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's AR/VR Headset Nearing Completion as Board Gets Demo
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
So a la Star Trek discovery or ST Picard, which is certainly a possibility but I won’t live to witness that, and, the way mankind is “evolving” at this point I fear we’re going to be back in the stone ages within the next century, but, that’s digressing.
I’ve been an early adopter of technology for over 30 years, this has no appeal to me.
But as I said, let’s talk in 5 years
5 years isn't enough time though.
Like I said, AR glasses probably won't take off until 10-15 years from now.
So they have a good chance to surprise you
I'm anxious to learn what this will do. How can we judge something totally new before we have any real information?
And how do we know if the price is reasonable?
I think this is potentially spectacular. And for $3000, it should be!!
And how do we know if the price is reasonable?
I think this is potentially spectacular. And for $3000, it should be!!
But we will have a very good handle of the market reaction in 5 years assuming Apple releases with a year or so - that will determine where this will be heading..
I have been waiting for market-ready VR since the late 1990’s … IMHO the Oculus Quest 2 is not bad but I’m keen to see what Apple can do for a £2.5k unit price …
My concern is that Apple’s track record in 3d/gaming is less than stellar and I think gaming/community will be a big part of whatever the next wave of winning VR products rely on.
Oculus’ on-boarding is really good … can’t wait to see how Apple surprises is!
Roll on WWDC !!
My concern is that Apple’s track record in 3d/gaming is less than stellar and I think gaming/community will be a big part of whatever the next wave of winning VR products rely on.
Oculus’ on-boarding is really good … can’t wait to see how Apple surprises is!
Roll on WWDC !!
Gamers make up the majority of the AR/VR space. If they don't have controllers and Steam support, they are going to have a hard time selling these. If they include those two things, I would highly consider replacing my Quest 2 (when the price comes down, of course). Otherwise, these will end up being like the Mac Pro or the Mac Studio; for professionals only. Otherwise, there's no real point in wearing such a large headset. Sure, there are productivity tools in AR/VR that work for some people, but they didn't for me. I tried using Immerse with Quest 2 and it was cool having 3 virtual monitors instead of just my physical two and being able to size and position them how I wanted. I couldn't deal with wearing the headset while trying to work. Gaming is a different story.
That’s because apple has neither released nor announced nor shared a single piece of information about this product they will not currently comment on developing. So why would you?
Apple should price to the market, wherever that will be in 2023 or 2024. I expect the first version will be a high-end pro version aimed at a niche market. This product is not aimed at an existing well-established consumer space (in contrast to iPhones, competing directly with established cell phones and Blackberries). Without a clear and obvious wide-spread use case, it doesn't make sense to price the introductory product for widespread adoption. Put out a high-end version, which will encourage an initial set of application developers; then follow with consumer versions as applications emerge.
That 3000 dollar price point indicates that the hardware won’t need to be tethered. I thought Apple would leverage iPhones to process and the headset would be the display. It would be ridiculous to charge 3000 just for the sensors, controls, and display. But this is Apple.
Right now the glasses do seem expensive. But I expect Apple will justify that price with software and services. And its interesting that the rumors/leaks never talk about those. We could be holding a pair of them in our hands and we'd still know nothing important.
Every article I read about A/R says "imagine if you could do X", and it sounds great but none of it ever seems to materialize. Apple's opportunity is to be the first to actually deliver a complete, compelling A/R story. If they do, the glasses will suddenly look cheap. If they don't its google glass time. (Though not entirely, since I expect some of this technology is also going into the Apple car.)
Some specific predictions:
I expect there will be A/R fitness training classes available for it on day 1. (Think about how much people pay for an annual gym membership.)
The gesture recognition should be top notch, so you don't need bulky controllers. That would immediately lift it above many products.
It will integrate with Siri of course, so you can answer the phone, stream music, get alarms, etc.
Also, I expect they'll demo Myst on it.
Every article I read about A/R says "imagine if you could do X", and it sounds great but none of it ever seems to materialize. Apple's opportunity is to be the first to actually deliver a complete, compelling A/R story. If they do, the glasses will suddenly look cheap. If they don't its google glass time. (Though not entirely, since I expect some of this technology is also going into the Apple car.)
Some specific predictions:
I expect there will be A/R fitness training classes available for it on day 1. (Think about how much people pay for an annual gym membership.)
The gesture recognition should be top notch, so you don't need bulky controllers. That would immediately lift it above many products.
It will integrate with Siri of course, so you can answer the phone, stream music, get alarms, etc.
Also, I expect they'll demo Myst on it.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Shouldn't make a claim for all without consulting all first. I doubt it's truly "no one." I'm 100% convinced Apple could box air and a number of people on this site would scramble to be first in line to buy it... then perhaps smother later if they happen to run out of Apple air, as opposed to simply falling back to breathing the "inferior, junk" type not from Apple.
More seriously though: if you make a device that can take over what you can see and hear, then anything is possible in terms of value. A super-server powered Mac could be IN there- 50 Ultras networked together. Perhaps one doesn't need a tangible Mac at all if you have a virtual one always able to be with you (if you have the glasses/goggles with you)?
An iPhone that can readily expand a screen to any size could be IN there. Or instead of a "fold" to get a bigger screen, you virtually stretch out that virtual screen to any size. Perhaps one doesn't need a tangible form factor phone at all if you have a virtual one built into the glasses/goggles?
Matrix or Star Trek holodeck-like experiences sans the sense of touching what is seen could be IN there too. Cheap staycations could offer the ability to feel like you are anywhere... not even limited to vacationing on this planet.
Much smaller "imagination" example to justify even $3K: people readily pay thousands of dollars for courtside seats to a single game or front row seats for a single concert or show. There are only so many seats in reality available, which is much of what bids up those prices. However, if you could position the right cameras courtside/front row, then everyone willing to pay something for that could attend ALL games in that (virtual) seat, all concerts in that seat, all shows in that seat. Apple could offer a "front row" subscription service where for maybe the price of ONE good seat to ONE event, you get the whole season in that virtual seat and ALL events.
It's scenarios like that- which seem logically plausible and a way to significantly boost "services" revenue- that makes me not dismiss these so quickly... even if they do look exactly as pictured (or worse). Being able to show eyes ANYTHING and feed ANY audio to ears opens up an incredible amount of potential uses/applications.
I can certainly see why these are so easy to dismiss, but taking over sight & sound opens up far more than many of us seem to be imagining. We better see what they can do before we summarily dismiss them. Else, we should recall how much "we" ripped phablet sized phones, NFC payments on phones, using Intel chips in Macs, using "phone" chips in Macs, etc BEFORE Apple rolled out that crazy and too expensive stuff. If this works along that kind of thinking, this could be bigger than ALL of it.
The $3000 rumor can look insane because our point of comparison is Oculus for a few hundred. If this was only Apple's cut of Oculus, Apple people might rationalize a price at 2X or so to work in the Apple premium. But 10X can look insane.
However, I just spent more than $6K for a new Mac Ultra. What if I could effectively have a virtual Ultra in rOS? If that worked pretty well, I'd also have a Mac Ultra as my laptop too but wouldn't have to carry a cube bowling ball around everywhere.
I also just spent 2/3rds of $3K for a screen that is pretty much locked to a single location on a desk at my home. If that screen could be IN there, then it is available to me anywhere I go. Not big enough for a specific project? Add 2+ or stretch it to any size I need.
People spend upwards of about $1,000/yr on a new iPhone. If virtual iPhone is upgraded to new EVERY year, then this costs about 3 "latest & greatest" iPhone upgrades and you may not need to carry an actual one anymore. It's concepts like these that make me wonder about exactly what these could be... to make $3K seem like a bargain instead of a shock.
Right now, all of the tangible Apple stuff is at various levels of risk of production delays due to efforts to manage Covid. What if the next generation of Apple stuff is manufactured entirely in Cupertino, entirely inside of reality OS? Dependency on nations that don't exactly love America could reduce. Supply could never be scarce. M2 replaces M1 without buying a new box of something... and M3 replaces M2 without buying a new box too. Margin could expand while price could actually go down (no materials expense, only coding expense). Etc.
OR, of course, these could be only Apple Oculus, (Apple) rumored at $3K to release at "only $1299" for a big relief sales rally, perceptual "bargain" frenzy. However, they've been at it too long for me to believe this is only Oculus Plus.
Last edited:
I has to have a killer app. It has to be something more than placing furniture in a room.
Everyone jumping up and down at the price. This is not the price for the consumer version. This is the price for the limited production version for developers.
The consumer version should be $20.00 less.
LOL there isn't even a current version!! This is all rumors as is the pricing. But ya it may not be for everyone especially out of the gate and at higher initial retail pricing.
The CIA isn't known for their design sense. 😉If the render is close to reality–and why wouldn't it be?–it's clear there isn't any way to make VR goggles look anything but dorky. Oculus has an excuse since Mark Z. has the worst aesthetic sense known to humankind (every FB hardware product looks like the most awful mashup possible of Dell, Volvo, and Birkenstock) but even Apple's design chops can't do anything for these things.
Second thought: will Apple sell a $89Motion Sickness Bag as an add-on?
And Apple doesn't do pure gaming.
Exactly, even Sony and the PlayStation hasn't really helped VR catch-on for gaming. My son uses it more than I do.
Well, it’s targeting the same market Facebook and Microsoft are in and no killer solution still exist. Apple entered the intelligent speaker market to compete with Amazon’s Alexa and so far it’s been a miss. Apple has never been good at gaming and we likely seeing another category they just don’t have a formula for.
Last edited:
You hit the nail on the head.
They aren't releasing the first version to be a mass market product. Will mainly be for developers to build an ecosystem. Once the ecosystem is more mature they will release cheaper consumer versions.
They aren't trying to sell millions of these right off the bat.
This is going to be genuinely revolutionary for playing musical instruments. Any piano or keyboard you want. Any guitar or stringed instrument. Buy the optional mouthpiece, play any wind instrument. Unlimited percussion. New abstract digital instruments. MainStage 4 could give you all that and more. Painting. Sculpture. Prototyping for additive manufacturing. Get the optional wingsuit simulator and tour the world. We are going to have to work on our upper body strength though, with all the arm work, unless we get a top-half exoskeleton to support our arms. But imagine all that creative opportunity, for less than the cost of a good Les Paul.
Yeah, but the $20 cloth is actually useful.While I agree with you that the $3k price tag is too high of an estimate; I think you're way low with your $700. I think the hardware costs alone will be around the $1000 cost for Apple. You throw in the apple tax and I'm guessing final price will be around $1600-$1800. Remember, this is the company that sells a $20 piece of cloth.
The stand to store the set will probably be around $700.
A $3000 price point would be welcome. I won't buy it, but some people will, and the tech will make its way into competing products very quickly and much more acceptable prices. Some people did buy the $10k Lisa. And the $9k IIfx. And the $700 Apple Wheels. (Someone did buy the wheels, right?)
Surprised to see this take from you, but I totally agree.
Apple’s services will definitely help the device, but gamers make up the majority of the market right now. It doesn’t seem like Apple has that in mind at all based on the rumors and the lack of controllers. I’m not saying it should try to be like the Quest, but I would definitely consider replacing my Quest 2 (not at $3k, of course) if they included controllers and Steam support. The specs sounds great otherwise. These will be for the professionals and die hards. Like the Mac Pro and Mac Studio.Shouldn't make a claim for all without consulting all first. I doubt it's truly "no one." I'm 100% convinced Apple could box air and a number of people on this site would be first in line to buy it... then perhaps smother later if they happen to run out of Apple air, as opposed to simply falling back to breathing the "inferior, junk" type not from Apple.
More seriously though: if you make a device that can take over what you can see and hear, then anything is possible in terms of value. A super-server powered Mac could be IN there- 50 Ultras networked together. Perhaps one doesn't need a tangible Mac at all if you have a virtual one always able to be with you (if you have the glasses/goggles with you)?
An iPhone that can readily expand a screen to any size could be IN there. Or instead of a "fold" to get a bigger screen, you virtually stretch out that virtual screen to any size. Perhaps one doesn't need a tangible form factor phone at all if you have a virtual one built into the glasses/goggles?
Matrix or Star Trek holodeck-like experiences sans the sense of touching what is seen could be IN there too. Cheap staycations could offer the ability to feel like you are anywhere... not even limited to vacationing on this planet.
Much smaller "imagination" example to justify even $3K: people readily pay thousands of dollars for courtside seats to a single game or front row seats for a single concert or show. There are only so many seats in reality available, which is much of what bids up those prices. However, if you could position the right cameras courtside/front row, then everyone willing to pay something for that could attend ALL games in that (virtual) seat, all concerts in that seat, all shows in that seat. Apple could offer a "front row" subscription service where for maybe the price of ONE good seat to ONE event, you get the whole season in that virtual seat and ALL events.
It's scenarios like that- which seem logically plausible and a way to significantly boost "services" revenue- that makes me not dismiss these so quickly... even if they do look exactly as pictured (or worse). Being able to show eyes ANYTHING and feed ANY audio to ears opens up an incredible amount of potential uses/applications.
I can certainly see why these are so easy to dismiss, but taking over sight & sound opens up far more than many of us seem to be imagining. We better see what they can do before we summarily dismiss them. Else, we should recall how much "we" ripped phablet sized phones, NFC payments on phones, using Intel chips in Macs, using "phone" chips in Macs, etc BEFORE Apple rolled out that crazy and too expensive stuff. If this works along that kind of thinking, this could be bigger than ALL of it.
The $3000 rumor can look insane because our point of comparison is Oculus for a few hundred. If this was only Apple's cut of Oculus, Apple people might rationalize a price at 2X or so to work in the Apple premium. But 10X can look insane.
However, I just spent more than $6K for a new Mac Ultra. What if I could effectively have a virtual Ultra in rOS? If that worked pretty well, I'd also have a Mac Ultra as my laptop too but wouldn't have to carry a cube bowling ball around everywhere.
I also just spent 2/3rds of $3K for a screen that is pretty much locked to a single location on a desk at my home. If that screen could be IN there, then it is available to me anywhere I go. Not big enough for a specific project? Add 2 or stretch it to any size I need.
People spend upwards of about $1,000/yr on a new iPhone. If virtual iPhone is upgraded to new EVERY year, then this costs about 3 "latest & greatest" iPhone upgrades and you may not need to carry an actual one anymore. It's concepts like these that make me wonder about exactly what these could be... to make $3K seem like a bargain instead of a shock.
OR, of course, these could be only Apple Oculus, (Apple) rumored at $3K to release at "only $1299" for a big relief sales rally, perceptual "bargain" frenzy. However, they've been at it too long for me to believe this is only Oculus Plus.