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 Mixed Reality Headset to Feature iOS-Like Interface, Advanced Hand Tracking, and Will Work as Second Display for Mac
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Motion sickness is 100% about software design. There are plenty of VR apps that no user will get motion sick from.
Looking forward to seeing it in the near future. Will surely be very expensive.
Apple can't even figure out how to make a calculator app for the iPad. I predict they will have 0 killer apps for this AR/VR headset and hope for 3rd parties to make them.
Best to ignore Mark Gurman or Information reports.
They sound either bogus, speculation, mischaracterized or only tip of the iceberg out of context. Best to wait until Apple tells their own story.
Like wow a $3k headset will have face, eye and hand tracking?! No way Mark?! You mean like other headsets in the $1k+ category. /s
You can use it as a monitor for your Mac?! whoa, didn’t see that coming. /s
All reports I have heard or read about for the last 5 years are very tip of the ice berg information. Not even tip of the ice berg, imagine you could only touch the ice berg and not even see the surface.
They sound either bogus, speculation, mischaracterized or only tip of the iceberg out of context. Best to wait until Apple tells their own story.
Like wow a $3k headset will have face, eye and hand tracking?! No way Mark?! You mean like other headsets in the $1k+ category. /s
You can use it as a monitor for your Mac?! whoa, didn’t see that coming. /s
All reports I have heard or read about for the last 5 years are very tip of the ice berg information. Not even tip of the ice berg, imagine you could only touch the ice berg and not even see the surface.
What‘s wrong with driving a Toyota? Or wearing average clothes?
Last edited:
In terms of video content consumption people associate headsets with 3D. However, the more pragmatic and tangible application is having a very large virtual screen that's very sharp without eye strain. This would offer the ability to do things like watch IMAX format content without the theatre. The problem with Meta's approach with the metaverse is trying to do too many ambitious things that are half baked. They have solutions that are looking for a problem. I don't know anyone clamoring to do work meetings in VR with leg-less avatars. It simply doesn't add any value beyond novelty. People don't even turn on their webcams for online work meetings. A better GTM strategy is to enhance what people want to do today and gradually expand functionality as the technology allows. Apple is good at playing the long game with consistent refinements over many years.
I'm excited to see what this will become going forward. 3k obviously very expensive but given rumours will come down with the next addition.
Maybe they will have 2 headsets with the 3k being a pro model with longer battery and more features. Almost all apple products have some sort of tier, well most of the products.
the external mac display option sounds very interesting. if that works properly and with a good resolution you can have an (infinite) large display everywhere you want.
The conspiracy theorist in me thinks Apple priced up the Pro Display XDR to make their VR headset feel better value.
6k @ 32 inches for $6000 or two 4k screens @ whatever size you like for $3000
I mean heck, the 'consumer focused' Studio Display is already $2000 with a height adjustable stand.
Hmm, I wonder if I could use the new Mac mini headless with just this VR headset
Last edited:
I feel like the real questions for enthusiast nerd adoption (rather than this just being a pricey toy even for the enthusiasts, much as the existing Quest headsets are) will be if (a) the visual quality is enough to genuinely replace a monitor for normal work or consumption (for example: web surfing and browsing Youtube in a few windows) and (b) the headset is light and comfortable enough to wear for an extended period of time without needing to build up huge traps first.
The Quest 2 falls short on both factors for most people, but is close enough that a very limited number of hyper-enthusiasts already use it for everyday tasks. If Apple can push the tech over the line of merely needing to be well-off and quirky to make use of it (without also needing a glutton's tolerance for self-punishment in the process), I think it could do some very interesting things to the AR/VR market even with the high price tag.
The Quest 2 falls short on both factors for most people, but is close enough that a very limited number of hyper-enthusiasts already use it for everyday tasks. If Apple can push the tech over the line of merely needing to be well-off and quirky to make use of it (without also needing a glutton's tolerance for self-punishment in the process), I think it could do some very interesting things to the AR/VR market even with the high price tag.
Wearing glasses with a Quest 2 sucks. Lens inserts are absolutely the way to go here, and while I have no doubt the Apple ones will be hugely overpriced, whatever attachment method they use will give a standard design for sanely-priced third parties to use.
The sane designs here, which unfortunately first-party VR companies have ignored, is to basically copy the straps of a welding helmet, so the weight is resting on your head in a balanced manner rather than clamped to your face. Some third-party companies like BoboVR have designed replacement straps for this purpose.
Assuming it has ~M2 Pro and a high enough resolution, perhaps the selling pitch will be - this will replace your MacBook Pro (£3,000), and your iPad (£1,000), and your AirPods (£250), and give you three Studio Displays (3 x £1,500) - £8,750 of tech for £2,999, a bargain!!
If this could genuinely replace 3 monitors, seamlessly (like you basically can’t tell the difference), I’d consider it
If this could genuinely replace 3 monitors, seamlessly (like you basically can’t tell the difference), I’d consider it
I think there can be value in meetings, collaboration, and training inside a VR environment, but that won’t be viable until VR is good enough that people are already frequently using VR for more common computing tasks. I don’t see companies buying these specifically for meetings.
The virtual IMAX screen is a great way to get value out of existing content, but I would like to see Disney+ add a stereoscopic 3D option for their movies, especially Pixar and other Disney animation that is natively 3D instead of going through a conversion process. Maybe Apple could even get Disney/Pixar to make some truly 3D short films (Rendered in real time in a game engine instead of pre-rendered fixed-perspective stereoscopic video).
I'm sure they'll demo it with some atrocious games. The on-stage game demos are always a car crash cringe-fest.
This is going to sell well. Target is 80s, 90s techies that are older and have higher income.
Generally speaking, it isn't aimed entry level type iPhone users and Macbook users.
Hard core Apple fans that generally include Mac Pro, High-end MacBook Pro, iPhone Pro Max users is the target to try out this Apple Gen 1 AR/VR.
It'll be like the 1st iPhone again somewhat. Only people that got money to burn to play with the newest and most different tech at a high price point.
Generally speaking, it isn't aimed entry level type iPhone users and Macbook users.
Hard core Apple fans that generally include Mac Pro, High-end MacBook Pro, iPhone Pro Max users is the target to try out this Apple Gen 1 AR/VR.
It'll be like the 1st iPhone again somewhat. Only people that got money to burn to play with the newest and most different tech at a high price point.
No it's literally amazing how this forum are purposefully ignorant when it comes to AR/VR and its capabilities. I cannot wait to revisit this thread in 10 years. It's the same tired people who's been saying "Apple's dead without Steve Jobs" for the last 10 years (statistics proving otherwise) while visiting an Apple forum on the daily and are unimaginative/lack thinking skills for the most trivial complaints. "How can I see my drink!!"... the article literally says there's a passthrough-
If microLED is the display they happen to use, $3k sounds appropriate considering microLED TVs currently range from $50,000-$200,000. For this headset to scale that display into an IMAX theater experience is worth it for MY personal use. And clearly this product is NOT for everyone if the price is $3k. It sets the precedent for an app ecosystem of derivatives: mainstream AR glasses, cheaper xr headsets. And obviously this prototype will be a premium price for the first testers. Battery life, the size, comfort, weight distribution, silicon will get better in the upcoming decade(s). It's almost like tech never stays stagnant.
If microLED is the display they happen to use, $3k sounds appropriate considering microLED TVs currently range from $50,000-$200,000. For this headset to scale that display into an IMAX theater experience is worth it for MY personal use. And clearly this product is NOT for everyone if the price is $3k. It sets the precedent for an app ecosystem of derivatives: mainstream AR glasses, cheaper xr headsets. And obviously this prototype will be a premium price for the first testers. Battery life, the size, comfort, weight distribution, silicon will get better in the upcoming decade(s). It's almost like tech never stays stagnant.
Steve Jobs made sure to make the iPad extremely cost-effective. By offering it at $499 it was appealing to many users thus it became a successful product. That's something Steve Jobs was very good at. But Tim Cook doesn't seem to be that way. In 2017, If Tim Cook is telling us $999 is a "value price" for an iPhone (Base Model) imagine what he is preparing to tell the world in 2023. (6 years later). I highly doubt it's going to cost $1799. Apple is going to need all the money it needs for the ROI. It's a niche product, targeted toward the cool rich kids living in Beverly Hills.
Tim Cook calls $999 iPhone X a 'value price' in new interview - 9to5Mac
In his first interview since Apple’s iPhone X event last week, today Tim Cook sat down with Good Morning America...9to5mac.com
Apple CEO Tim Cook Says Financing iPhone X Can Work Out to Cost of Just a Few Nice Coffees Per Week
While the iPhone X starts at $999 in the United States, with an even more expensive 256GB model available for $1,149, Apple CEO Tim Cook...www.macrumors.com
Tim Cook was responsible for all the supply chain while working for Steve Jobs. If anything, he is responsible that they were able to make the iPad this cheap.
I think it would supplement rather than replace monitors. Similar to how people use both speakers and headphones today as each has its merits. Think of them as Eye-phones(TM)