Apple May Launch Augmented Reality Headset With Custom 'rOS' Operating System by 2020

[hawkeye_a]

Pointless. Who in their right mind seriously sees the general population adopting such a product?

There isn't a use-case strong enough(so far anyway) where I would want to deal with such a physically invasive piece of technology.

A waste of resources, IMHO.

 

[JayIsAwesome]

I shudder at the thought of what that thing is gonna cost

 

[cjbryce]

How about glasses with user-controllable lenses which can adjust (electronically or physically) to a required prescription? Couple that with some rOS/AR functionality then I might be genuinely interested.

For example, I'm entirely right-eye dominant, long-sighted, wear a contact lens to correct that and thus have to wear reading glasses when wearing a contact or varifocals when not (which are sometimes a pain to use as my eyes/head are at the wrong angle for the correct part of the lens).

I'd pay good money for glasses which detected if I had a contact lens in and self-adjusted to meet use cases e.g.

• Contact lens in - switch automagically between
  • Dedicated to reading (detecting whether there's an object of some sort in "reading range")
  • Normal use when walking along (i.e. no correction at all)
  • Normal use when driving (lower half corrected for reading instruments upper half for looking where I'm going)
• Contact lens out - switch automagically between
  • Dedicated to reading (detecting whether there's an object of some sort in "reading range")
  • Normal use - adjust for long-sightedness (whole lens like the top-half of my varifocals)
  • Normal use when driving (lower half corrected for reading instruments upper half for looking where I'm going)

An Apple - and more intelligent - version of these

http://www.luzerneoptical.com/top-w...ronic-eyewear/empower-electronic-glasses.html

 

[bbeagle]

Pointless. Who in their right mind seriously sees the general population adopting such a product?

There isn't a use-case strong enough(so far anyway) where I would want to deal with such a physically invasive piece of technology.

Here's one:

The glasses (through face scanning) can detect sexual predators, prisoners on the run, people with restraining orders, etc. The more people wearing these glasses, the more this data can be sent to authorities.

I remember in the 80s when you left your house all day without being able to contact anyone. Now, with cell phones, you're in constant contact in case of emergencies. In the future, your technology will protect you, or others, and will be seen as invaluable and 'can't leave home without it'. Would you want your daughter to be out in public near a sexual predator?

At least this seems like a plausible way that some companies will market this.

 

[44267547]

A gimmick bound to fail in my opinion. We shall see.

That's what others were saying about the Apple Watch. And look at the success behind The Best selling smart watch in the world.

 

[zarmanto]

You mean a 5th OS. Apple already has macOS, iOS, tvOS, and watchOS. :eyeroll:

Technically, you could also argue that each is just a collection of tweaks to an interface resting on top of the same OS. (That is, BSD.)

 

[routine_analyst]

Again... if they assume people will wear this, they have to consider the fashion statement it makes. No one in their right mind will want to wear dorky lab glasses around. Example: Jobs wore John Lennon circle glasses because he liked his music. Tim Cook wears smart people looking glasses because he wants to look like a smart person (jk).

 

[Big Ron]

Just a general query:

I don't have perfect eyesight, one of my eyes being considerable stronger than the other.... corrected by glasses.

Does anyone know if my defective eyesight would be able to cope with the reality headset i.e could they induce a migraine, would I get a full VR stereo effect or would, as I hope, my glasses just compensate?

I hope somebody in a similar position, who has had experience with the numerous VR headsets already on the market, could give this forum the benefit of their experiences.

Thanks in advance

 

[mi7chy]

I'll wait for the leaders like Magic Leap before making a decision. There must be a good reason notable companies like Google, Qualcomm, Alibaba, etc. are investing in it.

https://www.magicleap.com/

 

[zarmanto]

Does anyone know if my defective eyesight would be able to cope with the reality headset i.e could they induce a migraine, would I get a full VR stereo effect or would, as I hope, my glasses just compensate?

I have very limited experience... but from what I understand, adverse side effects due to VR glasses in particular vary greatly from one person to another, and may not necessarily be related to how good your vision is. Nausea is one of the most significant adverse reactions -- but one of the interesting benefits that augmented reality in particular has over fully immersive VR is that the nausea is somehow mitigated by having a solid frame of reference within the real world.

So bottom line: it probably won't be as bad as similar tech has been for some people in the recent past... but unfortunately, there are no guarantees.

 

[visualride]

This mock up render must have been made by someone trying to kill the upcoming facial AR industry. While the render and mockup were quality made, the design is about as revolting as possible. The mock up that was posted yesterday was much more palatable.

 

[sjwr]

I'll wait for the contact lenses

 

[kevinthebright]

Dear god, please not another OS. The Apple ecosystem is a mess. And it feels like its being designed by the people who did the McDonald's playlands.

 

[Big Ron]

I have very limited experience... but from what I understand, adverse side effects due to VR glasses in particular vary greatly from one person to another, and may not necessarily be related to how good your vision is. Nausea is one of the most significant adverse reactions -- but one of the interesting benefits that augmented reality in particular has over fully immersive VR is that the nausea is somehow mitigated by having a solid frame of reference within the real world.

So bottom line: it probably won't be as bad as similar tech has been for some people in the recent past... but unfortunately, there are no guarantees.

Thanks Zarmanto

 

[gtgrad95]

I don't get it...because Google Glass was such a resounding success?

 

[lordofthereef]

Call me old fashioned. I’d rather have an Apple TV (display) or a car. Granted the car would most probably be out of my price range.

 

[california_kid]

would rather see this technology focus on those with impaired vision first.

 

[ackmondual]

eyeOS

Nah, eyeOS is supposed to be for the eyePhone

 

[76ShovelHead]

I like the idea of using this when traveling abroad, but I’m most excited to see what augmented reality can do on a windshield in a vehicle.

The latter is my sentiment exactly. It would be so cool to see a gps app highlight your path on the road. Never would you miss an exit again lol.

 

[Jim Lahey]

I once hated the very notion of stuff like this, but I now believe it’s inevitable. Nothing stays the same. Entropy alone sees to that. Embrace the future, it’s coming tomorrow. Possibly sooner.

I have a hundred dollars here though that says within seconds of announcement there will be complaining about battery life, and how some guy’s Great Grandad’s smart glasses would last a week on a single charge. Etc. Obviously this device will also be too thin, and too thick. Too heavy, and too light.

Embedded chips pluging us directly into the Matrix? MEH. WHY IS IT SO EXPENSIVE?! What about the Mac Micro updates, Tim?

 

[bunnicula]

Here's one:

The glasses (through face scanning) can detect sexual predators, prisoners on the run, people with restraining orders, etc. The more people wearing these glasses, the more this data can be sent to authorities.

I remember in the 80s when you left your house all day without being able to contact anyone. Now, with cell phones, you're in constant contact in case of emergencies. In the future, your technology will protect you, or others, and will be seen as invaluable and 'can't leave home without it'. Would you want your daughter to be out in public near a sexual predator?

At least this seems like a plausible way that some companies will market this.

So, people wearing them will become powerful tools of Big Brother. How Orwellian.

 

[Sylvan]

This would be awesome

 

[bbeagle]

I don't get it...because Google Glass was such a resounding success?

It wasn't done or marketed correctly. It was also too soon to market.

It didn't have any 'gotta have it' features - just 'wow, that's cool' stuff. Needed more than that.

Again, this will probably be something that Apple succeeds at as they look at the product differently. Nay-sayers will say 'but, Google was first'. When, they really weren't. They were one of the first with something to market, but not the right thing.

 

[zarmanto]

Call me old fashioned. I’d rather have an Apple TV (display) or a car. Granted the car would most probably be out of my price range.

Ultimately, a television with an AppleTV built-in would also be out of most customers price range -- which is why I personally don't think that either of the products you're suggesting are likely to come to fruition, outside of the "CarPlay" interface.

Apple has largely refocused their strategy on markets where there is high turnover... that is, they rely upon customers who are willing to spend more money every year or two years. That's (unfortunately) one of the reasons that they haven't been focusing much on Macs; while it was the product that made them to begin with, and as such, will probably always touch a soft spot in the heart of older Apple execs, it's simply not replaced frequently enough to really keep Apple in business.

Likewise, for televisions. I'm going to be replacing the TV in my home office soon -- but the only reason for that is that my son cracked the screen of the one that was already there. Otherwise, that two-year-old TV would probably have stayed in place for at least several more years -- just like the 2012 iMac, sitting in that same home office. Apple allegedly looked into building their own "smart TV" at one point, and I personally think that they ultimately cancelled the project because they saw the writing on the wall, and anticipated low turnover.

The current AppleTV device, on the other hand, can (ostensibly) be replaced more cheaply than an entire TV. By that merit, it has the potential to become a high turnover product. (I don't think it's actually done so yet -- likely because Apple has priced the darned thing far higher than offerings from their competitors -- but the theoretical potential is at least there.)

 

[hvfsl]

Pointless. Who in their right mind seriously sees the general population adopting such a product?

There isn't a use-case strong enough(so far anyway) where I would want to deal with such a physically invasive piece of technology.

A waste of resources, IMHO.

For cycling I can get a heads up display showing stats plus a map of where I am going. For sailing I get an overlay of where the buoys are so I don't have to keep looking down at the map or iPad, then trying to hunt the correct colour one with some binoculars. So I am really looking forward to this and will probably get a gen 1 product.