Hopefully there's not too much latency with the wireless connection.
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 Upcoming AR/VR Headset to Require Connection to iPhone
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The halo (or lock-in) effect works both ways. It's how Apple went from $1 trillion to $2 trillion in only 2 years. You are in the minority here.
I was always disappointed that Apple called it’s web browser Safari instead of iBrowse (Eyebrows).
It’s such a pity: the German word for eyeball is “Augapfel” which literally translated would be “EyeApple”. These could be the iApples but …
No. This is "as soon as 2022" which is 12 whole months. You could buy the quest now enjoy the hell out of it, and sell it when the rumors start to heat up about the actual date.
Too many fun things to do in Quest to wait.
Interested to see how this will do - as a consumer device (which generally seems to be Apple's prime market), AR/VR still seems to be a bit of a novelty without a compelling driver. In the fields it has got useful application such as engineering, research and medicine, Microsoft seems to already be filling the niche with HoloLens, having quickly realised that this is where the market lay.
I have an Oculus 2 and if this rumor is true, I'd pick that over what Apple comes out with every time just because its a standalone device that doesn't need to be tied to a separate device.
please stop using that awful graphic - not only does it looks like it was drawn by a child of very little talent, it doesn't even make sense from a design perspective.
Yawn - what a snoozer of an article. People, including myself, have suggested as much for years (digging up my post from 2017: https://landofwolf.blogspot.com/2017/11/apples-ar-strategy.html ). People will not accept AR glasses unless they're as stylish as regular glasses and last all day. But regular glasses don't leave much room for battery storage, CPUs, GPUs, sensors, etc. So, by sheer necessity the heavy lifting required to produce useful AR will need to be done off-device. And what better place than the over-the-top powerful iPhone?
Apple already tipped its hand a couple years ago with the introduction of ARKit. Surely Apple didn't expect people to run around with iPhones in front of their faces when it made that API available to app developers! It was obviously just meant to 'seed' the market with the beginnings of AR apps. The apps that were made will probably run unchanged once Apple releases its AR glasses - the apps' draw commands will simply be routed to the AR glasses and the apps' request for sensor data will simply come from sensors on the glasses rather than the current iPhone camera sensors. So, upon release, there will already be a few hundred apps for the glasses.
Apple already tipped its hand a couple years ago with the introduction of ARKit. Surely Apple didn't expect people to run around with iPhones in front of their faces when it made that API available to app developers! It was obviously just meant to 'seed' the market with the beginnings of AR apps. The apps that were made will probably run unchanged once Apple releases its AR glasses - the apps' draw commands will simply be routed to the AR glasses and the apps' request for sensor data will simply come from sensors on the glasses rather than the current iPhone camera sensors. So, upon release, there will already be a few hundred apps for the glasses.
It allows one to see stuff that isn’t really there so maybe, 21st century techno-hallucinogen?
My question is will the limited bandwidth that is available via lightning (usb2.0) going to be enough or is usb-c needed (usb3.1 gen 2 or above)?
If it runs on the eyePhone, then we'll actually see it in a thousand years or so
Always wished Nintendo got more into mainstream software. They could've had something like "Bowser Browser". It roars at you every time a security threat has been detected
Last edited:
I bought a quest 2 for 240$ (open box) about 3 months ago, I can resell it in a year for 160$, maybe more.
I don't think it's worth it to wait 12-24 months to save 80$.
BTW : I had a PS VR and I didn't like it much. I bought a quest 2 because I was curious and planned to resell it a month after the purchase, but I'll keep it, it's really great.
Much more than what I thought.
why not put M chip inside instead? AR/VR headsets are usually big enough to easily accommodate that and with Apple's chip design expertise they could make it work easily.
If they can fit the chip thats required to run it in iPhone then why not just save time etc. and put the chip from iPhone to the headset? Surely, the iPhone is smaller (space wise) than the AR/VR.
I guess that explains why there were internal battles in the team between integrated and not integrated.
If they can fit the chip thats required to run it in iPhone then why not just save time etc. and put the chip from iPhone to the headset? Surely, the iPhone is smaller (space wise) than the AR/VR.
I guess that explains why there were internal battles in the team between integrated and not integrated.
I love my quest 2! With the exception of being owned by facebook. It's impressive as a stand alone device. I hope Apple competes early, especially with games (though I'm not getting my hopes up).
Why hold off? You can always sell it later. If your like me and everyone I know that has one, you'll love it!
1- 1 billions $ is not that much for those cie.Hilarious. Mark Facebook spent a billion dollars buying Oculus Rift. Tim Apple probably will end up spending a similar amount onVR or iRealityDistortionField Goggles or whatever it ends up being named. That'll make $2 billion thrown at devices that make a lot of people nauseous. I think I'm going to look for a barf bag maker to buy stock in and skip the goggles/glass/helmet.
2- If you don't invest now, that could mean the death of your company. Maybe in 5 years the VR industry will be quite different from now, but if you don't put the money today, you won't be in the game later.
3- PS VR made me sick. Quest 2 is much, much better in that regard. So there is a whole world you can already explore without being sick. (and I'm sick so easily, I can't use a trampoline or swing in the park anymore).
Just like how the og iPod was Mac only this is completely done on purpose.
If comfortable enough, this could replace all displays. Imagine life where all displays are in your glasses (headset for now):
- your TV can just be an AppleTV box
- your phone can just be solid brick with no display
- your watch needs no display, just a sensor for hand movement
- your computer is just a keyboard, and you can have as many screens as you like
Now I'd hope that we eventually have an open AR Display protocol so you can use your glasses with multiple devices (Raspberry Pi display!) but that will probably take a while.
True if you compare to a Rift or a PS VR, but if it's wirelessy using the phone I already got in my pocket, I don't mind much!
And imagine if you even don't needs to make up from your bed because all will happen directly in your glasses!
I'm messing with you because I'm also curious of what will be the future with AR/VR, but humanly speaking it's a bit scary too.