Apple Stops Work on Lighter Vision Pro to Fast-Track AI Smart Glasses

[ypl]

At least the Vision Pros will sell a few hundred thousand units - maybe even a million cumulatively by 2027. The Apple Car truly consumed the R&D resoures and flopped so badly it never even launched!

Apple will sell ~ 1 billion (!) iPhones till then. 1 million is a "statistical error". Tim should have made same decision as for Apple Car and just drop the product (as well as Liquid Glass - but that different story).

...
It would not surprise me at all, if Meta (or someone else) manages to get out a proper pair of AR glasses for $1500 or less, just as Apple releases their 1st gen product with no display (probably for $5-600).

Meta Quest 2? They sold 10 million pairs in 2021 alone.

 

[Candlelight]

So.... Google Glass failed mainly due to privacy concerns. But now everyone is ok with it?

Honest question. I've not been following the Meta release.

 

[richinaus]

People who don’t wear glasses don’t want to wear glasses. People who *wear* glasses don’t even want to wear glasses

People also don’t want someone around them using a device that’s recording them at all times

who are these People? Are they the same as the people often referred to as 'we' ?

 

[turbineseaplane]

"The future", folks ... (not at all)

 

[ronno]

…People said similar things about smartphones as too convenient cameras and recorders. The market will adapt and will as its inevitable progress to the dismay of fear-mongering pessimists worrying that technology is advancing too fast for policies and reactionary controls to catch up to.

The world will again adapt similar to how technology advanced knowledge sharing faster than the rate of traditional education institutions.

Many private businesses and festivals have already embraced glasses preferably than phones as people are far more present and aware of their surroundings as well hands free to actually engage and buy drinks/food.

Common computing use cases on-the-conduct as following directions, capturing things while active, gathering information about what you saw, and even FPS gaming were ALWAYS going to be better done with spatial computing hardware over time.

This isn’t changing and will be more viable and welcomed as the cost and timeless technology hurdles are removed.

Many are making themselves more important than they really are, overly cynical arguably, or really need to force their local government to ease their minds with sufficient deterrents of people using spatial computing hardware maliciously

Cameras in people's pockets is an entirely different thing than cameras on one's head constantly pointed at whoever one is looking at.
Entirely different IMO.

 

[ronno]

OK, good for you? That doesn't answer my question. If someone asks if a mechanical watch or a smart watch is better, I'm not contributing much to the conversation if I just say I don't wear a watch.

I am referring to my comment elsewhere in this thread: heavy contraption strapped to my face, with cameras constantly rolling is a no go.
Not at $3500 and not even at $399.
Smart glasses, *maybe* - but even then, trying to interact with people with cameras constantly pointed at their face is ridiculous.
Unless maybe there is a red tally light to let people know that you are recording them. Also ridiculous.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Cameras in people's pockets is an entirely different thing than cameras on one's head constantly pointed at whoever one is looking at.
Entirely different IMO.

How are these things like the Meta Perv glasses working (or not) in say Japan, do we know?

IIRC, they are so conscious (a good thing!) of these issues that smartphone camera shutter sounds can't be silenced at all.

 

[egdiroh]

First rule. Don't trust Bloomberg.

I feel like these two products have a huge overlap. I think this only kills the vision line if it fully eclipses it. But also since so many people just use the AVP as a big screen for their Macs, it seems like it might. but so much of what they develop for one will be good for the other.

For apple I think the concern might be that Meta will poison the Market to make it so that they'll have to do too much to build it back.

 

[firewood]

Nothing will convince me to use something in my head, attached to my body when I can use my phone instead.

There are plenty of situations where I don't have a free hand to pick up my phone, but still want to see some info. Even a phone on the dashboard isn't as good as a heads-up display.

 

[Ct applefan]

"The future", folks ... (not at all)

View attachment 2562820

God I hope not.

 

[ToastErickson]

I still do not understand why the Vision was released as a stand alone device. Could have dropped the price of it considerably if it was just wirelessly tethered to your phone to handle the processing load.

 

[richinaus]

Apple will sell ~ 1 billion (!) iPhones till then. 1 million is a "statistical error". Tim should have made same decision as for Apple Car and just drop the product (as well as Liquid Glass - but that different story).


Meta Quest 2? They sold 10 million pairs in 2021 alone.

So keep repeating the same product until you realise your competition is going to overtake? We know how that ends.

 

[CrysisDeu]

The H2 Chip uses even less power than the S11 Watch chip.



Watch OS. If there is no screen what is upside of WatchOS? The HomePod Mni runs a variant of tvOS (if I recall correctly). If all the glasses are doing is audio (in/out) and perhaps pushing down camera output then it is far closer to the firmware that the AirPods run. Extremely little computation means don't really need a relatively large and/or complicated OS either.

[ The HomePod could have a smaller OS than tvOS but I suspect Apple is eventually heading towards something like the Amazon "Show" Screen+Speakers 'smart' device. the Micro display on the mini doesn't need much. It is also likely cheaper for tv and homepod line to 'share' the OS cost overhead over a higher aggregate unit volume also. ]



Hard to do 'visual AI' when have no screen. If mean camera capture computational AI. A mini (or micro) R1 may be a better fit if just have pure "camera RAW" processing issue.



The Watch has gyroscopes. There is reduced need to measure signals to the muscles if can feel the motions produced by the muscles. (e.g, Watch already has a pinch to do X , raise to wake , etc. )

If just did orchestration then Glasses + Airpod + Watch (+ Phone) required as a combo would lower the load on he glasses a substantial amount ( wouldn't have to do audio in/out either).




If sperad the batteries around ( AirPod , Watch , Glasses ) then don't need to be as swappable. Watch and AirPods work without swappable.




The in-ear AirPods already provide audio privacy.

Rayban display has a small display and it adds a lot of value.
Gyro isn’t accurate enough for accurate small movements.
I think the glass definitely needs to display something, especially when meta rayban display is already on the table. They can have a cheaper version with audio only

 

[Cameront9]

On the one hand, disappointing. On the other hand, if this means that I can have closed captioning glasses before the end of the decade, then I'm all in.

 

[turbineseaplane]

On the one hand, disappointing. On the other hand, if this means that I can have closed captioning glasses before the end of the decade, then I'm all in.

The real question with Apple is...
Which decade?

 

[whatnot]

Rayban display has a small display and it adds a lot of value.
[...] I think the glass definitely needs to display something [...] They can have a cheaper version with audio only.

define 'value' and 'something', because 'audio only' sounds like one of them pdf readers, but maybe for when you're lost in the cheese aisle? 'you are looking at brie. blink once to add to iBasket'.

 

[ifxf]

Great so just like meta they are giving up on VR, sorry but the whole Vision Pro selling point is how good watching videos and content on it, all I wanted was a newer model with better fov and lighter. I don’t like the whole glasses thing for AR. Can’t a trillion dollar company work on both. So the whole Vision Pro was a beta product they are just going to forget about

Vision Pro is a niche product that even most early adopters haven’t adopted. The size of Apple precludes investing resources in products that won’t impact the bottom line.

 

[aylk]

So I guess that Meta is now in charge of determining Apple's product pipeline? This sounds like BS... hopefully it is.

 

[Jensend]

I am referring to my comment elsewhere in this thread: heavy contraption strapped to my face, with cameras constantly rolling is a no go.
Not at $3500 and not even at $399.
Smart glasses, *maybe* - but even then, trying to interact with people with cameras constantly pointed at their face is ridiculous.
Unless maybe there is a red tally light to let people know that you are recording them. Also ridiculous.

My point was, if you are not willing to wear either in public, which device is potentially more useful?
One can at least watch a movie at home with the Vision Pro. What does someone use smart glasses for in their own home?

Maybe some could use the glasses in public as an alternative to a standalone action cam (GoPro). But the quality won't be as good. Though I suppose you could say that about comparing the Vision Pro to a TV that costs the same as the Vision Pro.

 

[Jensend]

I still do not understand why the Vision was released as a stand alone device. Could have dropped the price of it considerably if it was just wirelessly tethered to your phone to handle the processing load.

"If something that couldn't have worked could have worked, they could have made the device a few hundred dollars cheaper for a worse experience."

 

[ronno]

My point was, if you are not willing to wear either in public, which device is potentially more useful?
One can at least watch a movie at home with the Vision Pro. What does someone use smart glasses for in their own home?

Maybe some could use the glasses in public as an alternative to a standalone action cam (GoPro). But the quality won't be as good. Though I suppose you could say that about comparing the Vision Pro to a TV that costs the same as the Vision Pro.

Again, neither.
If I want to consume content at home, like a movie, not gonna strap something on my head and shut out the world and / or my family.
Gonna watch on the TV, laptop, iPad, phone… No more gadgets needed for consuming entertainment.

 

[Jensend]

Again, neither.
If I want to consume content at home, like a movie, not gonna strap something on my head and shut out the world and / or my family.
Gonna watch on the TV, laptop, iPad, phone… No more gadgets needed for consuming entertainment.

My original comment was a reply to someone saying "Finally a move from Apple that makes sense."
I wasn't asking which is more useful for you, I was asking which device a larger number of people could get use out of, especially if they weren't willing to wear it in public.

I don't have a Vision Pro, and I won't get Apple smartglasses. So the current answer for me is also "neither". But I would like to watch some of the (very limited selection of) spatial video. I can't do that on a TV.

There are tens of millions of people who already use VR headsets. Yes, that's dwarfed by the number of people who use TVs and smartphones. But do more people want thick rimmed glasses with a small monocular display?

From the reviews I've see of the Meta Display, the wrist band is the most interesting part of it, and something like that could be added to the Apple Watch.

 

[MAlbi]

That is absolutely terrifying. AI to give you conversation help with people? First off how is it going to do that other then it coming up with its own responses to what someone says, so you just become a parrot for AI. If that is the case why are you even needed at all in this conversation?

When asking for help in foreign languague.
When being asked about something obvious, like do you remember that xy we spoke about i cant remember his name.
When asked for help with something.
Not mandatory to wear them all the time, I think I know when to use them.
I am speaking with AI when dealing with corporate.
People already use the AI for chat conversation.
Facial expression is used already why can a user not use this to deescalate situation..
Edit:spelling

 

[Big_D]

Imagine going to a party and telling everyone they are not allowed to take pictures of you or post them like any normal person would - Germany is definitely through. Better yet: you should just stay home and not attend the party at all.

I don't see the problem, not everyone wants photos of them plastered all over the Internet.

 

[aknabi]

here come the negative nancy's to say how Apple has no idea what its doing after they explicitly asked exactly for these products to come out faster. the hypocrisy below will be glaring. Ready yourself for the toxicity here

It's a fundamentally deeper issue than that (and what the new new AAPL fanbros don't get).

Apple used to lead the consumer to what they wanted... Steve and his crew could see emerging tech, design, etc and synthesize it all into a product that we realized was the answer we were looking for (which on occasion took a while... and when we didn't even know the question sometimes). And when they delivered it was fully baked (with few missteps... the big one being the Newton, but that was in the Sculley era).

Tim's Apple is chasing whatever trend it shinny for bubble stock valuation... AI, drop everything to announce Apple Intelligence... even though it wasn't nearly as ready as it needed to be (hey the initials are AI as well... the press will love that and gives an extra 100 billion valuation!)...

If Polka music became the new hyped thing you'd see Apple delay/drop the AI Smart glasses so they could develop the Apple Accordion Air.