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 Headset's Capabilities Said to 'Far Exceed' Those of Rival Devices
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
1. Those aren’t killer apps. Those are inherent characteristics of the device category.
2. By that loose definition of killer app, the ‘killer app’ of AR glasses will be:
Integrate into the real world everything you do now in the connected world WITHOUT pulling a box out of you pocket and placing it in front of your face.
It’s the seamless, pervasive experience that is new for the product category.
Smartphones exploded because it put a the connected world into your pocket.
AR glasses will explode because it puts the connected world into the world around you.
Hmmm, seamless and pervasive experiences are worth exactly bubkis next to convenience. If it takes me longer to put the headset on, log in, and do a task compared to taking out my iphone and doing the same, guess which device I will use?
All the tasks in the Apple ecosystem of apps face the same hurdle — FaceTime, Messages and so on. They still have to be there because while you are using the headset you don’t want to be locked out of your online world, but none of them are going to be reasons to pull the device out of your bag and put in on.
No, I think the killer app here has to do with presence. The headset excels at placing you in another environment, just as if you were looking at it with your own two eyes. This could be a game world, as Meta seems to be pursuing, or it could be something different. We will see what they have cooked up for us in the WWDC.
All the tasks in the Apple ecosystem of apps face the same hurdle — FaceTime, Messages and so on. They still have to be there because while you are using the headset you don’t want to be locked out of your online world, but none of them are going to be reasons to pull the device out of your bag and put in on.
No, I think the killer app here has to do with presence. The headset excels at placing you in another environment, just as if you were looking at it with your own two eyes. This could be a game world, as Meta seems to be pursuing, or it could be something different. We will see what they have cooked up for us in the WWDC.
You guys are all wrong about Apple not being the leader in the Gaming category! Ironically Apple is getting the last laugh on Games! All Apple has to do for AR is focus in Games and it will further crush the category!
appleinsider.com
Apple earns more from gaming than Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft, Activision combined!
Apple earns more from gaming than Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft, Activision combined | AppleInsider
Apple's profits from gaming outweighed those of major game companies, according to a report, with Apple earning more from App Store games in its 2019 fiscal year than Nintendo, Microsoft, Activision Blizzard, and Sony combined.
You could put music and video files on the Blackberry.
So people buy an iPad to watch youtube? that's the killer feature? ok, let's continue this way of thinking.. can you imagine what a killer feature will be of a headset that let you put realistic-looking and interactable 3D objects and people on top of the real world and also multiple screens of any size and shape?
Yeah, I wonder what the killer feature of this headset will be... it's so difficult to imagine what it will be 🤔
Omg, mark my words, this is going to be the biggest Apple failure ever! The only killer apps for vr are games and it’s the one thing Apple doesn’t do well at all.
Even trying to imagine calling my sick mom with avatar FaceTime makes me just want to kill myself. Mom, I know you are weak and frail, but please strap on your ski googles so we can have a cartoon conversation in the “Happy Land”!
Even trying to imagine calling my sick mom with avatar FaceTime makes me just want to kill myself. Mom, I know you are weak and frail, but please strap on your ski googles so we can have a cartoon conversation in the “Happy Land”!
These forums always make it sound like people don’t want VR tech to advance . It’s by far the most exciting tech category in a long time. It needs a kick in the pants like this though . Oled, super high res screens. Eventually it will get to the point of being just like reality and some of the experiences on the cheap quest 2 are already pretty amazing
Actually, this is the era of the coming AGI and probably the worst time to release a VR gadget that no one will give two ***** about. No one gave two ***** about PVR2 and that was released with a couple dozen games at least. AI is changing everything and Apple is wasting most of their resources on this crap.
Why would you run into anything? You will be seeing the entire world with specific data and images overlayed atop it. If it's FaceTime, that's just a window (presumable user sizable) with someone's head talking. And of course these images could also be set for only 50% opacity for a ghost effect to see behind them if needed. The device had a heads-up mode (MR) and fully immersive VR mode too for when you're seated and focusing on a game or watching a movie.
I agree that battery pack is very un-Apple and will be a dealbreaker for some since it sucks some of the spontaneity and freedom out of the device. But of course you also get freedom to walk around anywhere outside your home for a few extra hours with a battery that you couldn't (not without neck strain from an internal battery inside headset) get otherwise.
Probably going be as popular as all the AR games that they showed us at every event.
AGI is just fueled by ChatGPT hype right now so it's impossible to see how much disruption it will bring when we are still in the eye of the storm. Remember 3D printing? the quantified self? NFTs? blockchain? Magic Leap? self driving cars? These were all tech trends that were going to change our lives when we were right in the middle of the hype. Most of them fizzled entirely but some will make a comeback in the future. Of course AI and truly intelligent assistants will be part of our future lives, but right now they are just tech demos for investors. Google Glass failed 10 years ago so it's about time to give it another try with better tech and better designers.
At this price, I would assume that face tracking and eye tracking would be table stakes, seeing that Meta can already do it for 1/3 the price. From that they should be able to reconstruct a realistic avatar with a scan of your face, etc. Facebook already demoed photoreal avatars a couple years ago.
This take will age like “why would I want a camera in my cellphone?” Or “CDs sound better than MP3s, who will ever buy an MP3 player?” But to each their own.
By the way I’m a VR skeptic, I’ve tried it for games and other than going out to a full room VR establishment it’s supremely dumb. But AR? Making reality suck less? That’s something people will pay for, I promise you.
Yep. And when the knowledge navigator films or the newton were released we were 20 years from a viable pocket computing device. If we don’t iterate we’ll never innovate. There will be a time when devices no more cumbersome than sunglasses alter our perceptions of reality and eliminate all other display and computing devices. But to get there, we have to start with bulky goggles that only sorta replace reality.
Every one of your examples are “exactly like the real world, but cheaper, and with only 2 senses,” and a couple with time travel thrown in. Not exactly imaginative. I want more experiences that I can’t even potentially experience in the world, including chopping giant blocks with lightsabers.
Valve has some 3D scans of real world environments that you can explore in VR. I’ve also virtually walked around a 3D scan of Mars. Yes, these are neat experiences, but they are hardly the most popular use of VR.
Yeah, they pretty much are. The holodeck is fundamentally full room VR, nothing more. It’s from a fantasy show so it has impossible features like unlimited size and physical projections, but it’s just full room VR. In reality, AR that can on the fly alter the real world around you is more powerful than a huge holodeck because it’s a holodeck that fits in a sunglasses case.
A mobile holodeck that is shaped like glasses... sounds even better than Star Trek's full-room holodeck
Hardware-wise, it's a huge improvement. Single cable to connect and no separate camera to track the controllers. It has cameras built-in so it can scan your room and set up safe play area. Seeing the AR component scan your room and identify the surfaces with correct depths is cool to see. It's nothing new but still novel to me.
I've only just started going through demos and interaction has been a big stumbling block. The Star Wars and Resident Evil demos are awkward to interact with. In Star Wars, holding a gun meant remembering to hold down a button with your middle finger while using your index finger to use the trigger. I think they were trying too hard to feel "real" but I ended up so focused on the controllers, it killed any immersion.
That said, 5 minutes into the Resident Evil demo and I had goosebumps and had to nope out.
I ended up picking it up because it's finally available at Best Buy and other retailers. I had $200 in store credit so finally had something to use it on.
You don’t know that. I agree we should try to find out what is possible. But that doesn’t mean that everything we would wish for is actually possible. And it also doesn’t mean that what is currently possible is a viable product.
Fake 3D that gives some people headaches, and I can't even see in 3D at all, the fake trick doesn't work on me because my eyes don't focus together.
I don't see the usefulness in that either, but even a single screen might be good, as long as there's a good input method and I don't think flailing around with your arms and hands is going to do it.
The name tags, object tagging, and distances, would be very cool for me, but not enough to wear goggles to do it. In other words, I'd be able to do with a less complex device, no interaction, just reading the environment and outputting tags. I'd pay $1000 for that maybe, if it could fit in normal glasses form factor.