Apple's AR/VR Headset Said to Feature Digital Crown, Waist-Mounted Battery Pack, and More

[purplerainpurplerain]

I believe Apple has considered some of the potential issues you’ve brought up — it sounds like this has been tested for quite some time, so I would imagine any issues would have been analyzed and dealt with. It’s possible they even worked with professionals in eye health in development. I just don’t see them disregarding any potential health issues when they’ve become so concerned with health.

The comfort of the device is probably the area they strongly focused on — what good is all of the innovative tech inside when it is just too uncomfortable to wear? So moving the battery out of the headset should lighten the weight quite a bit.

For me right now it is what the rumors and what some VR fans are saying that is off the charts. We have no idea what Apple is doing just some hints from Tim Cook in interviews. He said it won’t be all day device.

It’s definitely not going to replace Macs and iPhones and TVs and Apple Displays. If it did do that then it would cannibalise sales of computers and screens and then there would be massive loss of income for Apple and display makers. It would be chaos and then the display makers would charge 5X more for panels to make up for losses. Anyway it’s not possible anyway on all technical levels 😛😛

 

[citysnaps]

For me right now it is what the rumors and what some VR fans are saying that is off the charts. We have no idea what Apple is doing just some hints from Tim Cook in interviews. He said it won’t be all day device.

It’s definitely not going to replace Macs and iPhones and TVs and Apple Displays. If it did do that then it would cannibalise sales of computers and screens and then there would be massive loss of income for Apple and display makers. It would be chaos and then the display makers would charge 5X more for panels to make up for losses. Anyway it’s not possible anyway on all technical levels 😛😛

Of course not. AR (not VR) is simply a tool people will used to solve problems through accessing various kinds of information.

VR is mostly for entertainment.

 

[Rookbird¥]

I think they have it all wrong. V/R is not the future. Augmented reality is the future.

 

[UMHurricanes34]

I really hope the software thoughtfulness is there. Hardware sounds a bit like an R&D science project escaping the lab vs an incredibly advanced product if I’m honest.

 

[Kierkegaarden]

This is the most disappointing part of this. I know it probably won't flop, because nearly zero hardware Apple has developed has flopped (looking at you, Pippin) but I am so nervous about this. As of now, the vast majority of VR is gaming. Gamers are huge early adopters. They also can be very noisy if they don't like a product which could potentially hurt the product's success. Again I don't think it will happen with this but I'm very nervous that they're focusing on Memoji's and people standing around in a room wearing these during a business meeting smiling at each other.

The partnership with Unity is exciting and definitely a good step in the right direction. I hope they open it up to any and all game developers, and help with porting over existing titles. Get some classics in there like BeatSaber on day 1!

I wouldn’t put too much into a statement that starts off with “seemingly” — the hardware specs might be able to be leaked, but software is difficult — just look at how well they kept the Dynamic Island a secret until the reveal. I’m sure Apple knows this is an entertainment device — streaming, games, fitness — video conferencing will be neat, but that alone will not compel someone to buy the device.

 

[Kierkegaarden]

Apple has been working on this for at least seven years. I'm betting Apple's release will be within the next six months.

A recent SIGGRAF presentation (by an Apple competitor also collaborating with Stanford University) was fascinating. And pretty much confirmed what I believe Apple's entry will be.

Please share details of this presentation.

 

[iZac]

External battery pack?

reminds me of my Game Gear:

The battery on that lasted about as long too...

 

[Le0M]

OR, don't focus on a headset. Focus on Eyeglasses. Lightweight, simplified use. Basic AR and some limited VR. All-day comfort. Something you'd wear outside. This continued focus on headsets is a problem, I believe.

Glasses and headset will obviously share some of the technology and software, but they would be different devices with different applications in real world use.
Also, I'm pretty sure Apple can manage focusing on two new products at one time.

 

[Jensend]

Of course not. AR (not VR) is simply a tool people will used to solve problems through accessing various kinds of information.

VR is mostly for entertainment.

I think they have it all wrong. V/R is not the future. Augmented reality is the future.

ehh. I don't really think of them as distinct technologies. Throw a cover over transparent AR glasses and you have VR. Most VR headsets will have some kind of video passthrough and/or room scanning so you can see your real environment from within VR.
I think the main difference on whether you choose transparent or opaque is what your primary focus is. If your primary focus is the virtual content, opaque will offer better rendering of the virtual world, and if your primary focus is the real world, transparent displays will probably be a better choice.

 

[Le0M]

Not really relevant to AR, which uses totally different methods for transparency.

How so?
The only difference I can see is the high resolution needed for the headset. But please, explain.

 

[Jensend]

OR, don't focus on a headset. Focus on Eyeglasses. Lightweight, simplified use. Basic AR and some limited VR. All-day comfort. Something you'd wear outside. This continued focus on headsets is a problem, I believe.

With current and near-future tech, probably the best you will got out of a pair of electronic glasses that can pass as a regular pair of glasses is some form of smart glasses. Which is pretty much the same thing as a smartwatch but instead of a small screen on your watch, you get a small virtual screen floating in the corner of your vision, which to the wearer will look like one of the rear view mirrors for bicycle helmets.

 

[Jensend]

How so?
The only difference I can see is the high resolution needed for the headset. But please, explain.

Transparent AR glasses use projectors that bounce light through a waveguide (I haven't actually read much on how the waveguides work).
If you just had a tiny transparent OLED screen in front of your eyes, you couldn't focus on it. And if you put a lens in front of that so you could focus on it, you could no longer focus on the real world behind it.

https://guide-images.cdn.ifixit.com/igi/wjThsnPwhda5lRHM.huge

 

[MacMikePro]

If one company is going to do VR right, it's Apple. They know specs and technical expertise isn't everything, but the human element is!

I agree, but I think Nintendo could have also done it right if they would've taken it seriously with a more powerful version of the Switch, I guess we'll see

 

[Le0M]

Transparent AR glasses use projectors that bounce light through a waveguide (I haven't actually read much on how the waveguides work).
If you just had a tiny transparent OLED screen in front of your eyes, you couldn't focus on it. And if you put a lens in front of that so you could focus on it, you could no longer focus on the real world behind it.

https://guide-images.cdn.ifixit.com/igi/wjThsnPwhda5lRHM.huge

Well I guess we'll find out soon enough anyway.

 

[svish]

So much information about the upcoming AR/VR device. Waiting for Apple to launch it.

 

[Harvey Zoltan]

Battery pack and cable! Doesn't sound like Apple.

 

[free1000]

Speaking as an AR developer I believe the main purpose of this device will be for use by developers but with some units made available for early adopter consumers who will be acting as a kind of volunteer tester community.

I suspect that the number of units available will be small and that they will sell out very rapidly, maybe there will be additional tranches over time.

Back in 2018 when I was working for an AR start-up I was regarded as being a negative person for predicting that Apple would not introduce their 'glasses' product till 2023-2025. Now I think that the broad consumer usable product won't exist until 2030, but I may be being a little too pessimistic.

For those who say that Apple will not introduce a B2B product, and will hold back anything like this if it does not have a consumer market, I think they are making an error. Apple does have a significant enterprise market and takes those customers seriously, its just not its big market. Apple would happily introduce something like this into an early adopter enterprise market if it saw a longer term opportunity to use that to bridge the gap to a consumer product.

Overall I am not convinced that AR/MR/VR is really such a big deal that its fanboys say. I think the 'sci fi' version would be a big hit, glasses or contacts, though it requires technical advances that may not exist for many decades.

Humans are already capable of making 3D inferences from 2D representations, we do it all the time watching TV and no one is worried about the flatness of the people seen on the TV, because we hallucinate a 3D reality from that with a great deal of ease.

A final thought, the technical advances that are being pushed forward through this technology will impact many other areas of information technology. For example, very low latency wireless communication at a personal level network scale. Waveguide optics, one can imagine these permitting automotive and aviation applications, cheap HUDs all over the place and so on. Apple will undoubtedly profit from these.

It will be interesting to see what actually is delivered even in the early phase.

 

[Jensend]

For those who say that Apple will not introduce a B2B product, and will hold back anything like this if it does not have a consumer market, I think they are making an error. Apple does have a significant enterprise market and takes those customers seriously, its just not its big market. Apple would happily introduce something like this into an early adopter enterprise market if it saw a longer term opportunity to use that to bridge the gap to a consumer product.

Apple has products that aren't made for consumers, but those products run on the same OS as consumer products. Apple will have to develop a new OS with a totally new interface, and new apps and services for their AR/VR product. I don't see them making a whole product category like that for a small customer base if they are years away from releasing a consumer product.

Humans are already capable of making 3D inferences from 2D representations, we do it all the time watching TV and no one is worried about the flatness of the people seen on the TV, because we hallucinate a 3D reality from that with a great deal of ease.

It's more about having a natural perspective than just a 3D perspective. I can juggle virtual objects in VR using tracked controllers and a headset. I couldn't do that while watching a TV screen, whether it was 2D or 3D.

 

[purplerainpurplerain]

Humans are already capable of making 3D inferences from 2D representations, we do it all the time watching TV and no one is worried about the flatness of the people seen on the TV, because we hallucinate a 3D reality from that with a great deal of ease.

Right man. 3D objects on a monitor are already 3D. Live action movies are three dimensional and don’t need to “pop out” of the screen to be more real, they in fact look worse that way.

From software engineer perspective I can tell you the obvious stuff that is happening in development across industries.

You will go to a site on your laptop for example Adidas. You click on the shoes you like. Then you see a series of product images and a video. On the end you will see an option to see the product in 3D.

When you click on it you will be able to spin the object around with your mouse/trackpad. But next to it is a little QR type code. This means there is an option to view the image in AR. You put on AR glasses, scan the code and then the object will appear. Your phone will also be able to do this if you don’t have glasses.

It’s just an extra option. The classical views will always be around and manipulating a 3D object with your mouse the traditional way will always be around. Nothing is being replaced.

For AR/MR users they won’t be expected to wear these devices all day. You put it on to look at these options or play games. Then you take it off and continue computing and browsing the normal way.

 

[robbietop]

So, I have to wear a helmet and a belt clip? Seriously, what is the purpose of this thing? Only two hour battery life? So, I wouldn't want to take this out of the house?

This device continually says to me: "Hard pass."

1. Has no major need to be purchased in the first place. I already have five devices that can do what it does.
2. Two hour battery life. I am not dragging around another charger, cuz obviously it will be a unique brick, and two hour battery life isn't really going to mesh well with modern expectations. If people feel like it won't last long enough out of the house, they may hold off purchasing until a third gen model. This hampers adoption to early adopters only, which are not a sign of interest.
3. Ergonomics: By the pictures it looks like a helmet and has a belt clip? How long will I want to wear it?
4. Legality: It's obviously going to be banned in vehicles by anyone driving. So, it's passenger usage only.
5. Legality: What's the use for going out to restaurants? Bars? Shopping? Will companies be okay with a permanently recording device in their stores? Will other patrons be hesitant to be around someone wearing it? You won't know until they are in the public. You cannot make suppositions on something that hasn't been a public device since Google Glass.
6. Again, I have to ask: MO: What is the use case? I can do everything everyone says it can do from another device in a manner more comfortable to me. My TV doesn't have a two hour battery life, neither does my phone or iPad. And I don't have to wear any of them to use them.
7. Sharing: You can't just pass this thing back and forth like a phone or tablet. Share Screen is suggested as a fix for this, but I don't share my iPhone screen to another phone, I just hand my phone to someone else. Analogue Ad Hoc exchange still holds true in gaming software as well, where sharing your game is as simple as handing the disc to a friend (although Microsoft tried to kill this with the One.)
8. Sharing: Yes, you could share from one device to another in a Share Session, but that ASSUMES this thing will be adopted by everyone on DAY ONE. That's a hefty assumption.
9. Fervent Defenders: A lot of these zealots who advocate it are going to cost people money and time to figure out they don't need it, and then heavy returns will kill the entire project in the public's mind. Oculus isn't some huge explosion in popularity, and someone mentioned HoloLens, which I haven't heard anything about in a decade, so it must not be sold in a typical retail store.

 

[purplerainpurplerain]

So, I have to wear a helmet and a belt clip? Seriously, what is the purpose of this thing? Only two hour battery life? So, I wouldn't want to take this out of the house?

This device continually says to me: "Hard pass."

1. Has no major need to be purchased in the first place. I already have five devices that can do what it does.
2. Two hour battery life. I am not dragging around another charger, cuz obviously it will be a unique brick, and two hour battery life isn't really going to mesh well with modern expectations. If people feel like it won't last long enough out of the house, they may hold off purchasing until a third gen model. This hampers adoption to early adopters only, which are not a sign of interest.
3. Ergonomics: By the pictures it looks like a helmet and has a belt clip? How long will I want to wear it?
4. Legality: It's obviously going to be banned in vehicles by anyone driving. So, it's passenger usage only.
5. Legality: What's the use for going out to restaurants? Bars? Shopping? Will companies be okay with a permanently recording device in their stores? Will other patrons be hesitant to be around someone wearing it? You won't know until they are in the public. You cannot make suppositions on something that hasn't been a public device since Google Glass.
6. Again, I have to ask: MO: What is the use case? I can do everything everyone says it can do from another device in a manner more comfortable to me. My TV doesn't have a two hour battery life, neither does my phone or iPad. And I don't have to wear any of them to use them.
7. Sharing: You can't just pass this thing back and forth like a phone or tablet. Share Screen is suggested as a fix for this, but I don't share my iPhone screen to another phone, I just hand my phone to someone else. Analogue Ad Hoc exchange still holds true in gaming software as well, where sharing your game is as simple as handing the disc to a friend (although Microsoft tried to kill this with the One.)
8. Fervent Defenders: A lot of these zealots who advocate it are going to cost people money and time to figure out they don't need it, and then heavy returns will kill the entire project in the public's mind. Oculus isn't some huge explosion in popularity, and someone mentioned HoloLens, which I haven't heard anything about in a decade, so it must not be sold in a typical retail store.

Drivers definitely will not be allowed to wear this and pedestrians will probably be scared of getting mugged or accidentally walking into a telephone pole because they got distracted by a notification 😂😂

 

[robbietop]

Drivers definitely will not be allowed to wear this and pedestrians will probably be scared of getting mugged or accidentally walking into a telephone pole because they got distracted by a notification 😂😂

"Hand over your AppleVR!"

"Ahhhh, cool! A VR mugging experience!"

 

[PauloSera]

AR helps people solve problems, perform tasks, do research, access information, etc.

No, AR has the theoretical potential to do those things. If and when the technology matures to the points where is not twitchy and imprecise, and when the viewfinder does not have to held up to your face or strapped to your end.

Apple Glasses will be a success, but they don't exist. And may not for many more years.
Apple Gigantic Headset is already a failure, because no one is going to be willing to wear it for any length of time, nor are they going to walk around in public wearing it while tethered to battery packs on their waist.

 

[PauloSera]

• A waist-mounted battery, connected via a magnetic, MagSafe-like power cable to the headset's headband. One battery charge lasts no longer than two hours, but users can swap the battery out for longer sessions.

Is there a single person here who actually believes that Apple is going to release a headset that tethers to waist-mounted batteries??? That sounds like a tech demo from 1989, not a real product from Apple.

 

[Herm3s]

Apple has been working on this for at least seven years. I'm betting Apple's release will be within the next six months.

A recent SIGGRAF presentation (by an Apple competitor also collaborating with Stanford University) was fascinating. And pretty much confirmed what I believe Apple's entry will be.

Could you link it please?