have patented several new methods for making glass. They have non garbage collected UI capabilities, low level GFX API developers. Apple is in a unique position to get an edge on the AR/VR market.
gurumeditations 7y ago
AR technology development is really just about turning the crank, and Apple is best at that nowadays.

ChicagoBoy11 7y ago

People made a lot of fun of me for wearing Google Glass several years for a solid month straight. Like, every day, to work and back. It was in fact clunky and rough around the edges, but even at that stage I experienced moments of the kind of glee I felt when I first used an iPhone. AI and Machine Learning will need to do a lot more heavy lifting in an AR glasses world, but the experience will just blow our phones out of the water. And it'll be amazing.

aphextron 7y ago

Here's hoping it's not just another Hololens flash in the pan. I've been holding out hope for 5 years now that Apple will come in and do it right, and trigger another paradigm shift for computing akin to the mobile revolution. AR is absolutely going to be a game changing technology some day, but the current hardware is simply nowhere near what's needed for mass consumer adoption.

criddell 7y ago
As long as you need to wear a headset or glasses, I have a hard time believing it will take off beyond the niches it has already found believers in. A real tech fatigue seems to be setting in with lots of people and the last thing many of us want (including many here) is more tech in their lives. I think it's especially true of tech that isolates you like AR and VR does.
- zaroth 7y ago
  I don’t think people will think twice about wearing a headset if the content is intensely compelling or the use cases it enables are genuinely revolutionary. Most importantly it needs to be packaged in a way that you don’t need to be a motivated techie to pick apart the offerings, understand specs, setup a bespoke system, and just generally try so hard to get onboard. I’m not sure about the thesis that people want less tech in their lives. Look at the widespread adoption of “smart speakers” which to me seems like the ultimate expression of superfluous technology.
  - ttraub 7y ago
    Smart speakers are superfluous? Only if you don't find them useful. My wife comes downstairs every morning and says "okay Google what's the weather?" My daughter says "Alexa, play [some pop singer]". As a technology person, I tend to agree with you that these devices fall short of real life changing functionality, yet obviously many people out there love it.
  - criddell 7y ago
    > I’m not sure about the thesis that people want less tech in their lives. Look at the widespread adoption of “smart speakers” I think smart speakers aren't fatiguing because they are so passive. They sit idle, doing nothing until you call for them. Then they respond and return to idle. If using an Apple HomePod required special headphones, it wouldn't have sold at all. That said, I think there's a decent market for AR/VR devices but I don't think it's gigantic. It might be Playstation big (10^8), but probably not iPhone big (10^9).

atlasunshrugged 7y ago

I'm pretty excited to see what Apple releases. Generally, it seems like they're later to market rather than on the cutting edge of things but bring a high design quality and make tech approachable for a broader audience but this seems like one of those ones where the market hasn't been really made yet. Although, I've been pretty disappointed over the last few years with the quality of their products, especially software. I usually upgrade every ~2 years but for my last device that was 2 years old I was trying to hold out until a new release but it would constantly freeze up and crash after downloading the new software release they usually do when they announce a new phone (not trying to go into conspiracy theories but it seemed a little too convenient that just then is when my phone would start going on the fritz).

wavefunction 7y ago
>it seems like they're later to market rather than on the cutting edge of things but bring a high design quality That was true of Apple under Jobs but Tim Cook's legacy is one of terrible quality assurance and superficial design over considering function. Apple is coasting on their legacy.
- toddmorey 7y ago
  Remember that Jobs gave us the toaster desktop, which in my mind is still their very best example of superficial design over considering function. (Well that or the early QuickTime player for OS X.) Meanwhile, AirPods are a phenomenal product. Up there with the best work Apple has done.
  - thejohnconway 7y ago
    Do you mean the Cube? It’s a nice computer. Fanless and practically silent, with very easy to access internals. It was too expensive, obviously.
  - wavefunction 7y ago
    headphones? I guess I'm surveying their entire ecosystem

mark_l_watson 7y ago

I hope that they keep pushing for self contained independent devices. My wife and I love our Apple Watches and not needing an iPhone (assuming your watch has a data plan) is a game changer, The Oculus Quest is self contained, a great product, but a bit heavy. I expect an AR headset would also work in VR mode and I hope Apple makes it light and comfortable. It is amazing what functionality is packed into the Apple Watch and AirPods and I have confidence Apple will get it right with a headset. Then the question is, will people want them.

ghaff 7y ago
A lot depends on use cases. I, on the other hand, got an Apple Watch with a data plan and I canceled the plan because I never used it outside of my phone's range. That said, there's a lot of potential for comfortable wearables replacing a phone in your pocket for many purposes. We tolerate carrying wallets everywhere just as we tolerated carrying wallets and keys everywhere because that's just the way things are. But it doesn't need to be that way forever. I have a lot of questions about how AR will progress. I can imagine having essentially a high fidelity HUD but I'm not sure either how close we are to enabling something like that technically and how hard it will be to get mainstream consumers over the Glasshole effect of having omnipresent connected video (or maybe even if they should get over it).
CrackerNews 7y ago
Like AR, the future of VR mainstream adoption is in self-contained standalone independent devices. John Carmack of Oculus mentioned that user retention for the mobile snapon Gear VR was only one or two uses before never using again. There's too much friction for the common masses to get into VR that way. Hence the Note 10 dropping support for Gear VR and Carmack giving a "eulogy" for the device and Oculus focusing on the Go and Quest (with the Rift remaining for enthusiasts). The Quest has been far more successful than the Rift ever was due to its standalone nature for compelling VR experiences. (game developers could have made up to 3-4x more sales on Quest compared to the Rift) Apple has to make AR standalone. Smartwatches faced flack for not initially being standalone for being so expensive. While it did become more and more standalone, it still isn't a compelling use scenario for the masses to go out and spend that money. AR could have more promise than what Google Glass had, but it would have to be far more compelling than what the masses can already get from their iPhones. As a point of comparison, VR right now is within 1% of the entire Steam population, which is then a fraction of the world's masses. There's interest but people at large aren't biting yet for various reasons. Apple's AR could end up in a similar situation where it would be nice to have but remains out of reach.

ssully 7y ago

Very interested to see what a full AR product from Apple looks like. I am always impressed whenever I toy with their ARKit stuff on iOS devices, but I am curious how that translates beyond toy applications.

nlh 7y ago

Although it feels inevitable, I think what’s interesting to consider is that history would indicate that Apple is likely NOT to be the company that really ushers in the shift from ~5 inch screens we hold in front of us to an AR-based world. In the same way that in early 2000s, yes, Dell definitely moved us forward with a great line of laptops, but the Sony Vaio (and, later, MacBooks) are what brought laptops to consumers in a real way, and yes of course, Motorola and Nokia et al made the first real push at mobile, but Apple made mobile phones a mass-market accessory item. I wonder if Apple will end up being the Dell / Nokia of the AR world, and some company we haven’t yet considered ends up really owning the revolution.

MuffinFlavored 7y ago
Why couldn't Apple (who usually makes the highest quality devices in each sector) be the company to repeat what they did for smartphones / laptops for AR gear?
oflannabhra 7y ago
I’m not sure what about this article specifically that makes you feel that way. You are correct, in general, that firms that are successful because of an innovative technology, typically get surpassed by the next innovative technology to come to the market. See Clayton Christensen’s The Innovators Dilemma. However, Apple is one company that seems to have broken the trend, several times, in fact. Past success is not always an indicator of future success, but I’m personally not willing to bet against Apple at this point.
Despegar 7y ago
This is odd because history actually suggests the exact opposite. It suggests that not only will Apple be the company that makes AR a category for the mainstream (if it is to be one at all), but that they'll also own the revolution as well. Apple Watch and AirPods are two recent examples that make the case for the latter. If you just do a cursory analysis of the potential competitors and what they're good at, it becomes actually very easy to say that Apple will own this market.
CrackerNews 7y ago

dsalzman 7y ago

Apple's software first approach and last mover mentality will give them a huge advantage in the Augmented Reality Space.

hyperpallium 7y ago

> Apple CEO Tim Cook has previously said that he regards augmented reality as “a big idea, like the smartphone,” IDK about the timeline, but inevitable that they'll want to do it. A heads-up display enables larger displays and smaller devices, and seems inevitable to me, too. Google Glass seemed to fail because of privacy. But subtracting the camera was too much for Google engineers to bear... in contrast, Apple has a history of subtracting features when necessary. They can also design cool eye-wear. The only problem with my theory is that, without a camera, it isn't "AR"...

woah 7y ago
The problem with Google Glass was that it was completely useless. The only feature it had was taking pictures with the camera and viewing notification pop ups one at a time. If it had a use, then the awkward start where people got mad about the camera would be remembered as a brief anomaly, like horse riders getting mad about cars.
- hyperpallium 7y ago
  Was the display that low-res? You couldn't watch video, browse the web, read pdf's, lookup maps etc? EDIT It was 640×360. 360p is low, but typical for mobile youtube not so long ago. You can get an 80x45 xterm, with an 8x8 font.
  - woah 7y ago
    You could theoretically have done any of those things, but it really would have sucked.
    - hyperpallium 7y ago
      Is it just the resolution (which could be improved) or something else?
      - woah 7y ago

foobiekr 7y ago

Apple is not a parts manufacturer/inventor; they assemble parts wonderfully with, on occasion, some customization, so the obvious question is: where are the displays? Diffractive waveguides are a very disappointing display for most uses; not bright enough, poor FOV, bleeding, etc. For a summary, see [1]. Without an external vendor to make the breakthrough in displays, Apple is in the same position as everyone else - talking about an AR future that looks great until you get there. [1] https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-making-good-ar-displays-so-hard-daniel-wagner/ https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-making-good-ar-displays-s...

pokstad 7y ago
MicroLED in Apple Watch seems to be a step in that direction: https://9to5mac.com/2019/07/22/microled-apple-watch-report/ https://9to5mac.com/2019/07/22/microled-apple-watch-report/
coldtea 7y ago
>Apple is not a parts manufacturer/inventor Manufacturer maybe not, but inventor? They have all kinds of patents and inventions of their own, their own CPUs and processing units, etc... >they assemble parts wonderfully with, on occasion, some customization They order custom parts more often than not, with very heavy customization. Does anybody think that the displays for a 2022 Apple VR device (assuming the rumor is true) would be seen anywhere outside of Apple labs, and be e.g. available as off-the-shelve parts with merely "some customization" required on top in 2019?
- coldtea 7y ago
  Come to think of it, grandparent was probably thinking of the desktop space -- where Apple basically uses Intel, AMD, etc parts + some modifications. But that's absolutely not the case in the iOS, Apple Watch, etc space. They make their own everything, from best of breed mobile CPU designs, to custom DSPs that are the 2019 1000x equivalents of the Amiga of yore (remember Paula, Denise, Agnus?), own boards, and everything in between.
1auralynn 7y ago

chooseaname 7y ago

I must be the odd man out. I don't want something that I have to wear. I wear glasses and contacts and I don't want to wear those either. I see AR as being great as, say, a HUD in a car. But I just don't want wearables.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
rglover 7y ago
Think in terms of iteration. On your desk > on your lap > in your pocket > on your wrist > on your face > on your eyes > in your body.
- chooseaname 7y ago
  This is even worse. I want to be able to disconnect and just ... be human.
  - Aperocky 7y ago
    But you can always disconnect, there's no reason that you can't put your cellphone or even a physical connection to brain on airplane mode.

KoftaBob 7y ago

I hope they take the approach that Focals by North did with their smart glasses. Non-obtrusive heads up display for notifications/navigation, and glasses that actually look like normal glasses.

akl_bh 7y ago

I somehow read this as the code name for Glasses is "Apple Eyes".

dawg- 7y ago
Or maybe just 'i'? The ultimate evolution of product names.