This space has been emerging for how many years now? Wondering how long till it makes the breakthrough to wider consumer adoption.
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 Rumored to Announce 'Game-Changer' AR/VR Headset in January 2023
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
For a newcomer will only 24 posts you have a very disturbing and unpleasant attitude.
“That only a handful of enthusiasts…. There is this ridiculous idea that tech manufacturers are supposed to build for the masses. AR/VR development for professionals will be expensive and feature rich. Apple has no obligation to develop for the masses. Nor is there a clear financial incentive for inexpensive products. META is subsidizing it’s Oculus owned headset. There are a lot of Marxist Apple consumers that are VERY touchy about price. I urge them to get a part time job and start saving. Jan 2023 / Winter is coming! Laughs. I think the hardware divide will accelerate in the coming decades. As it should. Let’s revisit this in 5 years.
Last edited:
“Wider consumer adoption”. “Just another device for Rich people” “Few people want their hair style ruined” “Gimicky Block Games”. “You have a very disturbing and unpleasant attitude”.
Just a few of the recent GEMS in this thread. the hostility, socio-economic class resentment and patriarchal expressions here have little to do the AR/VR roll out.
Wider consumption adoption is irrelevant. it is the educated and affluent who will use these tools.
Class resentment? Patriarchal expressions? In this thread?
Suddenly the Koons is MR forums. 🤡
um... did you even read my original post?
I'm not implying Apple is supposed to build for the masses, it's simply that I personally don't care about the AR. All I'm saying is that having a 2nd tier simpler product (VR only) without the AR would be a nice thing.
Every Apple product comes in different tiers for different needs (that's why they sell bunch of different laptops, not just one buffed up MBP $4000 model). Is it so hard to imagine, there is maybe greater interest for a good, simple VR headset without the AR stuff?
Launch of iPhone propelled the development of smartphones. Launch of iPads propelled the development of tablets, etc... and more development means more competition on market = better products for all of us consumers. Launch of a good quality Apple VR headset would spark more interest then solely focusing on AR professionals. Lack of general interest is one of the reasons, development in this field has been so slow in the first place.
"Marxist Apple consumers" remark, lol... I'm not even gonna go there
um... did you even read my original post?
I'm not implying Apple is supposed to build for the masses, it's simply that I personally don't care about the AR. All I'm saying is that having a 2nd tier simpler product (VR only) without the AR would be a nice thing.
Every Apple product comes in different tiers for different needs (that's why they sell bunch of different laptops, not just one buffed up MBP $4000 model). Is it so hard to imagine, there is maybe greater interest for a good, simple VR headset without the AR stuff?
Launch of iPhone propelled the development of smartphones. Launch of iPads propelled the development of tablets, etc... and more development means more competition on market = better products for all of us consumers. Launch of a good quality Apple VR headset would spark more interest then solely focusing on AR professionals. Lack of general interest is one of the reasons, development in this field has been so slow in the first place.
"Marxist Apple consumers" remark, lol... I'm not even gonna go there
Yes “having simpler” products is what many call for. I participated in leading several large digital work-flow and hardware transitions in a corporate setting. Employees (like many Apple product users) don’t like change. “But that’s not how we did it before……”.
I recall we had a large supplier— and our financial relationship with them was a mess. I built a Microsoft Sharepoint site with features to streamline and discipline our paperwork. Then we required all vendors to use it or lose us as a customer. “ Oh but Sir, you don’t understand…our systems need no tweaking… Yes, thank you we’ll discontinue our business with you in 30 days.”—- Of course they came back. One company was an Auto Dealership in Los Angeles. I went out and trained the four nice ladies in accounting on Sharepoint. — They took to it fast. Same with a vital small Mom and Pop vendor we used. I bought them a new computer and a Loud bell that rang when they got a Sharepoint entry— so they could hear it in the machine shop. A few months later, the owner of the large dealership chain called me and asked if I would do same for his entire company! Laughs! right! I found him a training/integrator.
The point of this tale is — there are many (like you) who claim “I don’t care about AR” or fill in the blank at end. That not caring could cost you. Even Marxists should be hungry to eagerly learn emerging technologies! Laughs!
Last edited:
The more VR units Apple will sell (especially "cheaper" versions), the more incentive they'll have to actually invest in improving the AR /VR technology overall further and paving it's success, is what I'm saying.
Just a little background; I work in IT and got my hands on a HoloLens a couple of times. As much as I was in awe of this technology, the overall experience was so bad and so far from a useful product (in my view) I completely lost interest in it. But we have a VR headset in office that I often borrowed just for fun and have had truly immersive experiences. As a consumer therefore, I'm currently much more interested in VR then in AR. And I believe I'm not the only one.
Is AR the future? Absolutely
Is Apple working on a top notch AR / VR development tool a good thing? Definitely
would it still be nice to get hands on a nice, simple Apple VR headset for those without the current need for AR? Yes
Being hungry for learning emerging technologies, of course; I'm really interested to finally see this thing. I guess I'm just a type of guy that needs to see a good example first.
---
PS: I'm writing this on a custom built (almost maxed out) 27 iMac. Hardly a typical Marxist computer choice, isn't it?
The more VR units Apple will sell (especially "cheaper" versions), the more incentive they'll have to actually invest in improving the AR /VR technology overall further and paving it's success, is what I'm saying.
Just a little background; I work in IT and got my hands on a HoloLens a couple of times. As much as I was in awe of this technology, the overall experience was so bad and so far from a useful product (in my view) I completely lost interest in it. But we have a VR headset in office that I often borrowed just for fun and have had truly immersive experiences. As a consumer therefore, I'm currently much more interested in VR then in AR. And I believe I'm not the only one.
Is AR the future? Absolutely
Is Apple working on a top notch AR / VR development tool a good thing? Definitely
would it still be nice to get hands on a nice, simple Apple VR headset for those without the current need for AR? Yes
Being hungry for learning emerging technologies, of course; I'm really interested to finally see this thing. I guess I'm just a type of guy that needs to see a good example first.
---
PS: I'm writing this on a custom built (almost maxed out) 27 iMac. Hardly a typical Marxist computer choice, isn't it?
- Yes Miha— your tempered viewpoint is more patient than mine. I’m ok with the problems and frustrations that will accompany Version one. Maybe I’m too optimistic, but I expect Apple to surprise us. Much of the talk of Mixed reality headsets revolves around gaming and entertainment. I’m interested in how it will grow in education, medicine and countless other uses I can’t see at the moment.
I have closely followed the Defense Department’s problem plagued $20 Billion dollar HoloLens contract specifically for Combat infantry. There have been very view large scale Military hardware development contracts that have gone smoothly. But in my mind, it’s urgent to get the HoloLens (or other) into the field and widespread.— If it goes poorly— then pull it back and re-design. (I know there has been significant field testing of the HoloLens— for that very purpose) Recall when Elon Musk exploded his Starship in a 2020 crash landing? - he basically said, “No problem, we got good data”.— That goes against the grain of old school Defense contracting—
Last edited:
If you already knew where the information came from, why did you ask? I’m not here for rhetorical nonsense. Do you have a better argument than your self-declared “not credible”?
I hope the rumors are wrong and the headset comes in cheaper than expected, just like the iPad did. But if you want things to “pass the smell test” look at how much something like the valve index costs for inferior optics and no onboard processing. Then look at the cost of M1 and M2 macs and explain how it will combine the two and still come in at a grand or less. It’s not impossible, an M1 iPad Air is less than a grand, but unlikely given the displays, cameras and optics this requires.
It's a pair of (holographic) glasses that connect's to a person's iPhone for AR processing (which has an A-series cpu/gpu and a battery to support the computational load) via a wireless bidirectional UWB data link. There's not even an M1 or M2 or other cpu in the glasses - just enough electronics (in a small custom chip/ASIC) and small battery to support a couple of video data streams to/from the iPhone.
Much different than others' VR products that cost a lot.
Retail cost? I dunno. Between $1K and $2K; which will still provide a decent approx 40% profit for Apple.
Ok, so the point of contention was never the price (as all your posts suggested), but the features that drive the price. The predominant rumor is that the headset will be self contained (with an M1/M2) and cost $2000-$3000, but you're convinced that it will be something else entirely. Namely this snippet from tom's guide (the same article has a lot more on the M2 though):
While Kou does speculate on a $1000 price for something in line with the above, the $2-$3k rumors are much more predominant right now. There's no problem with discussing the headset at its rumored price with rumored features on MacRumors. Obviously the rumored price will influence how some people feel about the product's viability, as it should. It wouldn't be the first Apple device to price itself out of a market, and not everyone talking about the price is hating on Apple per say. I'd love to see a cheaper device, even if it needs to offload the processing to do it, so it would be nice if you were right, but saying it is that is mere speculation.
No. It's about the price that keeps getting kicked around - and the limited market being willing to accept that.
The only chance to make that happen is what I described up above using an iPhone's A-series cpu/gpu and decent battery found in an iPhone. Apple has been working with Stanford's AR/VR lab for six+ years. Not so coincidentally, Stanford and another company will be presenting a holographic glasses device for AR at SIGGRAPH in August.
Putting all the AR processing power and a decent sized battery in a set of goggles is so un-Apple. And just dumb, considering everyone's iPhone (assuming it's recent enough) has the required horsepower, decent battery capacity, UWB for video links to glasses, internet communications, storage for apps/documents, etc.
Also, I don't think it will connect via WiFi, rather use low power UWB for communications. Much lower power and more robust - it's sized right for the application and short communication distance. And it's in recent iPhones, starting with the iPhone 11, leveraging the tech Apple has already developed.
Last edited: