Apple AR/VR - Is this device just a dev protype before the real thing?

[Piggie]

Just been wondering about this, and wondered what your views are based on all the current leaks/stories.

Do you feel that this 1st device, which we are hoping to hear about in just a few weeks time, will be the actual product that Apple thinks is finished device for users to actually use for real.

Or might this be more a 1st, and expensive developer prototype, which will be bought by devs/enthusiasts/you-tubers
Which is really meant to show off the hardware, and what the unit is capable off, and some Apple created software examples.

So that, developers can then use this 1st version to develop amazing things, learn what's practical and what's not, what works and what does not, and spend perhaps a year? with this unit, setting the stage for the actual consumer unit at a lower price which will have a proper public launch aimed at everyone, and showing off all the work the devs have done using this early non-consumer device we're about to see.

Or do you feel Apple are simply not wanting to get into the consumer market with this product as they don't feel they can build something good enough at the right price point for the typical Apple customer? And they simply wish to own the high end pro market for many years before perhaps in multiple years time costs will come down enough for the normal consumer?

Is this really just a dev unit for building software?

 

[coffeemilktea]

With the exception of the semi-forgotten Mac Pro, most Apple products are geared towards consumers, and I can't imagine them announcing a new product line and saying "actually, this is really just for developers, sorry to disappoint the general public but it's not meant for you." 😅

That said, I would very much like to believe that all the rumors are wildly inaccurate, because the more I hear about it, the more silly it seems. A $3000 price tag? Having to wear a battery pack around your waist to keep it powered? It's like one bad idea after another.

 

[Piggie]

With the exception of the semi-forgotten Mac Pro, most Apple products are geared towards consumers, and I can't imagine them announcing a new product line and saying "actually, this is really just for developers, sorry to disappoint the general public but it's not meant for you." 😅

That said, I would very much like to believe that all the rumors are wildly inaccurate, because the more I hear about it, the more silly it seems. A $3000 price tag? Having to wear a battery pack around your waist to keep it powered? It's like one bad idea after another.

Yes, I agree.
The magic Apple managed to pull off with the iPhone line was pretty amazing, they were able to make many buyers feel special and (sadly) better than others as they had an iPhone, whilst as the same time felling tens of millions of them to everyone. That's a near trick.

As you say, the pricing makes this look very much not like a mass consumer device, when Apple is all about mass consumer products, other than the very high end/high spec'd MacPro's but they are basically the same devices, just faster versions with more storage.

The rumours of the hardware, 8K per eye, and about 200 cameras (a slight exaggeration!)
Sound like it would be impossible to build such a device without a very high price tag.

Personally I'm fine with a battery on a belt. Actually I'd be fine with the CPU/GPU on a belt also if it meant a super slim and lightweight headset.
If I took my belt off my pants would fall down, and that's not good for anyone

So it poses the question:

1: A 1st gen, high spec, meant for devs only model to work with, in readiness for the later consumer model.
2: An expensive, high spec device, focussed on Industry/Creators/Reviewers and forget about the consumer.
3: It's not as expensive as we think, but as mentioned, rumours suggest too high end not to be very pricey.
4: Shock everyone and there will be 2 models launched, and we are only hearing about the Pro model, not the cheaper normal model for the masses.
5: Something else I can't yet think of.

I'm sure it's going to be amazing and wow almost everyone. I think we are all expecting that.
We're just having trouble working out who it's for, coming from a mass consumer product company.

Perhaps it is just as simple, as this version is for the Pro market, and a cheaper, lower spec model will follow later.
That does feel the most logical answer to me anyway.

 

[Kierkegaarden]

I’m not entirely convinced Apple will show the actual device at WWDC. They may just show off the visual capabilities and applications, with no look at the design or specs, and the device would be showcased in the fall. For that to happen though, the device provided to developers would have to be a generic version of the product — not sure if that is even possible.

 

[Piggie]

From listening to a few in the media, I'm starting to believe the reports that this is more and more a kind of experimental test device, and Apple are doing the same with the software, basically covering all bases from entertainment to exercise (why anyone would want to exercise with a headset on in the 1st place is a bit of a puzzle if I'm honest) through productivity, iPad apps, and pretty much everything they can think of.
Mainly because, having learned from what happened with the Watch. Apple don't really know what it's going to be used for.
I actually feel this is a good idea, though, it's a very Non Apple way of doing things.
Make the best hardware you can, throw any software/use case you can at it, sell it and watch what happens.
You know, the old criticism that has been said about Samsung.
Throw everything you can think of at the wall and se what sticks.
Once it been out with actual devs/enthusiasts for 6, 12, 18 months, a ton of feedback with get back to Apple about what hardware specs and software features they need to start focussing on, and then models which are more aimed at what actually works get be created, and the product will gain focus.
Again, pretty much like the Apple watch story.
This seems to make the most sense to me right now, and answers most of the questions I feel I had.
But it pushes the consumer unit quite a way out.

 

[Jensend]

(why anyone would want to exercise with a headset on in the 1st place is a bit of a puzzle if I'm honest)

Look at the user reviews of the VR app Supernatural. Tons of testimonials about how it has gotten people to exercise and sometimes lose weight.

I've not tried it, but I have used apps like Beat Saber. Sometimes when I'm in a VR app, I'm so engrossed that I don't realize how tired I am until I stop. For some people, gamifying the exercise experience makes it something they look forward to instead of making it a chore.

 

[Piggie]

Look at the user reviews of the VR app Supernatural. Tons of testimonials about how it has gotten people to exercise and sometimes lose weight.

I've not tried it, but I have used apps like Beat Saber. Sometimes when I'm in a VR app, I'm so engrossed that I don't realize how tired I am until I stop. For some people, gamifying the exercise experience makes it something they look forward to instead of making it a chore.

Thanks for that information.
I looked at Supernatural myself, but then found it to be yet another subscription model that I'm so sick with that I hope this model of constantly clawing money from users fails eventually, but that's a different topic

I was more considering the issue of heat and sweat over your face when doing an intense workout combined with wearing a VR headset didn't seem the ideal type of scenario.

 

[Jensend]

I looked at Supernatural myself, but then found it to be yet another subscription model that I'm so sick with that I hope this model of constantly clawing money from users fails eventually, but that's a different topic

I’m completely with you there, but I figured if people are willing to pay monthly it would make my point better that people find it valuable. And it’s the route Apple will most likely go with for their VR fitness app, though I’m sure there will be third party alternatives.

I was more considering the issue of heat and sweat over your face when doing an intense workout combined with wearing a VR headset didn't seem the ideal type of scenario.

Understandable, though I don’t tend to sweat a lot (maybe that means I’m not working hard enough?), and I actually find that headset comfort is more of an issue for me when I’m using a more passive app. I haven’t seen anybody say they stopped using a VR app because of sweat/heat, but I have seen people trade tips on how to keep their faces cool, and there are various accessories available to help deal with sweat and heat.

 

[Piggie]

I will admit part of me is actually surprised at what Apple is doing here.
If I had to have guessed a while ago, I would have suggested Apple would go with the smallest headset they could have done with just the display mainly on your face.
Sound is solved with Airpods without wires.
And a single cable to your waist which connected to a high end iPhone, and an additional battery all in a single pack.

Headset would be vastly cheaper and smaller, We'd expect buyers of this to have airpods and a high end iphone anyway.

Honestly I'm surprised they didn't do this, and I must imagine it was one option they considered as in a way it almost makes the most sense to get a high quality experience to the largest number of people for the lowest cost possible.

 

[Kierkegaarden]

I will admit part of me is actually surprised at what Apple is doing here.
If I had to have guessed a while ago, I would have suggested Apple would go with the smallest headset they could have done with just the display mainly on your face.
Sound is solved with Airpods without wires.
And a single cable to your waist which connected to a high end iPhone, and an additional battery all in a single pack.

Headset would be vastly cheaper and smaller, We'd expect buyers of this to have airpods and a high end iphone anyway.

Honestly I'm surprised they didn't do this, and I must imagine it was one option they considered as in a way it almost makes the most sense to get a high quality experience to the largest number of people for the lowest cost possible.

Since Apple has not released anything yet, nobody can say with certainty what Apple is doing (unless you’re Tim Cook). I’m sure there is a lot of misdirection out there as well, so I wouldn’t put too much into the rumors and renders that you’ve seen. I will assume that the device will not have a speaker built in and instead require headphones, but I don’t know for sure.

 

[Piggie]

Since Apple has not released anything yet, nobody can say with certainty what Apple is doing (unless you’re Tim Cook). I’m sure there is a lot of misdirection out there as well, so I wouldn’t put too much into the rumors and renders that you’ve seen. I will assume that the device will not have a speaker built in and instead require headphones, but I don’t know for sure.

Indeed, but no rumours have said anything about having the "Compute" outside of the headset.
I know I'm probably out on my own here, BUT......

If you are going to have a cable to run from a belt mounted unit to the headset to avoid weight, then hey, you may as well stick the compute into the belt unit also, where you won't feel any weight.
The compute then will be alongside the battery.
Then the display just becomes a screen with tracking sensors only.

But as you say, we've not seen it yet and everyone is still mostly guessing, though I get the feeling we're not expecting anything too shockingly different to everything that's been talked about so far.

Being Apple, I would have thought getting the headset looking right would be a super high priority.
I'm sure it's going to be lovely and I know I'd love to have one, but I'd really want one for super high quality VR entertainment purposes, and that's the single area where I know the large question mark is currently hanging.

Roll on WWDC

 

[anselpela]

Just been wondering about this, and wondered what your views are based on all the current leaks/stories.

Do you feel that this 1st device, which we are hoping to hear about in just a few weeks time, will be the actual product that Apple thinks is finished device for users to actually use for real.

Or might this be more a 1st, and expensive developer prototype, which will be bought by devs/enthusiasts/you-tubers
Which is really meant to show off the hardware, and what the unit is capable off, and some Apple created software examples.

So that, developers can then use this 1st version to develop amazing things, learn what's practical and what's not, what works and what does not, and spend perhaps a year? with this unit, setting the stage for the actual consumer unit at a lower price which will have a proper public launch aimed at everyone, and showing off all the work the devs have done using this early non-consumer device we're about to see.

Or do you feel Apple are simply not wanting to get into the consumer market with this product as they don't feel they can build something good enough at the right price point for the typical Apple customer? And they simply wish to own the high end pro market for many years before perhaps in multiple years time costs will come down enough for the normal consumer?

Is this really just a dev unit for building software?

I mean, it's literally the dev prototype for the Glasses product that they're unable to build. Sources inside Apple have already said as much. They built this product to run the software, and the software is good. Tim is unwilling to wait until what is probably past his tenure as CEO for the glasses product to be buildable, so he said ship it. Something that is apparently a very unpopular decision inside Apple.

 

[Piggie]

Again my only real curiosity is 3rd party software development, which is 100% what this device is going to need to stimulate wide spread interest.
Unless Apple wishes to keep this as a very high end pro type device, which is not what Apple does.
Apple wants to get developers excited to spend their own time and money developing great software specifically for VR.
(not just iPad apps floating in front of you in space)
My question is, why as a developer am I going to write for this as a very high end niche product?
I have to spend my companies time and recourses to create software which costs me, thousands / tens of thousands + to produce so I then need to be confident I will be able to recoup my costs with sales to users and make a profit.

You make money by either selling a very few items at really high prices to a small number of people.
Or you can sell to the mass market (where Apple is) at an affordable cost.

So where is the mass market going to come from at even $2000 let alone $3000
Even $1000 isn't mass market right now. (perhaps in the distant future where people bought glasses rather than phones, but we're 10 - 20 years? away from that)

That's my only issue.

The console dev kits concept from Sony/Microsoft, sure I get it...

We sell the devs a $2000 / $3000 device, knowing that a $500 consumer mass market version, of the same abilities will be coming out in 18 / 24 months for the mass market, and is guaranteed to sell in big numbers over many years.
So the devs can put their time and money in knowing they will get the return.

But you can't build into the dev unit lots of abilities than the consumer unit won't have.

It's a puzzle.

 

[frou]

This sounds exactly like Google Glass where the initial model was called the "Explorer Edition" to emphasise that it was just for early adopters to play around with.

 

[Piggie]

This sounds exactly like Google Glass where the initial model was called the "Explorer Edition" to emphasise that it was just for early adopters to play around with.

Yes, that sounds more logical.

If anything I'd say this:

Let's pack as much different hardware into the product as we can, and we have no plan on this being a consumer items whatsoever.
And we are not expecting devs to work on consumer apps either.

Just throw it all at the wall and see what sticks.

Once the devs have played with ALL the hardware and what stupid ideas we have tried (like putting your face on the screen on the outside of the goggles so other people can see your face/emoji?) which is going to be seen as an unessary gimmic I'd imagine.
And we find you what parts of the hardware are actually the key important parts, THEN we can take this info and build a consumer unit based on this feedback.

Could be their plan?

 

[macfacts]

My question is, why as a developer am I going to write for this as a very high end niche product?

If consumers can afford the $3000 device, they can afford $100 apps.

 

[anshuvorty]

Most likely, yes. It will be like the iPhone, which was announced at MacWorld and not released until June. The same thing may happen with this headset - announced at WWDC, and won't be released for some time after...

 

[Piggie]

If consumers can afford the $3000 device, they can afford $100 apps.

It's just such a small market if it's a $3000 device, we'd probably be looking at vastly more than that.
Perhaps prices people currently pay for business software, not consumer software.

I wonder if Apple is going to fund a lot of this initial development.
I mean it would make sense. They want to establish this device as the "Next Big Thing" and without all the software to back it up, it will die.
So funding devs early creations would really just be part of the headsets development costs.

I still have the same confusion I had in the beginning when it comes to software creation and mass market.

If we look at Microsoft and Sony with their Dev kit consoles.
Whilst may start out as PC's with specific hardware, then actual early console hardware in large box's before the final consumer units are ready for sale.
The early dev units and the final consumer units have the same power/abilities.

There would be no point in early devs creating software that can't run on the consumer unit coming a year or two later if the consumer unit does not have the same power/hardware as the early dev units.

So, in Apple's case, do we think a $3000 headset for devs and a $1000 unit for the mass market (and that's still wayyyyy too expensive for mass market) will have the same speed/tech inside them?
Or a $599 device from Apple even?

See I'm struggling to connect this device to mass market and devs creating software for the mass market.
Going to be very interesting where Apple see's this device fitting in, other than Wealthy Apple Fans, Reviewers, and some businesses that use Macs who may try a few.

Unless of course Apple shocks the media, sells it at cost, and it's $1499 instead of $2999

 

[iZac]

I think this device will be sacrificial to a point, obviously the barrier of entry is very high for a consumer device, but I think it will set up a few things for future devices

What it will hopefully do (for developers) is give them a much less price conscious userbase to sell apps to, they can easily charge "full price" for games or apps, rather than being punished by the 'race-to-the-bottom' that's led to all these damn subscription apps with $0 upfront fees.

It'll also obviously set up a userbase and software base for an inevitable pair of AR glasses in 7-10 years.

Most importantly though Apple is so high profile in the market that they will push the hardware forward. Every other VR manufacturer is going need higher PPD screens to compete and they don't have the luxury of charging 3 grand for their headsets. Sony / Samsung / LG or whoever wants to make microOLED displays will compete hard with each other to lower the costs to produce these really high density screens.

~60PPD makes a retina display according to my previous napkin maths, and Apple's current screens will probably yield around 40PPD.

 

[Piggie]

Just for the record, I REALLY want Apple to do well here.
If Apple makes a great headset that sells well, even if it's the model after this one
The whole industry will benefit, and it will give others a target to work towards.

There will still be a great market for years to come for the Quest 3 and hopefully Quest 4 in the $500 ish range that Apple will probably never hit as there will be millions of people to whom $500 is a hell of a lot of money for a non essential device.

What we don't want is Apple to fail. I'm sure even Mark Zuk desperately wants Apple to win.
If Apple messes up, which they very well may do due to pricing.

Original Home Pod where they totally misjudged what the market wanted,
And the Trashcan Mac with no real upgradability.

If they again get this wrong, and price themselves out of the market, the media will be all over this with VR had Failed stories for ages, and that's going to put people off the whole concept and will hurt everyone.

It may well end up as another Homepod moment.
They bring something out they think people want, but overpriced, after they eventually realise their judgement was wrong, then then create something much much cheaper which is good enough for most people and that sells like crazy.

So perhaps we could see a $500 good enough headset from Apple if that scenario played out.

 

[XboxEvolved]

I don’t buy it that it will cost $3k nor that they will introduce a brand new thing that isn’t consumer geared.

 

[iZac]

So perhaps we could see a $500 good enough headset from Apple if that scenario played out.

I think everyone here would love Apple to price competitively against the current market, but I really think they’re going to frame its pricing against their other monitors. Perhaps there will be a consumer version that’s competitive against those, but when Apple sell a measly speaker for $300 they can’t justify all the corner cutting to sell such a cheap headset.

Plus when companies like Varjo are already selling at the price point they’re aiming for, they don’t have a lot of incentive to price low

 

[cambookpro]

Earlier in the year, I did think Apple would launch a 'developer preview kit' at WWDC which showed off the UI, navigation, and SDKs, but none of the industrial design which would be saved for its own event later in the year for the consumer launch.

However, the received wisdom seems to be that the whole thing is being announced today, and I think Apple would have wanted to strategically leak something to quash expectations if that weren't the case.

 

[tomtad]

That would not be anyway what the market is expecting and would have been leaked out by Apple now if that was the case. This will be a product you can purchase

 

[Ferazel]

My hope is that the M2 is the specs for the developer kit and that if the full version is releasing to consumers next year it will be upgraded to an M3. Since they didn't have any other M3 products launching at WWDC they will upgrade the release model to M3 by the time it is released.