22 ms·
The bill of materials for the Apple headset leaked
- londons_explore 3y agoI struggle to imagine which document would have all these details in one place within Apple. Instead, it looks like someone has reverse engineered one of the devices and guessed at all these figures/details.
- cianmm 3y agoIs "rear view mirror" a joke, or maybe just a lower res cheaper camera pointing backwards, or maybe this leak isn't legit? Either way, looking forward to seeing the headset!
- Geee 3y agoYes, it has a full automotive-grade rear-view mirror.
- mrbombastic 3y agoTree air freshener optional add on for only $250
- marginalia_nu 3y agoTree goes in a proprietary socket too, I assume.
- jallen_dot_dev 3y agofir wire
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- bottom999mottob 3y agoIt's probably a reverse pass through window that got poorly translated
- mecsred 3y agoIt's probably more of a rear view-mirror than your typical rear-view mirror.
- achow 3y agoThis is english translation of original Chinese leak [1]. Lot of formal/informal colloquial terms gets lost in translation. Yes you could be right - wearer of the headset would be aware of environment behind their head and for that this could be the camera system. [1] https://twitter.com/SadlyItsBradley/status/1659091168376807425 https://twitter.com/SadlyItsBradley/status/16590911683768074...
- ben_w 3y agoMy favourite (possibly apocryphal) example of meanings lost in literal translation, is "water sheep". (Hydraulic ram). Through an unrelated anecdote, in my head this is now bound to the music of "smoke on the water", with a sheep impression for the guitar (bass?) — "Sheep on the water, ba baa baaah, ba ba ba baaah"
- schubart 3y agoRear view mirror... looking forward... I see what you did there.
- cubefox 3y agoA "rear view mirror" isn't mentioned on the original source: Translation: https://i.postimg.cc/gm6ZNFYw/File-20230521-171346.jpg https://i.postimg.cc/gm6ZNFYw/File-20230521-171346.jpg Chinese: https://twitter.com/SadlyItsBradley/status/1659091168376807425/photo/1 https://twitter.com/SadlyItsBradley/status/16590911683768074...
- nickhalfasleep 3y agoI wonder which numbers are altered to find the leaker this time.
- mrbombastic 3y agoI am really struggling to see how this can succeed. Maybe it will be like Apple Pay, lackluster adoption for a time and then years down the line starts to gain marketshare. Even for me a geek who works in the apple ecosystem with a relatively high paying job who would love to mess with this thing it would be hard for me to justify spending 3k+ on a headset like this. Combine that with the fact that building compelling virtual reality experiences is just difficult, where are the apps going to come from? Maybe I will be totally wrong, I am excited to see it though.
- bottom999mottob 3y agoHere's an idea: tack it on as complimentary to the Apple Car. Sunk cost, so all the whales buy it and you get more locked into the Apple ecosystem!
- highwaylights 3y agoIt feels a lot like it’s been pursued all the way to a releasable product and there’s just too many wheels in motion to stop and think if it’s really a worthwhile idea. We could be wrong and people are happy to hand over 3k for this, but it’s just hard to understand how for a whole bunch of reasons. Are they going to get third parties to build software for this? Where is the volume to support that going to come from? Who’s going to want to go first and risk 3k on something that might flop and be on eBay for a fraction of the price in a year? There’s just so many hurdles to clear for this.
- TheLoafOfBread 3y agoLet's wait and see if 1600USD VR/AR headset will be market hit or miss. I am personally skeptical.
- uguuo_o 3y ago1.6k+ computers, high but understandable . 1.6k phones, way to high. 1.6k+margin (3k?) for a AR/VR headset, seems like something most people would never buy.
- llaolleh 3y agoDon’t underestimate Apple fanboys.
- TylerE 3y agoApple fanboys are the least likely to be into this sort of tethered, hattery pack requiring frippery.
- brookst 3y ago“Most people” don’t buy laptops. That’s a terrible measure of whether a business is attractive.
- uguuo_o 3y agoMost people meaning their potential customers. As a customer myself, there is little that would convince me to get this headset for that price.
- qwytw 3y agoI highly doubt Apple or anyone else expect most people to buy it. It's a new market with no content and no clear use cases. So starting slow and brining the price down over time seems like the best strategy.
- nocoiner 3y agoThat’s just component cost though, right? Now apply Apple’s typical margins on hardware to it.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- GuB-42 3y agoLooks expensive to me, $20 microphone? $40 PCB? $95 mid frame? $70 "heat dissipation module"? Are these prices normal for a mass produced item?
- yellow_postit 3y agoCan’t speak to the bom but the rumors have consistently said this will be multiple thousands at retail. Apples track record is refinement/perfecting for mass audiences not blue sky innovation. I’m looking forward to seeing their entry in this space should it actually launch.
- basisword 3y ago>> Can’t speak to the bom but the rumors have consistently said this will be multiple thousands at retail. The rumours were similar for the iPad. So much so they poked fun at those rumours when they shared the actual pricing which was shockingly low.
- pclmulqdq 3y agoNo, but these prices track for an ultra-high-end product given what I saw of the hardware industry years ago. For example, volume cost of a basic PCB is in the region of 1 cent per square cm, but a $40 PCB in volume can easily come from many layers and a weird stackup (not to mention that this may be up to about 100 sq cm).
- reportingsjr 3y agoApple (and most high end tech designers) use highly specialized, very $$$ PCBs for a lot of their products. They aren't created by traditional litho + etch, but rather by a process called modified semi-additive processing (mSAP). iPhone, apple watch, etc PCBs are basically the same as CPU/IC interposers on a large scale. Definitely not 1 cent/sq cm cheap, but they have massive volume and high price points. It lets them get the insane part density needed these days.
- 3y ago
- sva_ 3y agoThese numbers seem pretty high. May this just be the cost of a prototype?
- wildrhythms 3y agoPerhaps, but then the tweet alludes to 400k+ units: >Quantity: It is estimated to be 400,000 to 500,000 units in the second half of this year.
- tikkun 3y agoSomeone mentioned a rumor about "Apple has achieved 1:1 3d video chat where there avatars are almost completely photo realistic" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35995072 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35995072 Anyone know a source link?
- sebzim4500 3y agoHard to believe they can sell half a million units this year, but I'd be happy to be proven wrong.
- jonhohle 3y agoThis reminds me a lot of the lead up to the iPad announcement. A lot of buzz about a super high price and limited functionality (it’s just a big iPhone!) and the the actual price is significantly lower (though this “leak” is already about half of what the other “leaks” have been estimating). I wouldn’t be surprised if this is Apple marketing or Wall Street traders inserting information into the news cycle. For Apple, the benefit is obviously to exceed expectations when they release an $800 headset (still expensive, but so much cheaper to someone who had mentally allocated $1,600). For Wall Street, anything to get the stock price to move one way or the other is valuable.
- smoldesu 3y agoThe original reported price of $3,000 is not unrealistic. If this BOM is real, a $3,000 price point would be roughly similar to the profit margins of their other hardware products. The past few months have probably seen a lot of closed-door headset demos, and I wouldn't be surprised if the price was a major point of feedback for many people.
- jonhohle 3y agoI doubt Apple discusses pricing with the people it gives demos too or even partners creating content. The only people who know the price are finance, marketing, and C-level.
- smoldesu 3y agoTo the contrary, I'd wager the price is the first thing every Apple shareholder would care about after demoing a VR product. Many of these people are not stupid investors and know the market is hot. Even if Apple doesn't explicitly tell them the price, these people know that price is a constraining factor. Especially if they're handed a piece of hardware with a battery dangling off the side like it's a 2012 Oculus demokit.
- cubefox 3y agoThat's wishful thinking. Given the estimated BOM of 1500 to 1600 USD, the originally leaked ~3000 USD end user price is much more plausible. The BOM doesn't include costs of development, marketing, or profit margins.
- xoa 3y agoI'm honestly kind of boggled by the HN comments so far, all seem to be various forms "I can't see how wearable displays can offer any value unless they're cheap". To me the use case is obvious: getting rid of the fucking screen. There is no inherent law of physics reason I can't have a full size desktop 10k 40" or whatever max is "display" for every single system I interact with, anywhere. The current paradigm of lots of different screens for different computers (desktop/notebook/tablet/phone/watch/appliances) is because nobody has yet been able to sufficiently directly project photons into retina via something good enough and wearable. Products like the RETISSA II demonstrate direct retinal projection working but without enough resolution, too clunky, etc. But the fundamentals work. The killer app IMO for a wearable display is replacing every other display. I can sit down at my desk or anywhere else and have whatever screen size/config I want, the only difference being how much local compute I have available and at what latency. No more need for "headless servers", just have the right display key pairs and you can pull up a screen/console just from what you're wearing. Same with anything from network switches to printers, can have augmented local display tech using a full size screen vs some tiny little LED thing at best. On a plane or a train and want to watch a movie, or pull up SSH sessions or whatever else? Full screen, and in total privacy. NV/FLIR, or digital [LMH]VPOs could all just feed into my worn display too. Which would be perfectly crisp even for those of us with bad eyes. And on and on and on. It's so obvious. All the challenges involved are engineering/polish/politics (in terms of agreeing on some level of industry standards at least for a minimal level of universal interaction). Which doesn't mean it couldn't be mucked up but the promise is clear. I've spent many many thousands of dollars on displays of all sorts. When one wearable one can replace them all I'd cheerfully pay $5k let alone $3k. It'll also open up entire new realms of form factors for computers. Apple may or may not manage it, and certainly probably not the first go around, but it's pretty clear why they'd want to be getting going on real experience with it even if it's mostly for devs and such to start. It's the definition of a looming disruption, a huge amount of their current visual product design is about "very nice screens, with stuff on them". Something that eventually obsoletes the "screens" bit would be one obvious way someone else could pull the rug out from under most of Apple's current offerings, and conversely is a big new opportunity for them too long term. It might take them 5-10 years, but if they think now is the time to get iterating I don't see why they shouldn't get going even if it's a touch aggressive.
- samwillis 3y agoI'm far more interested in the OS and Apps, that's the thing that's going to make this a success or a flop. Hardware (Apple will almost certainly get this right) is important, but the actual user experience and use cases that Apple present are what will be the deciding factor. Outside of gaming and industry use AR/VR have felt a little like a solution in search of a problem. I do believe though that the people who work at Apple are capable of solving that problem, finding the use cases that an every day person wants it for. My benchmark for this is my family, they are all different, with different level of interest in tech. If I can see the majority of them having a use for it, being inspired by the UX and marketing, then it will be successful. Until now none of them have any sort of VR kit, but they all have iPhones and Macs. As a slight aside though, new hardware products are very hard for Apple to keep completely under wraps, too many people in the supply chain, too many factories. Software on the other hand they can lock down incredibly well (pun intended). I am somewhat suspicious that they may supprise us at WWDC with their take on generative AI. Now that could be part of the headset, but it's more likely to be part of iOS/macOS and a feature that aims to help them sell more of their existing hardware ranges.
- NickC25 3y ago>I'm far more interested in the OS and Apps, that's the thing that's going to make this a success or a flop. Hardware (Apple will almost certainly get this right) is important, but the actual user experience and use cases that Apple present are what will be the deciding factor. Outside of gaming and industry use AR/VR have felt a little like a solution in search of a problem. I do believe though that the people who work at Apple are capable of solving that problem, finding the use cases that an every day person wants it for. This is my feeling too - I just don't see an immediate usecase for such a device outside of a select few niches, none of which (even combined) move the sales needle for a company of Apple's size. What are people actually going to use this for? I just don't see it - although there could be something as the tech matures in a few years.
- alwillis 3y agoThis is my feeling too - I just don't see an immediate usecase for such a device outside of a select few niches… As usual, Apple is playing the long game. We should remember that when the iPhone was announced in 2007, Steve Jobs set the goal to get 1% of the cell phone market. In 2007, there was no App Store and the only native apps were what came installed on the device. Apple is laying the groundwork for the future. They’ll sell enough for it to meaningful while the rest of the ecosystem comes together.
- qgin 3y agoIt's a classic Apple move to leak rumors of extremely high prices and then announcing only medium high prices that make people feel like it's cheap. The original iPad was rumored to cost $1500 to $1800. So when they finally announced it "only" cost $500 people couldn't believe how cheap it was in comparison.
- StingyJelly 3y agoExactly. I'd like to see that $70 heatsink.
- cubefox 3y agoThis says 9 USD for "heat spreader and fan": https://i.postimg.cc/gm6ZNFYw/File-20230521-171346.jpg https://i.postimg.cc/gm6ZNFYw/File-20230521-171346.jpg
- heliophobicdude 3y agoSolid state, active cooling system https://www.froresystems.com/ https://www.froresystems.com/
- MichaelZuo 3y ago10.75 W sustained heat removal at a constant 85C for the bigger version isn't that impressive. Even the M2 could easily draw and produce 30+ W of heat at full load. The best use case may be ultra thin devices without enough room for a fan, not as a fan replacement.
- rsynnott 3y ago> Even the M2 could easily draw and produce 30+ W of heat at full load. If they're operating at 30W sustained they're in trouble anyway; that would imply a battery life of probably about an hour.
- MichaelZuo 3y ago
- yayr 3y agoI am wondering when Apple will start putting a second camera onto iPhones with proper pupil distance, so people can start taking 3D photos and videos in landscape format. That would be a real "whole family" use case... Some years ago I made 3D photos of a wedding with a physical dual camera setup. That was quite a pain to get exposure etc. synchronized and postprocessed. Still the pictures look amazing on a quest. Nowadays this could all be super easy.
- Geee 3y agoWith some AI/NERF magic, you could adjust IPD and allow limited head motion for videos and photos, even when they're shot with a sub-optimal stereo setup or even on a single camera.
- jayd16 3y agoIf you're going that far, you can do it now with mono-scopic shots.
- yayr 3y agosure, there are already models that allow you to hallucinate a full 3D scene from a single image. Still, it would be pretty cheap to add that camera I assume and it would have the potential to pretty quickly fix the 3D content issue that is prevalent currently without introducing hallucination artifacts.
- qingcharles 3y agoI had 3D photos taken of my wedding too in 2009. The wedding was in the snow, so the 3D worked out nicely. There were several 3D Android phones that I remember in the early days with dual-lens cameras and autostereographic screens, but sadly they all bombed. At some point the technology will return, I'm certain of that.
- cubefox 3y agoHere is an automated English translation of what seems to be the original source, with a lot more details on the hardware: https://i.postimg.cc/gm6ZNFYw/File-20230521-171346.jpg https://i.postimg.cc/gm6ZNFYw/File-20230521-171346.jpg By far the most expensive part are the two 1.3 inch Sony OLED screens at 700 USD (350 each). A "special-shaped flexible OLED" external screen by LG is only listed as 30 USD, which seems quite low. Its purpose may be to see the eyes of the wearer (reverse passthrough). Here the Chinese original: https://twitter.com/SadlyItsBradley/status/1659091168376807425/photo/1 https://twitter.com/SadlyItsBradley/status/16590911683768074...
- rostakagmfun 3y agoI wonder what is WellsennXR's role here. Are they managing the supply chain for Apple's headset, doing RnD for them, or something else?
- MichaelZuo 3y agoThe sony screen sounds totally custom, if it's actually 2160p, then that would be an incredibly high PPI.
- cubefox 3y ago(price per inch)
- MichaelZuo 3y agoOops DPI. But PPI does seem like a neat metric.
- LeicaLatte 3y agoApple only needs to deliver an inch of greatness every year. Cannot wait.
- charlie0 3y agoI just hope this will be usable with the MacBookPro and not require an iPhone for activation like their watch.
- agnosticmantis 3y agoWhat’s the likelihood that these leaks are intentionally fake for misdirection? Has there been precedent for that by Apple?
- joseph_grobbles 3y agoIt's some tiny Twitter (blue) user posting some nebulous list. Seems pretty BS to me, and it's surprising HN falls for this. Okay, it actually isn't surprising. It's actually funny how a confirmation bias works: In other posts people say "this tracks with other rumors..."...yeah, that's what people who make stuff up tend to do.
- s1k3s 3y agoWhy are all these companies bidding on this? Is there a bubble of headset users that I’m not aware of?
- MacsHeadroom 3y agoThere are 6 Billion or so display users, give-or-take a billion. Head mounted displays are just the obvious evolution of display technology.
- s1k3s 3y agoWhat's so obvious about it? Literally every BIG_CORP except Apple has tried (and failed) at this.
- whatarethembits 3y agoThis. They have all failed at this thus far, it naturally means that anyone trying will fail next time too. For eternity. It’s a well established law of nature at this point, that if new tech isn’t a massive hit within the first few iterations, it’s a wrap.
- oezi 3y agoI think Sony was happy with PSVR sales. Everyone else burned money. A headset which is half the weight, double the resolution and still cheap would sell well.
- s1k3s 3y agoYeah well Sony already has the biggest gaming marketplace to back that up. Everyone else doesn't have this.
- LarsDu88 3y agoI have a VR game I've been working on for 3 years. I planned to have it ready by whenever Apple had a headset ready, but if this thing costs $3000 Idk. I wish they could offer a subsidized devkit or something
- waboremo 3y agoYou should probably focus on the already existing market, anything else is a waste of time unless Apple has invited you to prepare something. Otherwise that's just a whole lot of wasted resources on an unsure userbase.
- jayd16 3y agoAre you just working in Unity in the hopes it'll be an easy port? How could you expect to target this device knowing nothing about the platform?
- LarsDu88 3y agoIt would be shocking to me if apple released a AR headset without at least considering Unity and/or Unreal support. Think about how long it takes to make a proper VR game, let alone a quality one
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- ksec 3y agoSo the internet went from $3000 being the BOM cost and Apple not making any profits to $1.5K BOM cost? [1] And for anyone who knew something about CE BOM cost. That list is just complete BS. At this point it is highly likely Apple will release an AR/VR Headset at $1999 and the internet will think it is a bargain. Given how PR had everyone set the expectation of its cost. [1] https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/r36yKbcdmZKH0dtxlKAZ8w https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/r36yKbcdmZKH0dtxlKAZ8w
- charcircuit 3y agoBOM is not the only cost in a product.
- fnord77 3y agosoftware development cost divided per unit isn't listed
- layer8 3y agoWhat’s up with the “Mini LED backlight” mentioned at the end? Aren’t all the panels supposed to be OLED?
- cjensen 3y agoBOMs do not have "positioning" remarks attached to them. Marketing positioning information does not have a BOM attached. This is fake. Or at least altered from the real information.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- ChildOfChaos 3y agoI believe in the potential of this product. Having a quest 1 that use still to this day, I believe very strongly that Apple will make this work. People talk about use cases, but there are quite a few. VR/AR is going to be fantastic for home fitness and Apple already have a fitness subscription, pair that with a watch for stats etc and this really will be a great device for that. Also exactly what apple loves at the moment, requires two products and a subscription in the apple eco system, great to getting people locked in. I think AR/VR as long as they can get it comfortable will replace screens and the TV, why have a TV in the house, when you can put on a headset and be at the cinema? Without it taking up the space of a TV and being something you can take with you anywhere, like a hotel etc. There were rumours for so long that Apple were working on an actual TV, I think what actually happened, is they will release the device that will replace it. All that needs to be done, is for someone to make all this work together and you have got a killer product, so i wouldn't write Apple off just because Meta have done a bad job with trying to sell the metaverse vision to everyone. I don't think Meta were stupid for pursing this, the current products are just half baked and badly executed, but Apple is in the position to do this right. This was the talk of the tech world not too long ago, before AI came and took over everything, but I believe Apple is going to put it firmly back on the map in a few weeks when they drop this. What Apple does, the world listens. This will be expensive and have a lot of flaws, but any generation shifting product that Apple has released has been like that, just wait a few years down the line and see where it goes.
- dgellow 3y agoYou can watch the TV with your friends and family, you cannot do this with a VR headset.
- MikusR 3y agoYou can. And you don't even have to be on the same continent.
- dgellow 3y agoYou can all have your own headset and watch the same content. But I’m sure you understand how that doesn’t replace the TV experience where you watch content with your family or friends, together, in the same space.
- willyt 3y agoA vr headset is just a really big screen. Imagine how much stuff you can leave on your desktop if it’s a perfect sphere and you can sit in your office chair spinning round with it all whirling past you…
- stainablesteel 3y agocan we please stop working on projecting shit into our eye balls and instead project shit onto thin air like a screen
- Zetaphor 3y agoHow would that even be conceivably possible with the technology of today? Look at the state of the art for projectors, they still require special reflective screens to reach their full potential. You're asking for what is still very much in the realm of science fiction.
- dredmorbius 3y agoPhysics works against you. Your eyball is a screen. And, well, screens are screens. Both work by restricting ambient light and focusing an image at a specific focal length. Air is ... many things, and useful and all that, but it is not a screen. Fill it with particles and you can get traced patterns through it (e.g., laser through smoke or arclamps through fog), but that's not screen-like projection. And under any circumstances in which ambient light levels are high, the darkest possible ground is ... the ambient light level. Which means either that the entire image is washed out or it's absolutely blasted with light. Captain Disillusion has a good debunk of one such purported device, the "Cicret Bracelet": <https://yewtu.be/watch?v=KbgvSi35n6o https://yewtu.be/watch?v=KbgvSi35n6o> Spoiler: it doesn't work. It can't work. Though I suppose you could carry a water-sheet-spray system and project onto that: <https://yewtu.be/watch?v=ImU1mG7QC4I https://yewtu.be/watch?v=ImU1mG7QC4I>
- dredmorbius 3y agoThinking a bit further on this ... ... amongst what I'll term displays, which is to say, an updatable presentation medium, there are generally illuminated and ambient variants. These date back to scratching on sand or dirt, erasable wax tablets (used by Greeks and Romans for education), slates (common amongst students in the 18th/19th centuries, roughly), and of course modern variants. I use "illuminated" to describe any display in which the information content is expressed within the light incident or emitted from the display. This would capture all of, say, a traditional CRT video display, a projection screen (where the image is reflected off the display surface), rear-projection displays (see 1990s-styple projection televisions), Nixie tubes, neon (and related) signage, and discrete-element displays such as LCD or plasma screens. What this captures is the distinction between a CRT display in which an image is painted (using an electron gun and colour mask) and an LCD display in which individual pixel elements are activated. I was unhappy with how I'd considered both as equivalent in my initial comment. I would argue that both are screens, but what's really common is that the illumination carries the signal. Ambient displays have a content encoding mechanism distinct from any illumination, thought that illumination might be integrated into the display itself such as with backlit liquid-crystal displays or "frontlit" e-ink (electrophoretic) displays. Here the surface itself is physically altered and ambient light is used to reveal that arrangement. Again, your eyeball is a screen (incident light carries the image, see the camera obscura for a physical analogue), air ... is not. If you wanted to consider how you might convey information via thin air, it seems that there are a few possible options: - One could create a temporary screen surface within air and project onto it. The water screen display used in tunnel excess-height warning systems is one such example. Note that the prominent visuals for that system show it at night or under limited ambient light. The effect under direct daylight would be far less prominent. Other possibilities include some sort of mesh or hanging thread pattern onto which an image could be projected. This is actually used to an extent in some IMAX theatres, particularly domed screens, in which the "solid" dome is actually a mesh with many holes in it, which both reduce overall mass and permit greater ventilation of the theatre space itself. At viewing distance, the holes are undetectable. All of these still require low ambient light. Some of these options might be viable where a natural framing opportunity exists, e.g., a beaded door curtain or similar) exists. But that's not a generalisable method which an individual could carry with them. - One could arrange for some particle swarm to organise within the message space to carry the image. Illuminated drone swarms are an example used now in entertainment and advertising (same low-ambient light requirement), though a reflective pigmented alternative might be conceived of. This ... would probably be difficult to maintain, and is effectively like spraying pigment into space. Either you're going to require a lot of ink, or the pigment elements would have to be both "smart" and movement-capable such that they could arrange themselves. In practice, static displays (print on paper or similar media) or dynamic ones (e-ink, transflective LCD, or similar) involving a very much non-thin-air medium is vastly more practicable.
- fnord77 3y agoI'm not in HW but some of those prices don't look right, especially for a run of 500k. $80 for 3D sensors? $60 for wifi/bt/pmic?
- londons_explore 3y ago70,000 units per month is pretty small for Apple... I guess they are planning on this being for real enthusiasts rather than a mass market thing.
- Cook4986 3y agoImagine if the whole internet was VR ready? MyHouse.pk3, I’m looking at you.
- SergeAx 3y ago$1600, wow! I should confess that despite I am now using my Oculus Quest 2 only for Beat Saber once a month, buying it for $300 two years ago was a real bargain.
- kgbcia 3y agoSurprise no else is making the screen lighter by separating the battery and processor as a necklace or fanny pack or mini backpack. Would have been better if the screen attached to an iPhone thereby reducing the cost of a separate processor/battery.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- culanuchachamim 3y agoI love this thread, everyone is sharing their expert opinion on something that is right down the corner. It would be a great exercise to review this thread 6 months after the headset is on the market, and see the true quality of hn on forecasting.
- harrisi 3y agoI had this tab open for awhile and was just re-reading the comments after talking to a retired Intel director. It's interesting to look at other innovative Apple posts here, maybe you'd like to check them: AirPods Max: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25344762 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25344762 AirPods (general): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21985239 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21985239 AirPods Pro: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21378197 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21378197 M1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25049079 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25049079 M1 (Max/Pro): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28908031 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28908031 Something interesting is that a lot of the most popular links for these from algolia are not the announcement. The M1 in particular surprised me. The announcement discussion is a few pages behind many other posts about various M1 things. I've long thought that there's a lot of interesting research opportunities for hn discussions (see Dropbox announcement). Maybe ChatGPT can summarize it.
- Rediscover 3y agoHow about not glasses, but a 2cm face shield? Flips up and down...