15 ms·

Apple’s Best Hope for New Headset: a Smartwatch-Like Trajectory

109 points by carlycue 4y ago

tracerbulletx 4y ago
Until the technology exists that can make something that looks like cool glasses with a mixed reality hud that you can wear all of the time like airPods or the watch they should stay out of this business.
carlycue 4y ago
https://archive.vn/yYBvR https://archive.vn/yYBvR
bwb 4y ago
When do we get updates on their internal stock buy/sells :)
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
smoldesu 4y ago
> With that in mind, executives are striking a realistic tone within the company. This isn’t going to be a hit product right out of the gate. But it could follow a similar trajectory as the Apple Watch. Their confidence is blinding.
- Overtonwindow 4y ago
  Can you elaborate? I have not found a use for a VR headset or the Apple Watch, beyond as a toy, or fashion accessory. Even then, it's been so long since I've worn a watch that wearing a watch is awkward. Yet apparently Apple sells a lot of them, and it is the smart watch with the highest number of global sales.
  - nunodonato 4y ago
    Apple watch has its use as... a watch, fitness bracelet, health monitor, etc. Lots of people wear one for the many features it provides. A VR headset is quite more challenging, especially because we all know Apple is not a big reference in gaming...
    - UnpossibleJim 4y ago
      This! I have resisted the Apple platform due to personal tastes but if they get the blood sugar monitor working (which they say they're close to), I'll switch my entire platmorm ecosystem over to Apple for that one specific feature.
    - lockhouse 4y ago
      For Apple to find success here, I think they will need to provide a compelling mix of gaming and productivity killer apps and strong tie-ins with the rest of the Apple ecosystem.
  - twalichiewicz 4y ago
    Anecdotally I was in a similar mindset about the Apple Watch for a while after the novelty wore off. I found the notification functionality (my main use case when I first got it) incredibly distracting, and having to remember to charge it constantly annoying. So I stopped actively wearing it for a period of time. It was only once I started using it for its health tracking capabilities and turned off many of the annoying notifications that I started regularly wearing it. Is it as essentially as having my phone with me when I leave the house? Ultimately, no, and it does require more thought about how to squeeze the most utility out of it (when compared to a smartphone) but I think the reason it’s so popular is the flexibility it affords: - Sport tracking watches are great at tracking everything down to a fine detail BUT you wouldn’t want to be seen wearing them out to a dinner - Traditional (non-smart) watches look very nice as a fashion accessory BUT are useless for fitness and integrating other data into the faster-to-read watch form factor
  - mpweiher 4y ago
    I was super-skeptical about the Apple Watch. Particularly as it didn't show the time. (Initial versions didn't have enough power to keep the display on all the time). Apple finally got me by fixing that and by making their phones too large to carry around while running. Grrr. But glad they did. It's been eye-opening. The fitness and sleep tracking are fantastic, and if you are having issues in that area, potentially life-changing. I was also resisting contactless payment, being a typical German "cash is good" guy. And I still think cash is good. But during the pandemic everything went contactless, and Apply Pay with the watch is just super convenient. Always there, no PIN to enter or signature to verify, ever. Life-saver when my wallet got stolen on holiday. And of course super-comfy listening to podcasts, books or music while exercising or on public transport. Since I got it with the cell radio, I nowadays often just leave my phone at home. Who needs to carry that around? And no phone, no social media :-)
- lockhouse 4y ago
  https://www.counterpointresearch.com/global-smartwatch-shipments-market-share/ https://www.counterpointresearch.com/global-smartwatch-shipm... If it follows the Apple Watch, then it will be the undisputed market leader in the product segment, which honestly I think it will. The competition is very weak. Meta's efforts have largely failed with the MetaVerse and their whole ecosystem seams very stagnant. Valve and HTC aren't doing much in this space. Sony's PSVR is promising, but it is completely locked into the PlayStation ecosystem, so I see it being limited just to first person games for the most part. Microsoft has completely abandoned the consumer market with HoloLens and prefer to sell very expensive headsets to industry and the military instead. This is a very ripe market for Apple to disrupt if they can execute well. Very reminiscent of the smart watch market before the Apple Watch.
  - smoldesu 4y ago
    I'm not sure if I agree. What is there to disrupt? Really think about that statement for a minute. Maybe telepresence if you market it right, but the money is all in gaming and social use. And if you're gonna buy a headset, would you rather get the $300 one with Beat Saber and VR Chat, or cough up $3,000 for FaceTime in VR? I think Meta has done all they can here. It's frankly a shock they managed to sell over 10 million Quest units, it would be a miracle if Apple can ship over a million at the price they're considering. Even if they do get the coveted iPhone-level install-base (fat chance), Apple cut ties with industry standards like OpenXR and SteamVR years ago. Their entire ecosystem will have to get built up from scratch, and they'll also have to fend off competitors selling units at literally 10% of the price. For Apple to become the undisputed market leader in this product segment, they'd need a lot more than just a headset that exists. This project is looking less Apple Watch and more Apple Newton.
    - dev_tty01 4y ago
      Well said. There is no Apple-scale market to disrupt. If the largest market for the wearable remains as gaming, Apple is in a very poor position since they have always only begrudgingly embraced gaming. This isn't about disruption, this is about creating a new market. If I think of myself as an example, I don't have interest in the gaming angle. If it is comfortable enough and the experience is great, I might buy it for telepresence, if for no other reason than richer visits with my children on the other side of the country. Maybe there is some other use I would buy into, but I'm sure not seeing it yet.
- gumby 4y ago
  This was the framing of the iphone as well: “We hope to eventually reach 1% of the market”.
nunodonato 4y ago
I wonder if we'll now see "VR was a bad bet", when everyone is turning into LLMs and hoping Apples comes up with something on their own.
- Despegar 4y ago
  Apple will likely make all the money from it in the end anyway.
- fullshark 4y ago
  Maybe for FB, a web service, but Apple's competitive advantage is hardware/surfaces. Can't imagine they think betting on the headset is a bad move just from a risk management perspective in case it takes off.
- adfm 4y ago
  What if LLMs are the killer app? https://lukashoel.github.io/text-to-room/ https://lukashoel.github.io/text-to-room/
  - bastawhiz 4y ago
    I'm unconvinced that actually making the content is the problem. We had SketchUp fifteen years ago and that made it stupid easy to make some really killer 3d content. I don't think being able to use natural language removes the barriers to it taking off. The real problem isn't the shapes (there's plenty of free meshes out there), it's making them interactive, which is a complicated problem that extends well beyond the capabilities of our current generation of LLMs. Just look at Roblox: it's successful because you can make the world do stuff. But we can be pretty sure that just making VR/AR Roblox doesn't make a killer app. The challenge that a killer app for VR/AR needs to overcome is being more than a glorified art gallery.
    - adfm 4y ago
      Oh, you want interactively? https://instruct-nerf2nerf.github.io/ https://instruct-nerf2nerf.github.io/
andsoitis 4y ago
Mixed reality headset, not virtual reality headset.
anonymouse008 4y ago
This will be as successful as Animojis. This headset will have a loyal customer base, will make a big splash, but will not transform computing, creative work, or anything for the everyday user. Apple Watch got so extremely lucky. I do not ever want to see Apple make product decisions like 'well this worked, so let's see if this will, too.' There is zero taste in that, zero craftsmanship, it's just AppleGPT Product Edition. [not done]: Have we really all forgotten how we all fell on our collective a** we were when we saw Mac, iPod, M1, iPhone? How hard is it to know - "guess what, this was kinda 'meh'" vs. "well that changes everything"?
- CharlesW 4y ago
  > This headset will have a loyal customer base, will make a big splash, but will not transform computing, creative work, or anything for the everyday user. Oooh, I love these "No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame."-type proclamations. > Apple Watch got so extremely lucky. Breathtaking.
- DantesKite 4y ago
  How much would you be willing to bet on this?
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - anonymouse008 4y ago
    Probably more than you're comfortable with. Seriously reach out to the email in profile.
- cjdoc29 4y ago
  I am doubtful their VR product will be great if released within this or next year. > Apple Watch got so extremely lucky But given that others have tried and arguably failed to have the same impact, this is not sizably attributed to luck at all.
  - 4y ago
root_axis 4y ago
My prediction: it will suck. Why? All AR devices suck, the tech just isn't there.
- paxys 4y ago
  More than that, I think the underlying problem is that people simply don't want VR/AR. Decades of science fiction writing has convinced us that it is the future, but like..why?
  - staminade 4y ago
    Because as depicted in scf-fi, VR would be amazing. The ability to plug-in, or walk onto a holodeck, and frictionlessly experience literally any experience, in perfect, complete sensory detail. Believing people wouldn't want that means disregarding human nature entirely. The problem with VR/AR is that they anything but frictionless or perfect. They are expensive, uncomfortable and limited. They are a million miles away from what's depicted in sci-fi and likely will be for decades, perhaps hundreds of years. If anything, the sci-fi dream works against them by illustrating just what a stark difference there is between fiction and (artificial) reality.
    - JKCalhoun 4y ago
      Yeah, but that's not a headset — that's more like being jacked into the matrix (or "Brainscan" (1994) if you like). We may still have another 50 years before that is ready.
  - dmead 4y ago
    One decade. Just the one. Maybe one and a half. Most science fiction doesn't care about VR.
  - Duralias 4y ago
    As someone enthusiastic about it, VR is unlikely to go fully mainstream, however it will definitely still exist, but AR is a completely different beast. AR glasses could replace your phone, TV and computer monitors. Of course we are a bit away from that future but just replacing screens alone has the capability to shake up the world.
rektide 4y ago
As someone who really does enjoy being terminally online, but who also enjoys being out in the world, I have to say I'm kind of excited about the possibility here. The whole wearable & ubiquitous computing dream greatly motivated me as a grade schooler. The idea was compelling then & still interesting/hopeful now. Given the specs (below) of the hallmark display, the p4 Private Eye (1989), I am excited to see what we can do. And Apple's general competency at hardware will be interesting to see at play as we go-forth-again: > Mounted on a pair of glasses, with a 720 x 280 pixel red monochrome screen in a 8.89 x 3.81 x 3.18mm casing, the actual display measured 1.25-inches diagonally but appeared as though you were viewing a 15-inch monitor from 18-inches away. The possibility of me owning an Apple product is up from 0%.
paxys 4y ago
Apple has come a long way from the time when not even the engineering team working on a product would know what it really was until Steve Jobs unveiled it on stage. Now everything gets leaked like at every other company. Did Apple even have a hundred executives in 2008?
- nr2x 4y ago
  I don’t think it’s really accurate to call anything coming from Gurman/Bloomberg a “leak”. I think leadership just use him to signal to Wall Street what their road map is. This is intentional.
- JKCalhoun 4y ago
  The "Top 100" thing has been going on for some time. The first I heard about it was certainly when Steve Jobs returned. In fact I remember it struck me how "Jobsian" it was: to create in-the-circle and out-of-the-circle groups. Unsurprisingly this is when you started seeing political jockeying, coattail riding and all the other rather gross human behaviors I had not experienced at Apple up until then.
  - randomifcpfan 4y ago
    Heh, you may have been lucky. I worked at Apple during the middle part of the no-Jobs era, and I remember there was plenty of political intrigue between teams. Mac vs Apple vs Newton vs Draco, Blue vs Pink vs AUX vs Red. Many different hardware projects. Engineering vs HIG vs Research. The engineering culture was good about coming together to ship the next big thing, but in between big things there was tons of infighting.
  - andsoitis 4y ago
    > it was: to create in-the-circle and out-of-the-circle groups Decision-making doesn’t scale, so there’s a practical reason not to have thousands and thousands of people in that decision-making ring.
  - belugacat 4y ago
    > when Steve returned […] is when you started seeing political jockeying, coattail riding and all the other rather gross human behaviors I had not experienced at Apple up until then. What do you make of the fact that this is also when the company went from nearly bankrupt to wildly successful? Is making humans compete (within ethical boundaries that should be set by labor law etc of course) a great way to get the best out of them?
voisin 4y ago
Initial product will be weak, just like the original iPhone (no App Store, slow, poor battery life, etc) and Apple Watch (no development, no health tracking, small screen, poor battery life). The thing about Apple is not to judge based on v.1 but to watch the iteration. They are the most persistent company in the world. Compare to Google which seems to have ADHD. Apple will iterate and iterate and in 5 years we’ll all be shocked that it is an “overnight success” and undisputed market leader with an unassailable ecosystem. If their stock tanks after the release I’ll see it as a good buying opportunity!
- paxys 4y ago
  Where was this persistent iteration and overnight success with Homepod, Airpower, butterfly keyboards, touchbar, force touch, MobileMe, Ping? Apple has had its share of failures like any other company, and kills products like any other company. There is plenty of precedence for their AR headset to just fizzle out.
  - dmead 4y ago
    It's likely that it will just fizzle out. It's a big ship and getting it to produce something new I'm sure is no easy task. Good for them that meta has shown this is a dead end. I'm sure they're ready to cut bait on this.
  - dev_tty01 4y ago
    I don't disagree with your examples. Yep, they've made plenty of mistakes. A key difference here is that Apple has been spent many years developing and promoting substantial AR frameworks. It has been a huge investment. It at least appears that this huge investment has all been leading up to some sort of vision based wearable. If it does turn out to be a failure, the magnitude of the failure will be much larger than the above examples.
    - smoldesu 4y ago
      > Apple has been spent many years developing and promoting substantial AR frameworks ...dovetailed with their cut support for SteamVR and the OpenXR standard. In-house APIs are a nice investment, but arguably pointless when everyone's content is built on pre-existing and open frameworks. This whole project feels like a side-pot to me, and Apple themselves are clearly afraid to commit.
KaiserPro 4y ago
hahaha, meta are going to have to actually compete. I suspect the MR experience will suck from apple, but the reality distortion field thats still lingering will tide them through. At least we know that the apple device, whilst limited in screens and slam, will have a decent software stack that will put consumer's ease of use first, rather than bullshit promotion driven dev from oculus.
- paxys 4y ago
  This is in fact the best thing that can happen to Meta. At the moment no one really knows or cares about VR/AR. If Apple successfully takes it mainstream then they would have done what years of Meta's marketing campaigns couldn't, and suddenly they'll have a real market to compete in. Heck they don't even have to be better at it. Playing the Google/Android role is good enough.
  - JKCalhoun 4y ago
    > and suddenly they'll have a real market to compete in With ads. Good luck, Meta.
    - smoldesu 4y ago
      FWIW, this is exactly the sort of 400 IQ chess play Mark Zuckerberg has been playing for the past half-decade, and the one this website has kicked the piss out of him for time immemorial. So which is it? Is VR a dehumanizing medium with no redeeming qualities, or is it a horizon of content and potential yet to be unlocked? It feels like HN's opinion on it changes every 15 minutes. Personally, I think VR is a bust. That being said, there is not an ice cube's chance in hell of Apple out-maneuvering Meta here. Zuck will happily pour billions into this spite machine, he already has. On top of that, he has the leverage of a more "open" platform (will Apple give you Root?) and larger install-base. All Zuckerberg needs to 'win' is a cross-platform killer app. If Apple's hardest spin on this is "FaceTime with 3D characters", their product is toast. A cross-platform protocol/experience will become the dominant player, and everyone will gravitate towards the cheapest option.
iamleppert 4y ago
HoloLens is (soon to be was) a great AR device. Certainly useable and competent but it suffered from the same issue over and over: once the gee wiz demo was over, outside of a few very niche uses, people went back to using their laptops and smartphones. Because it’s easier to just pull out your smartphone, get whatever you need done, then put it back in your pocket. This rapid and random access is why people love smartphones so much. With a headset, you either have to be wearing it all the time (something people aren’t willing to do; it’s like wearing sunglasses indoors no matter how good the waveguides are) or have to take the time to take a fragile headset out of its case, put it on your head, adjust to the complete take over of your field of view & environment, then figure out what you need to do using an input modality (be it voice, gestures, an input peripheral or some combination) that is far inferior to a touch interface for the 90% of tasks. People like to claim that AR is less intrusive than a smartphone but all the cases they present are carefully crafted demo’s. If you watch actual people use AR devices trying to accomplish some task you immediately notice that isn’t true at all. It will be interesting to see how Apple has addressed these problems but AR needs to be better at doing tasks average people can already do well with a smartphone, and like I mentioned you have an uphill battle due to the headset form factor alone.
- randomifcpfan 4y ago
  As I understand it, Apple is expected to only introduce a VR headset this year, like the new Sony VR headset or the high end Oculus. Apple’s AR headset is still many years away.
  - p1esk 4y ago
    The article is about “mixed reality” headset, whatever that is.
    - sp332 4y ago
      Mixed reality can refer to both AR and VR, so it's actually less specific. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/mixed-reality/discover/mixed-reality#the-mixed-reality-spectrum https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/mixed-reality/disc...
indymike 4y ago
One of the biggest problems with the metaverse is content. It's pretty clear that AI can do a great job generating the artwork needed for great 3d content. It is very expensive and time consuming to do so with human artists... which makes me sad.
- TheOtherHobbes 4y ago
  AI has done a great-ish job with 2D content. It's very impressive superficially, but flawed when you examine the details. 3D content - particularly live procedural 3D animated content based on large models - is maybe 15-20 years away. It needs a couple of orders of magnitude more processing power. I wouldn't be surprised if that's Apple's planned destination. If so, it's going to take a while to get there. This version seems more like a toe in the water. It will appeal to early adopters and a few gamers, but it's not going to be a game changer.
etempleton 4y ago
If it is as described I think it is insane for Apple to launch this product. Comparing it to the state of the Apple Watch is pretty strange because if nothing else the Apple Watch was functional, self contained, worked, and was under $1,000. Even if it didn’t work you could put it on and ignore it. A VR/AR headset is nothing like that and at $3,000 is a significant investment for most everyone. But who knows. I haven’t seen it. Maybe it will be amazing and exactly what the VR space needs. I suspect it is a really fancy Meta Quest with significantly more processing power. Certainly Apple is in a unique position with their Apple Silicon. But will Apple open it up enough for gaming if that is what it is? Because that has been the problem in the past. Gamers aren’t going to want to buy this thing unless you can plug it into a PC and have it function as a regular VR headset and the Meta Quest crowd isn’t going to shell out 3 grand.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- junofan 4y ago
  Bet your manager’s manager’s manager will get one. Then your manager’s manager. Then your manager. If you sit on Zoom calls all day it sounds amazing.
  - etempleton 4y ago
    What part of having something strapped to your face all day while on Zoom calls sounds amazing? As someone who spends all day on zoom calls this is the last thing I want.
    - p1esk 4y ago
      Not having to sit sounds pretty amazing. Assuming it can match my monitor quality. I think of a headset as headphones for your eyes.
      - etempleton 4y ago
        What do you look like to other people on the Zoom call? What are they seeing? If it is your avatar that is going to be a no go for most executives. They want to see your real face.
whywhywhywhy 4y ago
I’d think they’re hoping to do way better than smartwatches with this investment.
tomatotomato37 4y ago
I'm interested what this will look like in 5 years. Apple's ecosystem is currently hostile to the largest market for A/VR so far, gamers. However if there is one company I would bet to pull a completely brand new market segment out of their ass it would be Apple. Should be exciting to watch.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- nottorp 4y ago
  Maybe, or it would end up like the watch, i.e. the most expensive fitness band. Which is both pretty niche and not a brand new market segment. It was new when fitbit and the likes were doing it.
- scarface74 4y ago
  Apple makes more on games via iOS than all of the console makers
arnaudsm 4y ago
I may be anti-Apple, I am excited for this release. All the XR headsets I've owned had terrible UX and no product vision whatsoever. Just "make a bad videogame and users will find something to do with it". The Quest pro has hilariously bad software. Apple excels at opinionated product vision on new form factors and finding new killer features. And that's what the dying AR space needs the most.
xiaolingxiao 4y ago
Has anyone heard of this launch will be associated with a launch of an SDK for app developers as well?
Overtonwindow 4y ago
I've always found the Apple Watch to be more of a fashion accessory or a toy. People seem to really love them and showing them off.
- kibwen 4y ago
  Apple is a luxury fashion company first, and a tech company second.
jdlyga 4y ago
This sounds like Apple strong-arming their staff to try and rally around a mediocre product. The Apple Watch comparisons don't make sense. Even the Apple Watch Series 0 was totally worth it. You could get notifications on your wrist, fitness tracking (totally replacing RunKeeper and similar apps at the time), pause music, locate your phone, etc. I happily used the Series 0 for 3 years.
m348e912 4y ago
Paul Krugman famously said in 1998 that "the growth of the growth of the Internet will slow drastically [...] the Internet’s impact on the economy has been no greater than the fax machine’s" I am going to go out on a limb and say unless headsets change profoundly they will have limited impact on most people's daily lives. I'll have to remind myself to come back in a few years and check this post.
dagorenouf 4y ago
The reason the Apple Watch took a few years to get traction is that: - Apple initially positioned it as a fashion accessory, which few people cared about - the public wanted it to be like a smartphone on your wrist, and were let down by the limited features Then Apple realized the value was in the health features. They started positioning it properly and people bought it more. All at the same time the tech improvements made the watch more capable and started becoming even more useful. But at the core, it’s the health focus + typical Apple ease of use and quality that made it take off. I can see the same trajectory happen with VR: - Apple starts positioning it as a metaverse / HoloLens type headset, which few people care about - People assume it’s an « iMac in VR » type device and get disappointed that it isn’t. But over time, Apple realizes that the number one value is in gaming, and gradually shifts focus and positioning. It attracts more and more people while at the same time the tech improves. Then eventually the tech allows for a headset that can fit in a smaller for factor and truly helps people beyond gaming. As an enhancement to day to day tasks with light enough glasses for example.
- abledon 4y ago
  also battery life still sucks on this generation. Once it lasts a week or two, then I'll be interested.
  - brokenmachine 4y ago
    I'd want one day battery life for any device, like my phone. Before bed I plug in all my devices.
    - piceas 4y ago
      I want at least a week. Every day means that a charger of some sort is needed for weekends away etc which suddenly is more stuff to manage. One can dream. I wear a solar eco drive that is coming up on ten years with the original battery. Not exactly comparable but the middle ground is unimpressive.
- thiht 4y ago
  > But over time, Apple realizes that the number one value is in gaming Except that Apple sucks at gaming. They just don't get the market. There's no way they'll make a product whose primary focus is gaming. If they do they'll fail hard.
specialist 4y ago
Jobs referred to early Apple TV as a "hobby". For years. Time enough for a nascent market to mature, for the technology to catch up with the ambitions. That's how Apple/Cook should refer to Apple VR/AR. Under promise, over deliver. Projecting 1m unit sales the first year is nutty. Sure, they might sell that many. And then what? Also, the initial models should be over priced, specifically targeting sexy use cases. Ridiculously expensive, maximally awesome, hype building applications. Like telemedicine, protein folding, and walking tours of fictional settlements on Mars. Let people imagine and build boutique applications for a couple years, normalize the emerging market, before introducing a consumer mass market model.
- illiarian 4y ago
  > Under promise, over deliver. But Apple TV still hasn't delivered, and its first version was released 16 years ago. It's still unusable for anything but the most basic tasks, and is a mess as a product: it fails as amedia hub, it fails as a smart device hub, it fails as a compute hub...
  - Jcowell 4y ago
    Does it? As a device I want to hook up to a TV to watch streaming services without worrying that my TV is sending snapshots to its manufacturer it works pretty well.
andsoitis 4y ago
Ideas for product names: - Clear Vision - Reality Field - Apple Reality - Reality HD - eXtended Reality
- popcalc 4y ago
  Reality Distortion Field :)
- alden5 4y ago
  apple glass would be my guess
- tyfon 4y ago
  I think they will use the really innovative iGlass :)
xrguy 4y ago
Apple entering the AR VR XR space may be a good thing, more competition = better products?
glass3 4y ago
In which way will they make it different from the Meta headsets? The Apple branding won't be enough to turn an average headset into a successful product. My guess would be that their headset is just a set of goggles that requires an iPhone for computation. Then, they can sell them for $300 or even $150. The article suggests that VR is a tool for long-distance relationships. For $300, that could become possible.
- r0fl 4y ago
  Apple sells WHEELS for a Mac Pro for $700! You think that same Apple will sell, what may be a totally new revolutionary product of less than half the cost of WHEELS? Try again.
  - rocketbop 4y ago
    > Apple sells WHEELS for a Mac Pro for $700 Not many of them though. AirPods are 200-300 and an absolute cash cow, and probably system sellers for Mac and iPhone.
    - r0fl 4y ago
      AirPods are not as complex as virtual reality goggles. It’s like comparing apples to VR goggles.
      - rocketbop 4y ago
        Sure. I don’t agree with OP that they can be sold at 300. Something that does less for cheaper might be an easier sell though then more for more.
- Jcowell 4y ago
  > The Apple branding won't be enough to turn an average headset into a successful product. For me the Apple Branding is enough. One of the biggest barriers for me picking up the Oculus Quest is that it’s attached to Facebook.
status200 4y ago
I'm an Apple user and love all things VR / AR, probably spend 10hr/wk using Quest 2. Tempted to get the Reality Pro/One on launch, but at $3k and the tech team saying that not only will there be nothing exciting software-wise at launch, but a cheaper version and a more advanced version are on the horizon (no pun intended), I can't justify getting it. If someone like me who is basically the perfect demographic crossover doesn't want it, not sure who will... but time will tell.
Jam-O 4y ago
Maybe Apple could market this thing simply as a hi-res monitor and focus only on productivity side. If they have dual 5K displays and lenses, that seems like a safer bet and avoid the metaverse and gaming altogether. They charged more than 3000 for their pro monitors. Recently they have Wi-Fi 6E across new products and it could be for pushing compressed pixels to the headset which needs only to be a thin client like the studio display.
- bredren 4y ago
  I use the XDR Pro Display and have wondered if these will work as a replacement for a large high res monitor. I tried productivity / desktop on my quest 2 and it was awful.
speakingortho 4y ago
This device needs to have WebXR support on it, day one. This will enable VR browser games, and immersive web applications for retail. Also important to ensure we have cross-platform metaverse experiences.
costanzaDynasty 4y ago
The simple things I want from Apple, that seemly would be not to difficult from a company with so much money and talent are left to linger. But every half baked idea is rushed to the front of the line. If during the VR headset announcement Xbox was somehow involved, it would get my attention though.
karaterobot 4y ago
Did we go back to thinking we wanted to be less connected to the world around us, and we're looking for a $3k device to help us do that? I thought maybe society was admitting there are major, inadequately examined problems with device addiction, social alienation, mental health, and so on. I guess maybe we were just in a lull between product launches, and I mistook that silence for introspection. My bad.
thih9 4y ago
Headset is something that you wear, there’s a personal connection and an aspect of fashion. Apple can be fashion too. As long as the product is closer to AirPods Max than Mac Pro, people will buy it.
MagicMoonlight 4y ago
I’m never going to spend £3000 on a headset. For that I could get an absolute top of the line desktop. Hell I could get a car for that. Both would be far more useful. It’s just ludicrous money for a shit product. Even the first full VR headsets came nowhere close to that price.
GeekyBear 4y ago
It's worth remembering that the first headset is aimed at developers, and priced like Hololens. This isn't the less expensive mass market consumer device that people have been calling "Apple Glasses".
billychuck21st 4y ago
I think entertainment is still the biggest market for AR/VR, Apple is investing $1B in original content next, won't be surprised some of that goes to bespoke production for the new headset. Paired with a powerful apple tv and apple watch (doube as a gesture remote?), I can see some creative content revolutionize home entertainment.

109 points by carlycue 4y ago

Until the technology exists that can make something that looks like cool glasses with a mixed reality hud that you can wear all of the time like airPods or the watch they should stay out of this business.

carlycue 4y ago

https://archive.vn/yYBvR https://archive.vn/yYBvR

bwb 4y ago

When do we get updates on their internal stock buy/sells :)

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

smoldesu 4y ago

> With that in mind, executives are striking a realistic tone within the company. This isn’t going to be a hit product right out of the gate. But it could follow a similar trajectory as the Apple Watch. Their confidence is blinding.

Overtonwindow 4y ago
Can you elaborate? I have not found a use for a VR headset or the Apple Watch, beyond as a toy, or fashion accessory. Even then, it's been so long since I've worn a watch that wearing a watch is awkward. Yet apparently Apple sells a lot of them, and it is the smart watch with the highest number of global sales.
- nunodonato 4y ago
  Apple watch has its use as... a watch, fitness bracelet, health monitor, etc. Lots of people wear one for the many features it provides. A VR headset is quite more challenging, especially because we all know Apple is not a big reference in gaming...
  - UnpossibleJim 4y ago
    This! I have resisted the Apple platform due to personal tastes but if they get the blood sugar monitor working (which they say they're close to), I'll switch my entire platmorm ecosystem over to Apple for that one specific feature.
  - lockhouse 4y ago
    For Apple to find success here, I think they will need to provide a compelling mix of gaming and productivity killer apps and strong tie-ins with the rest of the Apple ecosystem.
- twalichiewicz 4y ago
  Anecdotally I was in a similar mindset about the Apple Watch for a while after the novelty wore off. I found the notification functionality (my main use case when I first got it) incredibly distracting, and having to remember to charge it constantly annoying. So I stopped actively wearing it for a period of time. It was only once I started using it for its health tracking capabilities and turned off many of the annoying notifications that I started regularly wearing it. Is it as essentially as having my phone with me when I leave the house? Ultimately, no, and it does require more thought about how to squeeze the most utility out of it (when compared to a smartphone) but I think the reason it’s so popular is the flexibility it affords: - Sport tracking watches are great at tracking everything down to a fine detail BUT you wouldn’t want to be seen wearing them out to a dinner - Traditional (non-smart) watches look very nice as a fashion accessory BUT are useless for fitness and integrating other data into the faster-to-read watch form factor
- mpweiher 4y ago
  I was super-skeptical about the Apple Watch. Particularly as it didn't show the time. (Initial versions didn't have enough power to keep the display on all the time). Apple finally got me by fixing that and by making their phones too large to carry around while running. Grrr. But glad they did. It's been eye-opening. The fitness and sleep tracking are fantastic, and if you are having issues in that area, potentially life-changing. I was also resisting contactless payment, being a typical German "cash is good" guy. And I still think cash is good. But during the pandemic everything went contactless, and Apply Pay with the watch is just super convenient. Always there, no PIN to enter or signature to verify, ever. Life-saver when my wallet got stolen on holiday. And of course super-comfy listening to podcasts, books or music while exercising or on public transport. Since I got it with the cell radio, I nowadays often just leave my phone at home. Who needs to carry that around? And no phone, no social media :-)
lockhouse 4y ago
https://www.counterpointresearch.com/global-smartwatch-shipments-market-share/ https://www.counterpointresearch.com/global-smartwatch-shipm... If it follows the Apple Watch, then it will be the undisputed market leader in the product segment, which honestly I think it will. The competition is very weak. Meta's efforts have largely failed with the MetaVerse and their whole ecosystem seams very stagnant. Valve and HTC aren't doing much in this space. Sony's PSVR is promising, but it is completely locked into the PlayStation ecosystem, so I see it being limited just to first person games for the most part. Microsoft has completely abandoned the consumer market with HoloLens and prefer to sell very expensive headsets to industry and the military instead. This is a very ripe market for Apple to disrupt if they can execute well. Very reminiscent of the smart watch market before the Apple Watch.
- smoldesu 4y ago
  I'm not sure if I agree. What is there to disrupt? Really think about that statement for a minute. Maybe telepresence if you market it right, but the money is all in gaming and social use. And if you're gonna buy a headset, would you rather get the $300 one with Beat Saber and VR Chat, or cough up $3,000 for FaceTime in VR? I think Meta has done all they can here. It's frankly a shock they managed to sell over 10 million Quest units, it would be a miracle if Apple can ship over a million at the price they're considering. Even if they do get the coveted iPhone-level install-base (fat chance), Apple cut ties with industry standards like OpenXR and SteamVR years ago. Their entire ecosystem will have to get built up from scratch, and they'll also have to fend off competitors selling units at literally 10% of the price. For Apple to become the undisputed market leader in this product segment, they'd need a lot more than just a headset that exists. This project is looking less Apple Watch and more Apple Newton.
  - dev_tty01 4y ago
    Well said. There is no Apple-scale market to disrupt. If the largest market for the wearable remains as gaming, Apple is in a very poor position since they have always only begrudgingly embraced gaming. This isn't about disruption, this is about creating a new market. If I think of myself as an example, I don't have interest in the gaming angle. If it is comfortable enough and the experience is great, I might buy it for telepresence, if for no other reason than richer visits with my children on the other side of the country. Maybe there is some other use I would buy into, but I'm sure not seeing it yet.
gumby 4y ago
This was the framing of the iphone as well: “We hope to eventually reach 1% of the market”.

nunodonato 4y ago

I wonder if we'll now see "VR was a bad bet", when everyone is turning into LLMs and hoping Apples comes up with something on their own.

Despegar 4y ago
Apple will likely make all the money from it in the end anyway.
fullshark 4y ago
Maybe for FB, a web service, but Apple's competitive advantage is hardware/surfaces. Can't imagine they think betting on the headset is a bad move just from a risk management perspective in case it takes off.
adfm 4y ago
What if LLMs are the killer app? https://lukashoel.github.io/text-to-room/ https://lukashoel.github.io/text-to-room/
- bastawhiz 4y ago
  I'm unconvinced that actually making the content is the problem. We had SketchUp fifteen years ago and that made it stupid easy to make some really killer 3d content. I don't think being able to use natural language removes the barriers to it taking off. The real problem isn't the shapes (there's plenty of free meshes out there), it's making them interactive, which is a complicated problem that extends well beyond the capabilities of our current generation of LLMs. Just look at Roblox: it's successful because you can make the world do stuff. But we can be pretty sure that just making VR/AR Roblox doesn't make a killer app. The challenge that a killer app for VR/AR needs to overcome is being more than a glorified art gallery.
  - adfm 4y ago
    Oh, you want interactively? https://instruct-nerf2nerf.github.io/ https://instruct-nerf2nerf.github.io/

andsoitis 4y ago

Mixed reality headset, not virtual reality headset.

anonymouse008 4y ago

This will be as successful as Animojis. This headset will have a loyal customer base, will make a big splash, but will not transform computing, creative work, or anything for the everyday user. Apple Watch got so extremely lucky. I do not ever want to see Apple make product decisions like 'well this worked, so let's see if this will, too.' There is zero taste in that, zero craftsmanship, it's just AppleGPT Product Edition. [not done]: Have we really all forgotten how we all fell on our collective a** we were when we saw Mac, iPod, M1, iPhone? How hard is it to know - "guess what, this was kinda 'meh'" vs. "well that changes everything"?

CharlesW 4y ago
> This headset will have a loyal customer base, will make a big splash, but will not transform computing, creative work, or anything for the everyday user. Oooh, I love these "No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame."-type proclamations. > Apple Watch got so extremely lucky. Breathtaking.
DantesKite 4y ago
How much would you be willing to bet on this?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- anonymouse008 4y ago
  Probably more than you're comfortable with. Seriously reach out to the email in profile.
cjdoc29 4y ago
I am doubtful their VR product will be great if released within this or next year. > Apple Watch got so extremely lucky But given that others have tried and arguably failed to have the same impact, this is not sizably attributed to luck at all.
- 4y ago

root_axis 4y ago

My prediction: it will suck. Why? All AR devices suck, the tech just isn't there.

paxys 4y ago
More than that, I think the underlying problem is that people simply don't want VR/AR. Decades of science fiction writing has convinced us that it is the future, but like..why?
- staminade 4y ago
  Because as depicted in scf-fi, VR would be amazing. The ability to plug-in, or walk onto a holodeck, and frictionlessly experience literally any experience, in perfect, complete sensory detail. Believing people wouldn't want that means disregarding human nature entirely. The problem with VR/AR is that they anything but frictionless or perfect. They are expensive, uncomfortable and limited. They are a million miles away from what's depicted in sci-fi and likely will be for decades, perhaps hundreds of years. If anything, the sci-fi dream works against them by illustrating just what a stark difference there is between fiction and (artificial) reality.
  - JKCalhoun 4y ago
    Yeah, but that's not a headset — that's more like being jacked into the matrix (or "Brainscan" (1994) if you like). We may still have another 50 years before that is ready.
- dmead 4y ago
  One decade. Just the one. Maybe one and a half. Most science fiction doesn't care about VR.
- Duralias 4y ago
  As someone enthusiastic about it, VR is unlikely to go fully mainstream, however it will definitely still exist, but AR is a completely different beast. AR glasses could replace your phone, TV and computer monitors. Of course we are a bit away from that future but just replacing screens alone has the capability to shake up the world.

rektide 4y ago

As someone who really does enjoy being terminally online, but who also enjoys being out in the world, I have to say I'm kind of excited about the possibility here. The whole wearable & ubiquitous computing dream greatly motivated me as a grade schooler. The idea was compelling then & still interesting/hopeful now. Given the specs (below) of the hallmark display, the p4 Private Eye (1989), I am excited to see what we can do. And Apple's general competency at hardware will be interesting to see at play as we go-forth-again: > Mounted on a pair of glasses, with a 720 x 280 pixel red monochrome screen in a 8.89 x 3.81 x 3.18mm casing, the actual display measured 1.25-inches diagonally but appeared as though you were viewing a 15-inch monitor from 18-inches away. The possibility of me owning an Apple product is up from 0%.

paxys 4y ago

Apple has come a long way from the time when not even the engineering team working on a product would know what it really was until Steve Jobs unveiled it on stage. Now everything gets leaked like at every other company. Did Apple even have a hundred executives in 2008?

nr2x 4y ago
I don’t think it’s really accurate to call anything coming from Gurman/Bloomberg a “leak”. I think leadership just use him to signal to Wall Street what their road map is. This is intentional.
JKCalhoun 4y ago
The "Top 100" thing has been going on for some time. The first I heard about it was certainly when Steve Jobs returned. In fact I remember it struck me how "Jobsian" it was: to create in-the-circle and out-of-the-circle groups. Unsurprisingly this is when you started seeing political jockeying, coattail riding and all the other rather gross human behaviors I had not experienced at Apple up until then.
- randomifcpfan 4y ago
  Heh, you may have been lucky. I worked at Apple during the middle part of the no-Jobs era, and I remember there was plenty of political intrigue between teams. Mac vs Apple vs Newton vs Draco, Blue vs Pink vs AUX vs Red. Many different hardware projects. Engineering vs HIG vs Research. The engineering culture was good about coming together to ship the next big thing, but in between big things there was tons of infighting.
- andsoitis 4y ago
  > it was: to create in-the-circle and out-of-the-circle groups Decision-making doesn’t scale, so there’s a practical reason not to have thousands and thousands of people in that decision-making ring.
- belugacat 4y ago
  > when Steve returned […] is when you started seeing political jockeying, coattail riding and all the other rather gross human behaviors I had not experienced at Apple up until then. What do you make of the fact that this is also when the company went from nearly bankrupt to wildly successful? Is making humans compete (within ethical boundaries that should be set by labor law etc of course) a great way to get the best out of them?

voisin 4y ago

Initial product will be weak, just like the original iPhone (no App Store, slow, poor battery life, etc) and Apple Watch (no development, no health tracking, small screen, poor battery life). The thing about Apple is not to judge based on v.1 but to watch the iteration. They are the most persistent company in the world. Compare to Google which seems to have ADHD. Apple will iterate and iterate and in 5 years we’ll all be shocked that it is an “overnight success” and undisputed market leader with an unassailable ecosystem. If their stock tanks after the release I’ll see it as a good buying opportunity!

paxys 4y ago
Where was this persistent iteration and overnight success with Homepod, Airpower, butterfly keyboards, touchbar, force touch, MobileMe, Ping? Apple has had its share of failures like any other company, and kills products like any other company. There is plenty of precedence for their AR headset to just fizzle out.
- dmead 4y ago
  It's likely that it will just fizzle out. It's a big ship and getting it to produce something new I'm sure is no easy task. Good for them that meta has shown this is a dead end. I'm sure they're ready to cut bait on this.
- dev_tty01 4y ago
  I don't disagree with your examples. Yep, they've made plenty of mistakes. A key difference here is that Apple has been spent many years developing and promoting substantial AR frameworks. It has been a huge investment. It at least appears that this huge investment has all been leading up to some sort of vision based wearable. If it does turn out to be a failure, the magnitude of the failure will be much larger than the above examples.
  - smoldesu 4y ago
    > Apple has been spent many years developing and promoting substantial AR frameworks ...dovetailed with their cut support for SteamVR and the OpenXR standard. In-house APIs are a nice investment, but arguably pointless when everyone's content is built on pre-existing and open frameworks. This whole project feels like a side-pot to me, and Apple themselves are clearly afraid to commit.

KaiserPro 4y ago

hahaha, meta are going to have to actually compete. I suspect the MR experience will suck from apple, but the reality distortion field thats still lingering will tide them through. At least we know that the apple device, whilst limited in screens and slam, will have a decent software stack that will put consumer's ease of use first, rather than bullshit promotion driven dev from oculus.

paxys 4y ago
This is in fact the best thing that can happen to Meta. At the moment no one really knows or cares about VR/AR. If Apple successfully takes it mainstream then they would have done what years of Meta's marketing campaigns couldn't, and suddenly they'll have a real market to compete in. Heck they don't even have to be better at it. Playing the Google/Android role is good enough.
- JKCalhoun 4y ago
  > and suddenly they'll have a real market to compete in With ads. Good luck, Meta.
  - smoldesu 4y ago
    FWIW, this is exactly the sort of 400 IQ chess play Mark Zuckerberg has been playing for the past half-decade, and the one this website has kicked the piss out of him for time immemorial. So which is it? Is VR a dehumanizing medium with no redeeming qualities, or is it a horizon of content and potential yet to be unlocked? It feels like HN's opinion on it changes every 15 minutes. Personally, I think VR is a bust. That being said, there is not an ice cube's chance in hell of Apple out-maneuvering Meta here. Zuck will happily pour billions into this spite machine, he already has. On top of that, he has the leverage of a more "open" platform (will Apple give you Root?) and larger install-base. All Zuckerberg needs to 'win' is a cross-platform killer app. If Apple's hardest spin on this is "FaceTime with 3D characters", their product is toast. A cross-platform protocol/experience will become the dominant player, and everyone will gravitate towards the cheapest option.

iamleppert 4y ago

HoloLens is (soon to be was) a great AR device. Certainly useable and competent but it suffered from the same issue over and over: once the gee wiz demo was over, outside of a few very niche uses, people went back to using their laptops and smartphones. Because it’s easier to just pull out your smartphone, get whatever you need done, then put it back in your pocket. This rapid and random access is why people love smartphones so much. With a headset, you either have to be wearing it all the time (something people aren’t willing to do; it’s like wearing sunglasses indoors no matter how good the waveguides are) or have to take the time to take a fragile headset out of its case, put it on your head, adjust to the complete take over of your field of view & environment, then figure out what you need to do using an input modality (be it voice, gestures, an input peripheral or some combination) that is far inferior to a touch interface for the 90% of tasks. People like to claim that AR is less intrusive than a smartphone but all the cases they present are carefully crafted demo’s. If you watch actual people use AR devices trying to accomplish some task you immediately notice that isn’t true at all. It will be interesting to see how Apple has addressed these problems but AR needs to be better at doing tasks average people can already do well with a smartphone, and like I mentioned you have an uphill battle due to the headset form factor alone.

randomifcpfan 4y ago
As I understand it, Apple is expected to only introduce a VR headset this year, like the new Sony VR headset or the high end Oculus. Apple’s AR headset is still many years away.
- p1esk 4y ago
  The article is about “mixed reality” headset, whatever that is.
  - sp332 4y ago
    Mixed reality can refer to both AR and VR, so it's actually less specific. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/mixed-reality/discover/mixed-reality#the-mixed-reality-spectrum https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/mixed-reality/disc...

indymike 4y ago

One of the biggest problems with the metaverse is content. It's pretty clear that AI can do a great job generating the artwork needed for great 3d content. It is very expensive and time consuming to do so with human artists... which makes me sad.

TheOtherHobbes 4y ago
AI has done a great-ish job with 2D content. It's very impressive superficially, but flawed when you examine the details. 3D content - particularly live procedural 3D animated content based on large models - is maybe 15-20 years away. It needs a couple of orders of magnitude more processing power. I wouldn't be surprised if that's Apple's planned destination. If so, it's going to take a while to get there. This version seems more like a toe in the water. It will appeal to early adopters and a few gamers, but it's not going to be a game changer.

etempleton 4y ago

If it is as described I think it is insane for Apple to launch this product. Comparing it to the state of the Apple Watch is pretty strange because if nothing else the Apple Watch was functional, self contained, worked, and was under $1,000. Even if it didn’t work you could put it on and ignore it. A VR/AR headset is nothing like that and at $3,000 is a significant investment for most everyone. But who knows. I haven’t seen it. Maybe it will be amazing and exactly what the VR space needs. I suspect it is a really fancy Meta Quest with significantly more processing power. Certainly Apple is in a unique position with their Apple Silicon. But will Apple open it up enough for gaming if that is what it is? Because that has been the problem in the past. Gamers aren’t going to want to buy this thing unless you can plug it into a PC and have it function as a regular VR headset and the Meta Quest crowd isn’t going to shell out 3 grand.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
junofan 4y ago
Bet your manager’s manager’s manager will get one. Then your manager’s manager. Then your manager. If you sit on Zoom calls all day it sounds amazing.
- etempleton 4y ago
  What part of having something strapped to your face all day while on Zoom calls sounds amazing? As someone who spends all day on zoom calls this is the last thing I want.
  - p1esk 4y ago
    Not having to sit sounds pretty amazing. Assuming it can match my monitor quality. I think of a headset as headphones for your eyes.
    - etempleton 4y ago
      What do you look like to other people on the Zoom call? What are they seeing? If it is your avatar that is going to be a no go for most executives. They want to see your real face.

whywhywhywhy 4y ago

I’d think they’re hoping to do way better than smartwatches with this investment.

tomatotomato37 4y ago

I'm interested what this will look like in 5 years. Apple's ecosystem is currently hostile to the largest market for A/VR so far, gamers. However if there is one company I would bet to pull a completely brand new market segment out of their ass it would be Apple. Should be exciting to watch.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
nottorp 4y ago
Maybe, or it would end up like the watch, i.e. the most expensive fitness band. Which is both pretty niche and not a brand new market segment. It was new when fitbit and the likes were doing it.
scarface74 4y ago
Apple makes more on games via iOS than all of the console makers

arnaudsm 4y ago

I may be anti-Apple, I am excited for this release. All the XR headsets I've owned had terrible UX and no product vision whatsoever. Just "make a bad videogame and users will find something to do with it". The Quest pro has hilariously bad software. Apple excels at opinionated product vision on new form factors and finding new killer features. And that's what the dying AR space needs the most.

xiaolingxiao 4y ago

Has anyone heard of this launch will be associated with a launch of an SDK for app developers as well?

Overtonwindow 4y ago

I've always found the Apple Watch to be more of a fashion accessory or a toy. People seem to really love them and showing them off.

kibwen 4y ago
Apple is a luxury fashion company first, and a tech company second.

jdlyga 4y ago

This sounds like Apple strong-arming their staff to try and rally around a mediocre product. The Apple Watch comparisons don't make sense. Even the Apple Watch Series 0 was totally worth it. You could get notifications on your wrist, fitness tracking (totally replacing RunKeeper and similar apps at the time), pause music, locate your phone, etc. I happily used the Series 0 for 3 years.

m348e912 4y ago

Paul Krugman famously said in 1998 that "the growth of the growth of the Internet will slow drastically [...] the Internet’s impact on the economy has been no greater than the fax machine’s" I am going to go out on a limb and say unless headsets change profoundly they will have limited impact on most people's daily lives. I'll have to remind myself to come back in a few years and check this post.

dagorenouf 4y ago

The reason the Apple Watch took a few years to get traction is that: - Apple initially positioned it as a fashion accessory, which few people cared about - the public wanted it to be like a smartphone on your wrist, and were let down by the limited features Then Apple realized the value was in the health features. They started positioning it properly and people bought it more. All at the same time the tech improvements made the watch more capable and started becoming even more useful. But at the core, it’s the health focus + typical Apple ease of use and quality that made it take off. I can see the same trajectory happen with VR: - Apple starts positioning it as a metaverse / HoloLens type headset, which few people care about - People assume it’s an « iMac in VR » type device and get disappointed that it isn’t. But over time, Apple realizes that the number one value is in gaming, and gradually shifts focus and positioning. It attracts more and more people while at the same time the tech improves. Then eventually the tech allows for a headset that can fit in a smaller for factor and truly helps people beyond gaming. As an enhancement to day to day tasks with light enough glasses for example.

abledon 4y ago
also battery life still sucks on this generation. Once it lasts a week or two, then I'll be interested.
- brokenmachine 4y ago
  I'd want one day battery life for any device, like my phone. Before bed I plug in all my devices.
  - piceas 4y ago
    I want at least a week. Every day means that a charger of some sort is needed for weekends away etc which suddenly is more stuff to manage. One can dream. I wear a solar eco drive that is coming up on ten years with the original battery. Not exactly comparable but the middle ground is unimpressive.
thiht 4y ago
> But over time, Apple realizes that the number one value is in gaming Except that Apple sucks at gaming. They just don't get the market. There's no way they'll make a product whose primary focus is gaming. If they do they'll fail hard.

specialist 4y ago

Jobs referred to early Apple TV as a "hobby". For years. Time enough for a nascent market to mature, for the technology to catch up with the ambitions. That's how Apple/Cook should refer to Apple VR/AR. Under promise, over deliver. Projecting 1m unit sales the first year is nutty. Sure, they might sell that many. And then what? Also, the initial models should be over priced, specifically targeting sexy use cases. Ridiculously expensive, maximally awesome, hype building applications. Like telemedicine, protein folding, and walking tours of fictional settlements on Mars. Let people imagine and build boutique applications for a couple years, normalize the emerging market, before introducing a consumer mass market model.

illiarian 4y ago
> Under promise, over deliver. But Apple TV still hasn't delivered, and its first version was released 16 years ago. It's still unusable for anything but the most basic tasks, and is a mess as a product: it fails as amedia hub, it fails as a smart device hub, it fails as a compute hub...
- Jcowell 4y ago
  Does it? As a device I want to hook up to a TV to watch streaming services without worrying that my TV is sending snapshots to its manufacturer it works pretty well.

andsoitis 4y ago

Ideas for product names: - Clear Vision - Reality Field - Apple Reality - Reality HD - eXtended Reality

popcalc 4y ago
Reality Distortion Field :)
alden5 4y ago
apple glass would be my guess
tyfon 4y ago
I think they will use the really innovative iGlass :)

xrguy 4y ago

Apple entering the AR VR XR space may be a good thing, more competition = better products?

glass3 4y ago

In which way will they make it different from the Meta headsets? The Apple branding won't be enough to turn an average headset into a successful product. My guess would be that their headset is just a set of goggles that requires an iPhone for computation. Then, they can sell them for $300 or even $150. The article suggests that VR is a tool for long-distance relationships. For $300, that could become possible.

r0fl 4y ago
Apple sells WHEELS for a Mac Pro for $700! You think that same Apple will sell, what may be a totally new revolutionary product of less than half the cost of WHEELS? Try again.
- rocketbop 4y ago
  > Apple sells WHEELS for a Mac Pro for $700 Not many of them though. AirPods are 200-300 and an absolute cash cow, and probably system sellers for Mac and iPhone.
  - r0fl 4y ago
    AirPods are not as complex as virtual reality goggles. It’s like comparing apples to VR goggles.
    - rocketbop 4y ago
      Sure. I don’t agree with OP that they can be sold at 300. Something that does less for cheaper might be an easier sell though then more for more.
Jcowell 4y ago
> The Apple branding won't be enough to turn an average headset into a successful product. For me the Apple Branding is enough. One of the biggest barriers for me picking up the Oculus Quest is that it’s attached to Facebook.

status200 4y ago

I'm an Apple user and love all things VR / AR, probably spend 10hr/wk using Quest 2. Tempted to get the Reality Pro/One on launch, but at $3k and the tech team saying that not only will there be nothing exciting software-wise at launch, but a cheaper version and a more advanced version are on the horizon (no pun intended), I can't justify getting it. If someone like me who is basically the perfect demographic crossover doesn't want it, not sure who will... but time will tell.

Jam-O 4y ago

Maybe Apple could market this thing simply as a hi-res monitor and focus only on productivity side. If they have dual 5K displays and lenses, that seems like a safer bet and avoid the metaverse and gaming altogether. They charged more than 3000 for their pro monitors. Recently they have Wi-Fi 6E across new products and it could be for pushing compressed pixels to the headset which needs only to be a thin client like the studio display.

bredren 4y ago
I use the XDR Pro Display and have wondered if these will work as a replacement for a large high res monitor. I tried productivity / desktop on my quest 2 and it was awful.

speakingortho 4y ago

This device needs to have WebXR support on it, day one. This will enable VR browser games, and immersive web applications for retail. Also important to ensure we have cross-platform metaverse experiences.

costanzaDynasty 4y ago

The simple things I want from Apple, that seemly would be not to difficult from a company with so much money and talent are left to linger. But every half baked idea is rushed to the front of the line. If during the VR headset announcement Xbox was somehow involved, it would get my attention though.

karaterobot 4y ago

Did we go back to thinking we wanted to be less connected to the world around us, and we're looking for a $3k device to help us do that? I thought maybe society was admitting there are major, inadequately examined problems with device addiction, social alienation, mental health, and so on. I guess maybe we were just in a lull between product launches, and I mistook that silence for introspection. My bad.

thih9 4y ago

Headset is something that you wear, there’s a personal connection and an aspect of fashion. Apple can be fashion too. As long as the product is closer to AirPods Max than Mac Pro, people will buy it.

MagicMoonlight 4y ago

I’m never going to spend £3000 on a headset. For that I could get an absolute top of the line desktop. Hell I could get a car for that. Both would be far more useful. It’s just ludicrous money for a shit product. Even the first full VR headsets came nowhere close to that price.

GeekyBear 4y ago

It's worth remembering that the first headset is aimed at developers, and priced like Hololens. This isn't the less expensive mass market consumer device that people have been calling "Apple Glasses".

billychuck21st 4y ago

I think entertainment is still the biggest market for AR/VR, Apple is investing $1B in original content next, won't be surprised some of that goes to bespoke production for the new headset. Paired with a powerful apple tv and apple watch (doube as a gesture remote?), I can see some creative content revolutionize home entertainment.