Apple Reportedly Completes Production Tests for AR/VR Headset

[Jensend]

My guess is that there will be two versions. A bulkier VR headset for home use, and a more lightweight pair of AR glasses (which I imagine will be almost identical to a normal pair of spectacles) that you can wear outdoors all day just by tethering to your phone.

With Apple, the best way to approach this is to imagine what sort of experiences a product can enable. Live sports and concerts would be an interesting way to start.

I have a hard time envisioning a wear-everywhere headset any time in the next 5 years that passes as a normal pair of (sun)glasses at first glance, is useful enough to be worn all day, has enough battery life for all day usage, and has decent visuals.

You could have something like Siri glasses, where the primary interface is audio. Maybe you could even have a tiny visual HUD. But that's not really AR—at best it's just the Apple Watch in a different form factor.

There probably will not be a huge gap between this headset's AR mode and the AR mode on a iPhone. The immersive impact/effect would be different but pretty good chance would not have to completely rewrite the app from scratch.

There is a two fold scale impact there. First, a limited subset of developers could do AR app development on iPhones ( like already doing for last couple of years). Second, some AR headset app developers have an outlet beyond the headset for the slightly different app build for iPhones/iPads.

I don't think there's a lot of overlap between phone/tablet AR and head mounted AR. From a technology standpoint it's similar—Apple's work on ARKit is certainly going to pay off for head mounted AR. But for actual use cases, I don't see much overlap. If AR were useful in a phone/tablet form factor, it would have already gotten a lot more use. I'm a bit of an enthusiast in the VR space, and have tried several iPad AR apps, and while it the technology is impressive, I haven't found much of a use for it. On the other hand, I've spent hundreds of hours in VR social, gaming, and creative apps. If visual quality is significantly improved, I could see myself using VR even for mundane computing tasks.

 

[dreamerstree]

"Here's the question no one is asking: Is this worth it?"

-Oscar Martinez, The Office

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

I so hope I live long enough to have a serious case of vertigo using these goggles. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE SOON!!!

 

[Le0M]

I don’t know how many times it has to happen. I can’t see how anyone with some imagination cannot the see the potential of this product.

I think I do know: AR/VR headsets released so far have a terrible UI and input methods. If Apple is smart enough it will create a mind blowing user interface and input methods.
I really hope they can deliver what I pictured in my head years ago

 

[duffman9000]

I don’t believe it until I see blurry, clandestine pictures of the headset.

Don’t forget man hand with extra long finger nail. No finger nail? Not real!

 

[npmacuser5]

Big screen TV’s (any TV) demise!

 

[ajfahey]

Looks like scuba mask. I wonder where they‘ll go with that look?

 

[ajfahey]

I also wonder whether there is a chance that this display technology will ever replace connected Monitors in a workspace environment?

 

[nastysailboat]

Everyone seems to be flipping out about the supposed pricing of this thing, but I'm thinking there could be some classic Apple misdirection at play here. We know that Apple has, historically, allowed bits and pieces of information (and misinformation) to "leak" out in order to either 1) gauge reaction, 2) set expectations, or 3) fully misdirect.

I think we're seeing a bit of 2 and 3 here.

First off, do I think that we'll be seeing Oculus Quest 2 pricing? No. The Headset (or whatever it will be called) has way more raw power than a Quest 2 and will probably be priced accordingly, especially since this is Apple we're talking about after all.

Do I think we're going to see a $2,000 - $3,000 Headset? Again, probably no. Especially not if Apple is legitimately wanting to make a consumer play here (which they probably are). I'm guessing that the Headset will probably be in the $1,000 - $1,500 range. Which is expensive for what we've come to think of as a stand-alone VR headset (Quest 2), but not expensive at all when you think about high-end VR headsets (HTC Vive / Valve Index). Especially when you consider that the high-end units ALSO require a pricing gaming PC to make them work. And even more especially when the rumors point to having M1 Pro levels of processing power which will make it akin to a high-end PC rig (cheapest M1 Pro MBP starts at $2k).

So what does Apple do? They "leak" that the Headset will cost up to $3,000 so that when they announce that it "only" costs $1,000 (to start), the conversation won't be about how expensive it is, but rather what a bargain it is (compared to what everyone thought it would be).

We've even got precedent - look at the original iPad. For months, the rumors pointed to it being $800 - $1,000 or more. What was its starting price when announced? $499. And everyone went nuts about how "inexpensive" it was.

OR, how about this? What if there's going to be two versions? Headset and Headset Pro? Headset is for consumers, starts at, say, $1,299, and has a bunch of accessories that you can add on to it (sold separately). Headset Pro is for businesses / professionals, starts at $2,499, and comes bundled with a bunch of stuff (or just has more gigawatts, gewgaws, LiquidMagicXDRRetina, or whatever).

Just thinking out loud.

I honestly think apple will charge up in the $2000 - $3000 range. I hope they don’t because I’d like to see a lot more people being able to get into this product. And I think that price range is a bit out of range for most. But if Apple is smart. Which I think they are. They will make this a device that big on gaming and consuming media. Something to maybe compete with gaming pc’s. Seems like that’s what the every day consumer wants is to game on a Mac, so maybe this is apple offering to gamers. A decent gaming pc starts around $1000. So if you want the apple equivalent I could easily see it going to $2000 but then you gotta think that’s for a decent machine. Up it to a more premium machine and you could easily get to $3000

 

[nastysailboat]

Thats not what you would use them for.
The competitors (as we think)
Consumer example ($300): Oculus
https://www.oculus.com/

Commercial/Industrial example ($3500): Microsoft Hololens
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/hololens

I’m surprised how much I see these comments. Why would you wear a $3000 device that can obstruct your vision out in public.

 

[EdT]

Big screen TV’s (any TV) demise!

Yeah, and if you want to watch a movie with your wife and 2 kids then its only $12000.00 for all of you to have one.

There really better be another use for this other than 4k or 8k tv replacement. Maybe being able to link it to a Mac Mini or a MacBook Pro as a main screen of 360 degree width. That makes more sense than something just meant to stream videos, but not a lot more sense.

 

[sideshowuniqueuser]

Oculus $299, Apple 3k. This isn’t a price point apple should want to hit

What if it's 20x better?

 

[svish]

Excited to see the new product category from Apple. Looks like it will be announced at least in 2022

 

[Ghost31]

Everybody acting like this is a guaranteed hit product but just look at where the HomePod went. Look at AirPods Max which they don’t seem to even give that much of a crap about.

So we will wait and find out. Will this be another iPhone? Or will it just be another HomePod niche device that barely anybody will buy and competitors will outmatch in no time

 

[mcdoze]

I’m enjoying all the “nobody wants this” comments. Reminds me of so many other product rumours (Fleetwood Mac's version!) like the iPad and watch that slowly burned into massive successes, or the AirPods that were mocked for their design and went on to become iconic must-haves.

I have a feeling the first AR/VR sets won’t yet know what their killer feature or use case is. They’ll pitch it as one thing, but a few years in people will show the tech giants what these things are really for and the companies who adapt the quickest will rise to the top and dominate the industry.

I am in complete agreement with this. chaos + opportunity + disenfranchisement + class warfare = digital worlds

 

[M.PaulCezanne]

On the list of things the world needs right now this ranks… well, not on it.

 

[Jensend]

Everybody acting like this is a guaranteed hit product but just look at where the HomePod went. Look at AirPods Max which they don’t seem to even give that much of a crap about.

So we will wait and find out. Will this be another iPhone? Or will it just be another HomePod niche device that barely anybody will buy and competitors will outmatch in no time

The Apple iPod Hi-Fi is another expensive Apple audio product that didn't last long.

I think most people just don't care about audio quality enough to pay several hundred dollars when there are a myriad of good enough, much less expensive options. And there's a bunch of competition in the higher end range as well.
Speaker tech just doesn't change all that much. The Sony headphones I'm wearing now have been in production for over 30 years. Speakers don't need to be replaced very often.

 

[incoherent_1]

I’m enjoying all the “nobody wants this” comments. Reminds me of so many other product rumours like the iPad and watch that slowly burned into massive successes, or the AirPods that were mocked for their design and went on to become iconic must-haves.

I have a feeling the first AR/VR sets won’t yet know what their killer feature or use case is. They’ll pitch it as one thing, but a few years in people will show the tech giants what these things are really for and the companies who adapt the quickest will rise to the top and dominate the industry.

Ha! Reminds me of myself after the Apple Watch debut. I thought to myself "Who would want this?" "There aren't any killer features?" "I don't want another device to charge"

Three years later, I bought one and it is fantastic! It is so insanely useful!

 

[44267547]

If it’s really going to ship this year I’d expect a WWDC preview of the platform.

You would think so, because that would make the most sense. I could see Apple at least giving a ‘teaser’, but with no definitive release date or maybe a general ‘expected year’ to release. I think this product has a lot of potential, but also the potential to see delays easily if there’s lack of progression on the developer side of things and/or with the software.

 

[bushman4]

Long time coming, expectations are high and it’s Doubtful Apple will disappoint
As with all Apple products the experience will only get better as time goes on and others add value and function to it
There are so many Apple patents related to this that the experience could really be mind boggling

 

[cocoua]

there isn't a word about controllers, and this devices are just useful as their controllers are designing,

That's why the iPhone wasn't a Blackberry, N64 is not a Wii but PS1 and PS4 are the same devices just better.

And nobody is talking about that (gesture control??? please…)

 

[Arsenikdote]

No, people around here probably don't assume gaming. As you say, Apple has had MANY opportunities for that and never seriously gone after it (off phone).

If pricing rumors are true, it needs to bring something very desirable. For example, I just spent over $2K on a widescreen, high-resolution monitor for my next Desktop. There's some believing this product could virtualize ANY size monitor so your "big"/"best" monitor could always be with you. If so and if it works well (no headaches), I'd much rather have shot that $2K towards THIS instead.

My last big screen TV cost much more than the rumored price. If this could allow me to bring an equivalent big screen TV with me when traveling, I could rationalize a pretty good outlay for it.

The question will be: if something can fool your eyes into seeing ANYTHING, what anythings are worth whatever the actual MSRP will be? That's not a hard list to make. For example, sports fans might pay upwards of several thousand dollars for court-side seats to ONE game. A service that creates a realistic sense of sitting front-row center for any sporting event/show/etc seems like it would easily sell for several thousand dollars plus an ongoing service fee.

Peloton gets about $50/month so that you can ride a bike with instructors through a variety of places in 2D. If you could feel much more like actually being in those places (if you could look side to side and even behind you and see that you are THERE, is that not worth at least the same subscription cost? If so, how much is 2-3 years of that kind of experience worth?

Exercise/Dine with celebrities? Turn staycations into something that feels much more like true vacations? Go to a "live" Beatles concert in approx. 1963? Go be a part of ANY historical event that can be rendered for this? Lunch on the moon? (Superman) fly around anywhere? Swim down to check out Titanic first hand (and not be crushed by the pressures). Etc.

Many of us seem to only think gaming and that this is going to have to deliver a way for us to slice boxes flying at us in 3D upwards of 4X-6X better than Oculus. But gaining control of what our eyes see and what our ears hear has tons of possibilities far beyond what we've seen so far.

As others say, the software will make this sale. If the software dazzles, the demand will be there.

I have been thinking a lot about this. I suppose maybe this might be it, but it still feels too small doesn't it? I mean anyone with a family wouldn't buy 3x,4x,5x of these things to use to watch movies instead of a TV. So now the market is limited to single people or the super rich. Most of their consumer base for all non-iPhone products are married people with children in their mid-life period. For occasional travel use? Seems the market would be even smaller.

Someone else mentioned the "next interface" for computing. Maybe we are there, but I doubt it. Simple gestures to control a very limited range of interaction seems reasonable, but to wholesale replace today's computing interface? I just don't think the tech is there to make it as seamless as it needs to be for widespread adoption. However, maybe this would be a bridge device. Meaning, maybe it would act as a "large screen" which would pull in some people and then as they iterate over time it could be more appealing to larger groups of people. Apple hasn't really shown that to be the case for any large segment products, but maybe it would have to be for this to launch now?

I get the opportunities of AR for things like sports events or any "be there" type things. It still just seem VERY niche and doesn't seem very mainstream. Maybe if the price point is closer to $1500, uses your phone's compute power, and they already have a ton of content providers backing it.....maybe? I would be truly shocked if Apple enters the space with a VR headset instead of an AR headset.

I just think that augmenting what you see with "extras", essentially a full time HUD in the form of an acceptable version of Google Glass, seems way more in line with the mainstream appeal they would want for a true large segment product release. I just don't think it would not look anything like the renders we are seeing. So I either think they are farther off still or they have a different design concept that hasn't been leaked (hopefully this one).

 

[Putzi360]

Immersion gets me every time in Beatsaber on my Quest2. Every game is a little rewarding workout.
I am quite keen on the next generation of VR, but I can't imagine shelling out 10 times the money for it.
Watching movies is okayish but no revelation, VR p(opc)orn is quite involving, especially in 180°/360°. ?

 

[npmacuser5]

The Yeah, and if you want to watch a movie with your wife and 2 kids then its only $12000.00 for all of you to have one.

There really better be another use for this other than 4k or 8k tv replacement. Maybe being able to link it to a Mac Mini or a MacBook Pro as a main screen of 360 degree width. That makes more sense than something just meant to stream videos, but not a lot more sense.

My observation, the movie night going the way of the dinosaur's. Kids on couch listening to shows on their tablets, mom and dad watching different movies on their devices. TV’s are already starting to become dinosaur‘s. Our bedroom TV, has it been turned on in the last year, no. Portable screens are winning. This will offer another level and opportunity to not buy a screwed to the wall bedroom TV. How it shakes out on pricing to portability will need to wait and see. I am not counting those who love big screens, big sound and live in a high rise apartment. No neighbor problems. Lots of opportunities for sales numbers, at the expense of traditional TV’s.

 

[EdT]

My observation, the movie night going the way of the dinosaur's. Kids on couch listening to shows on their tablets, mom and dad watching different movies on their devices. TV’s are already starting to become dinosaur‘s. Our bedroom TV, has it been turned on in the last year, no. Portable screens are winning. This will offer another level and opportunity to not buy a screwed to the wall bedroom TV. How it shakes out on pricing to portability will need to wait and see. I am not counting those who love big screens, big sound and live in a high rise apartment. No neighbor problems. Lots of opportunities for sales numbers, at the expense of traditional TV’s.

And like I said, at $3000 a pop are you buying one for every member of the family? No? Baby to 5 or 6 years old can still watch a regular tv? Give them an iPad (or Surface)? What age becomes the cut off then? Lets also not forget that if you are streaming different multiple movies, and probably even if you are all streaming the same movie that can eat up bandwidth from whatever ISP you use pretty damn fast. Just like multiple phones in the same household use their own data and not some home-centric 'universal' data, unless Apple/Roku etc decides to release or update so that they can act as a hub so everyone connects just to your home device and it just downloads one feed from the internet then goggles are using internet AND home bandwidth. And if your 3 or 4 people are all viewing different 4K shows then you are eating up 75 to 100 Mbs of data. Maybe ok if you have gigabit speeds but a lot people only have 100 Mbs service available, and that means the 3 of you watch a movie OR you use your laptop/ipad, but not both.