Most of our current technologies had plenty of "I don't see the point" naysayers. Even cars. ("Get a horse!")
VR locks you into an artificial world. AR integrates with ours, which is arguably more processor-intensive.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Bought Augmented Reality Headset Company Vrvana
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
My first exposure to AR (even though nobody was calling it AR at the time) was in 1990. I was in the research lab of a company that previously made military hardware but had recently been acquired by a automotive company. They showed me an infrared camera that could be mounted on a helmet and the output of the camera was shown in a head worn, 1" CRT right in front of the wearer's eye. It allowed a soldier to see "reality" (i.e. a bush or tent) with one eye and "enhanced vision" (i.e. the thermal image of what was behind the bush or inside of the tent) with the other eye.
I can easily see AR being valuable in a number of industrial applications such as production managers / manufacturing engineers being able to walk up to a machine on a factory floor and seeing information about the machine (oil temperature, time until routine maintenance is required, today's production quantities, etc.) displayed over the machine.
Most popular VR headset by miles..... GearVR. I like it. They just need to get rid of the screen door effect.
http://www.samsung.com/uk/wearables/gear-vr-r324/
http://www.samsung.com/uk/wearables/gear-vr-r324/
I agree completely. General Motors offered a zero emission, electric vehicle (the GM EV1 "Impact") from 1996-1999. The total production run was 1,117 vehicles. Would it be appropriate to conclude that electric vehicles have run their course and nobody will ever want an electric vehicle again? Tesla alone has sold over 200 times that many electric vehicles over the past 5 years. The technology just wasn't quite mature enough in the 1990s. GM (and other auto makers) were forced to bring a zero emission vehicle to market by government regulations but the technology wasn't mature enough to make a product that the market really wanted to buy. Thanks in large part to better battery technology, a lot more people are interested in electric vehicles today.
Go Apple go!
With the view of the future of VR looking to be some dsytopian future with Facebook loss leading Oculus in VR to own the market and exploit users every personal detail - I'd love it if Apple did both VR and AR.
With the view of the future of VR looking to be some dsytopian future with Facebook loss leading Oculus in VR to own the market and exploit users every personal detail - I'd love it if Apple did both VR and AR.
Apple is always interested in technologies which allow the user experience to be more personal and help remove barriers that stand in the way of people interacting with their devices.
And Apple like sees AR as the next frontier for that.
That’s why the people who criticise iOS as not making them more productive (eg: lacking mouse support, doesn’t run macOS) are missing the point. The purpose is to make technology more personal and intimate, not necessarily more productive in a raw sense.
RE: "... signaling a deep interest"
The article clearly states it might have been ONLY a $30M acquisition ... Apple has a market cap of nearly $900B.
As such, DEEP INTEREST != 0.00333% of market cap !
Maybe if it was a $900M acquisition (i.e., 0.1% of market cap), but it probably wasn't, was it ???
There's ONLY one small company out there right now, maybe worth $900M, that Apple could consider acquiring, and it's NOT an AR/VR company ... completely different area of the camera tech.
The article clearly states it might have been ONLY a $30M acquisition ... Apple has a market cap of nearly $900B.
As such, DEEP INTEREST != 0.00333% of market cap !
Maybe if it was a $900M acquisition (i.e., 0.1% of market cap), but it probably wasn't, was it ???
There's ONLY one small company out there right now, maybe worth $900M, that Apple could consider acquiring, and it's NOT an AR/VR company ... completely different area of the camera tech.
I think Apple will approach VR the way the Apple Watch has focused on health...I imagine the potential will be industry and health care related (conducting brain surgery and need a second pair of eyes? Doc from across the globe puts on AR glasses and sees what you see, in 3D. Uses a stylus to mark the brain virtually, you see the marks show up on the person you are operating on. Cut on the dotted line.) I’m not saying there won’t be games, but I don’t think that’s why Apple develops new techs.
I can’t see the future, but if we look backward, it’s obvious to bet on any product or idea that allows an individual to immerse themselves in their own little world where they control what they see and can brand themselves to friends and strangers. Personal mobile devices, Facebook, social media, gaming, news even...
AR will have two main categories. A very personal side where each person can practically have superpowers and experience the world they wish to see/create, and the more important side - advertisements. When people can truly visualize a product or experience, it will do away with the last vestige of in person shopping: the “I want to see, touch, and manipulate it” hurdle. Once companies can make money with the technology, it will explode.
Just depends on how Apple packages the ar experience.
AR will have two main categories. A very personal side where each person can practically have superpowers and experience the world they wish to see/create, and the more important side - advertisements. When people can truly visualize a product or experience, it will do away with the last vestige of in person shopping: the “I want to see, touch, and manipulate it” hurdle. Once companies can make money with the technology, it will explode.
Just depends on how Apple packages the ar experience.
VR and AR are suited to different things. I don’t think games such as elite Dangerous would play quite so well in AR! In VR, it’s one of the best experiences.
Like wise, Pokémon wouldn’t play very well in VR - by nature it’s more suited to AR!
Each have their own valid uses.
Processor intensive - that really depends on the application.. take ED again - that’s not going to be played on a smartphone - it’s GPU requirements are waaay too heavy. A good smartphone can cope with AR.
Based upon Apple's projections for the upcoming holiday quarter, they will make $30 million every 1h 21m.
Last edited by a moderator:
Siri comes in very helpful for many, VR is interesting too. Why wouldn’t a tech company pursue such topics?
Curious about what your version of right is? And your perceptions about Apple not doing it right with respect to addressing markets ripe for AR solutions and products.
But they bought 38 over a period of what, 30 years? And now you're telling me they bought 53 in a matter of 6 years? Holy crap that is worrying.
I don't find that worrying at all. Apple is acquiring the expert talent (and IP) they need to excel in markets the company wants to pursue going forward. Smart.
For what it is worth, my version of "right" means...
1) Something stylish that users won't be embarrassed to wear in public
2) Something fun AND useful (has to be for more than just games - maybe showing navigation directions or a civilian form of "night vision" glasses for reading menus in dimly lit restaurants, etc.)
3) Something that respects other people's privacy to avoid the "Google Glasshole" backlash where businesses banned "Google Explorers" from wearing Google Glass in bars and restaurants because other customer's didn't like wondering if they were being secretly recorded. This may be the toughest challenge but if anyone is up to the task, I think it will be Apple. Maybe they could use machine learning to automatically black out other people's faces (the exact opposite of the studio lighting effect on the new iPhone 8+ and iPhone X). This would allow Apple AR headset wearers to use their glasses anywhere while still assuring the public they are not being spied by the people sitting at the booth beside them.
I've just been reading the iMac pro threads..... if AR is anything like the iMac pro addressing the markert.... yeah I've got reservations .
[doublepost=1511365407][/doublepost]
New MacBook Pro .... new iMac pro .... iPhone x - I see Apple falling behind their biggest advantage , user experience .
Sorry since jobs lefts, new products miss that execution to detail based on user experience. That's my opinion, if you disagree , great , we can disagree
You bring up an interesting point about advertising. In the book "The Fourth Transformation" the author explored new concepts of shopping. Imagine walking down the street wearing AR glasses and you see someone wearing a hat, coat, pair of shoes, etc. that attract your attention. You could ask the glasses (verbally or via some hand gesture) to identify the brand and model of that item and pull up that item on Amazon.com or the brand's own website. AR could also allow people to virtually "try on" clothes and makeup to see how they would look on the potential customer without having to go to a dressing room or apply sample makeup to their faces. There are already AR apps in the App store for a user to get a virtual tattoo on their body and see how it would look on them. They can take any image, scale it, and apply it to any body part then see what it would look like as they move around.