Augmented vs virtual reality

[Allen_Wentz]

I don’t have an answer. I’m just asking the question.

Most of the use cases and applications people seem to be discussing for the AVP are based on virtual reality, with the device provides a total synthetic image to the user. But the AVP is an augmented reality device. It provides an overlay of synthetic images on top of a real scene.

For example, Viewing movies is fine and good but for an AR device Wouldn’t the real world seen behind the movie image actually distract from the movie viewing experience?

Seems like the advantages and disadvantages of augmenting a real world scene Is not really part of the discussion.

Pokémon Go (which I actually detest) Is one of the few actual augmented reality applications I can think of.

So what are the augmented image (not virtual reality) Applications available for the AVP?

IMO the OP question is functionally moot. Reality [pun intended] is that the AVP allows manipulation of a user's viewing. AR/VR overlap 0-100% as controlled by devs and by the user. E.g. I could envision a product presenter, design engineer, movie director or whomever intentionally moving back and forth AR<-->VR as an intended part of the user experience.

And we are at time zero, so IMO questions like "So what are the augmented image (not virtual reality) Applications available for the AVP?" are just semantic distractions. My $0.02 is that the new thoughts and directions that v1 AVP triggers will be what are most interesting. And most important.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

The name of the game for AR is data source. Stationary (examples) can lean on local wifi. Put user in motion in Vpro and where are they getting data for the overlay? Presumably, it will lean on the cellular data in a (dependency on) iDevice?

I had some expectation that Apple would build in at least a cellular option to Vpro: both to give it a true stand-alone usage but also to be able to tap into the up to $1000 cellular device contract with cell service contract, perhaps offering a $2499* price WITH cell plan, much like how iPhone can be "bought" for "free*." Instead, it's looking like AR uses beyond a wifi zone will need to share data on an iDevice also with user.

Some AR applications are already described in prior posts. If you want to simplify it down to a very simple concept, think relevant graphic overlays to a transparent view of the real world. The simplest of all example is to imagine a mapping application while one walks around some kind of location. A real world analogue of this can be found in MANY museum exhibits and some national part trails today, in which visitors are given a personal device that basically narrates a tour through the exhibit/trail. They hear information about what they are seeing as if someone is there to help them. Conceptually AR in Vpro could provide the same with video overlays and audio.

Why aren't we seeing more AR in Apple pre-launch marketing? It's probably easier to market VR uses. Anyone should be able quickly grasp virtual super-sized television or huge computer monitor on demand. Now try to convey the mixed reality of graphic overlaying the real world and that may take longer to get across than the short attention spans people have in 2024. I suspect all those cameras are not there mostly to track hand gestures and only film spatial video.

AR may turn out to be the BIGGER use than VR... VR simply may do the bulk of motivating the early purchases via marketing messaging. Use the easier VR marketing to get it widely placed with early adopters and then those buyers discover AR uses and basically show & sell their friends on the AR side of it all.

 

[AlastorKatriona]

I don’t have an answer. I’m just asking the question.

Most of the use cases and applications people seem to be discussing for the AVP are based on virtual reality, with the device provides a total synthetic image to the user. But the AVP is an augmented reality device. It provides an overlay of synthetic images on top of a real scene.

For example, Viewing movies is fine and good but for an AR device Wouldn’t the real world seen behind the movie image actually distract from the movie viewing experience?

Seems like the advantages and disadvantages of augmenting a real world scene Is not really part of the discussion.

Pokémon Go (which I actually detest) Is one of the few actual augmented reality applications I can think of.

So what are the augmented image (not virtual reality) Applications available for the AVP?

It's a device that has VR hardware, because that's the only hardware that can run the software. Apple never wanted to make a VR device. They set out to make an AR device that could be part of every day life (not unlike every single other Apple product). But the AR device isn't possible. The technology simply doesn't allow for it. And they have no timetable (7 to 10 years) for when the hardware will be possible. But they made the software already, and they made this hardware to demo it/develop it. Tim Cook saw it, and said ship it, because Tim Cook wanted spatial computing launched during his tenure, even if it's 10 years too early.

Once you understand that, you can understand Vision Pro a little better.

 

[Analog Kid]

I could envision a product presenter, design engineer, movie director or whomever intentionally moving back and forth AR<-->VR as an intended part of the user experience.

That's a really interesting thought: a movie that includes transparency to the real world as part of the experience. Imagine if Finding Nemo put the fish tank in your living room, for example. I mean, what's that dentist doing in my living room, but forget the dentist for the sake of discussion...

 

[Allen_Wentz]

It's a device that has VR hardware, because that's the only hardware that can run the software. Apple never wanted to make a VR device. They set out to make an AR device that could be part of every day life (not unlike every single other Apple product). But the AR device isn't possible. The technology simply doesn't allow for it. And they have no timetable (7 to 10 years) for when the hardware will be possible. But they made the software already, and they made this hardware to demo it/develop it. Tim Cook saw it, and said ship it, because Tim Cook wanted spatial computing launched during his tenure, even if it's 10 years too early.

Once you understand that, you can understand Vision Pro a little better.

When a firm is the world's largest, most successful tech company I would argue that there is no "10 years too early." Apple has the money to just do it and let things evolve. Like work on the Newton helped build where Apple is today.

 

[Ghost31]

Yup even simple things. Like i currently use an iPad to display recipes when i cook but with this i could just have it in front of me and not have to worry about getting hands covered in ingredients all over a screen. And i could also message friends back, listen to music, see my outdoor cameras etc all at the same time