is it?
Lacking imagination / understanding means dismissive attitudes to something that can improve their lives.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
AR/VR Headset Rumor Recap: 10 Features Coming to Apple's Next Major Product
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Lacking imagination / understanding means dismissive attitudes to something that can improve their lives.
Nope, very few positions as consultants for innovations. It mostly done in-house by employees. Also innovation work is hard, competition is hard and usually requires working a lot of hours.
I have specialised in keeping old legacy systems running or converting them to new systems. Pay is also very good, it's not very difficult and way less competition.
Yeah yeah.. when they will be shaped like glasses, cost 500$, and will be able to produce the ultimate (virtual) workspace at no additional cost, meet your friends and family as if they are with you in the room, watch IMAX quality movies on huge virtual screen.. etc. YOU WILL BUY IT AND USE IT TOO. YOU ALL WILL BUY IT.
Curious if any major gaming companies are already on board and would love to see them announce a big lineup of games ready at launch.
But as I glance at the Apple Arcade offering, I won’t hold my breath.
But as I glance at the Apple Arcade offering, I won’t hold my breath.
How’s that 3D TV working out these days?
And no, I won’t be buying it or anything like it. I don’t have an Apple Watch either and never will.
LOL, what a joke. If Apple is stupid enough to release a VR headset, it will be the biggest flop since the HomePod. And Siri. Apple should focus on fixing Siri instead of trying to create new products that nobody will ever purchase. It’s pretty shocking that Apple handed over the entire multibillion-dollar home market to Amazon. Apple is such an uninspiring & terrible company these days that they couldn’t even figure out how to replicate Amazon Alexa, Amazon Echo, Amazon smart plugs, Amazon smart TVs, and more. Amazon is the new Apple. Tim Cook’s Apple is riding on fumes. But this is what happens when you make a glorified shipping clerk the CEO. Zero innovation left at Apple.
Apple could clean up in the smart home market if they put some effort into it. The streaming media segment is ripe for Apple to make a real move too. The Apple TV could (and should) be a vastly more useful device.
But Tim wants a legacy of innovation. Apple TV was Steve Jobs’ baby. Apple Watch was Johnny Ive’s baby. Tim needs a win… just like John Scully did. He gambled on a self driving car and that went nowhere. His fallback position is AR/VR, which is also going nowhere.
I expressed the same doubt in the earlier thread, was told that the headset is probably meant for the home or office. And while I easily see the VR applications in the home/office I donmt see the AR use case as clearly.
When they drop the price to the live audience, this is going to have the same reaction as the *Macpro wheels - monitor stand - I can't wait 
*ThisBougieLife - thanks for the correction
*ThisBougieLife - thanks for the correction
Last edited:
But what does it do exactly?
Quest 2 is primarily for gaming,and is relatively cheap..
PS VR 2 and PC VR are also for gaming.
but what is Apple's headset exactly useful for?
Quest 2 is primarily for gaming,and is relatively cheap..
PS VR 2 and PC VR are also for gaming.
but what is Apple's headset exactly useful for?
Most of these features sound a lot more like wishful thinking than reality - no doubt the design will be a strong point, but hardware is not the biggest issue this thing is facing, it's software and usable "killer apps" that have made VR headsets for non-gaming uses hit the proverbial wall.
The opposite, hardware is by far the biggest issue, it's a device that you wear on the face, and you must make it as light and comfortable as possible, and also as capable.. that's hard. There are some easy killer apps for it that I can think of, and I wrote them above, I'm sure Apple will show their implementation with the headset's introduction.
When they drop the price to the live audience, this is going to have the same reaction as the Macpro wheels - I can't wait
No reaction was better than the reaction to the $1000 “sold separately” monitor stand. 🤣
Design matters, I specifically mentioned it for that very reason - the hardware I'm talking about is micro-OLED displays, M2 processors and all that high-end stuff that will not matter if apps aren't there to make this thing useful once you strapped it to your head.
If Apple thinks it can get away with a new device that will only allow us to consume ATV+ content and Facetime our friends and collegues, micro-OLED displays and M2 processors will not be enough to make this device a commercial success.
Sure design matters very much. I trust Apple that they have done their research and met the minimum requirements that are acceptable. Apple is not just its CEO, there are thousands of others in the chains that give feedback and make decisions.
I think that besides immersive media, communication, and entertainment apps, the biggest feature this device will have, and I'm looking for it personally - is an all-in-one powerful and immersive computer, which means, a powerful and productive OS, support for multiple displays at any size and any shape, user friendly.. that's what will sell it for me.
"It doesn't matter what 'you believe'. It matters what real film makers believe. Quentin Tarantino, Steven Spielberg and Christopher Nolan, who coincidentally all still shoot on film, believe that there is nothing better than being in a theater.
These film makers are the experts. They are not some random lonely VR person on a forum with an opinion."
Very nice appeal to authority.
With respect, they are NOT (and cannot be, for the simple fact they are not me) experts in how I want to watch a movie or the value I receive from it (or don't). I've been to many movies over the course of my life and have never, ever felt any of the things you describe. What I have felt is the loss of extra time and money from going to the theater and the inconvenience of having to do it on somebody else's schedule. In addition to avoiding those negatives, I get to pause the movie to get up and take a leak or get a snack.
The beauty of books, music or movies: creators get to create what they want, we get to enjoy them (or not) how we want. The makers do not get to control their meaning, import to society or how or if they are used. Their job is done when it leaves their hands. Want to enjoy it on a phone, on a VR headset, on a big screen TV; go for it.
So why are movies shot on film and shown in theaters? Because that's what they had when they were invented. Painters disliked photographers, said photography was not art. Producers of staged performances said movies were not art (no connection to audience etc).
Today movie makers say the only way to see movies is with other people otherwise it's just a schlocky TV show and not art. Digital artists say pictures made with the assistance of AI are not art. I would bet the complaints of movie makers and digital artists go the way of the complaints by stage producers and painters. I would also bet that by 2035 the only movie theaters left will be art houses, mostly run by charitable foundations.
These film makers are the experts. They are not some random lonely VR person on a forum with an opinion."
Very nice appeal to authority.
With respect, they are NOT (and cannot be, for the simple fact they are not me) experts in how I want to watch a movie or the value I receive from it (or don't). I've been to many movies over the course of my life and have never, ever felt any of the things you describe. What I have felt is the loss of extra time and money from going to the theater and the inconvenience of having to do it on somebody else's schedule. In addition to avoiding those negatives, I get to pause the movie to get up and take a leak or get a snack.
The beauty of books, music or movies: creators get to create what they want, we get to enjoy them (or not) how we want. The makers do not get to control their meaning, import to society or how or if they are used. Their job is done when it leaves their hands. Want to enjoy it on a phone, on a VR headset, on a big screen TV; go for it.
So why are movies shot on film and shown in theaters? Because that's what they had when they were invented. Painters disliked photographers, said photography was not art. Producers of staged performances said movies were not art (no connection to audience etc).
Today movie makers say the only way to see movies is with other people otherwise it's just a schlocky TV show and not art. Digital artists say pictures made with the assistance of AI are not art. I would bet the complaints of movie makers and digital artists go the way of the complaints by stage producers and painters. I would also bet that by 2035 the only movie theaters left will be art houses, mostly run by charitable foundations.
Last edited:
Isn’t this dead obvious? The theater experience is unique. Not only do you get the energy and enthusiasm of the audience watching with you but it makes the film a special event that you schedule and leave your home to attend. Watching a movie in a theater on a big screen results in a completely different experience than watching the exact same film in your living room, no matter what interface you’re using.
I have never seen a movie I thought was special enough to warrant going very much at all out of my way to see it. Fortunately, I don't have to now.
I would have agreed 20-30 years ago.
however there are barely no films I have seen that I wished I had watched in the cinema.
Adding to this, I have had too many poor experiences watching movies where the place is trashed, over priced etc and then the movie hasn't been 'great'.
Covid destroyed cinema I feel and it is on life support.
streamed services of tv series have been far more engrossing than movies in the last 5 years at least.
Anyway back to the headset - no I don't think it will replace the going to the movies experience but it will be much more of an encompassing experience than your tv [unless you have a fully kitted out home cinema].
Low quality mainstream movies are not the fault of the theater experience. If you want better movies, go to the good ones.
I see the value of a “virtual TV” that you wear on your face in your home. But I don’t think that’s enough to warrant the price of entry and it absolutely isn’t a good enough use case to make the product unique or compelling.