Gurman: Apple Headset Could Feature 'In-Air' Typing for Text Input, No iPhone Pairing Required

[Jensend]

If you really feel your only choices for watching a movie on a large screen from your couch are a phone or a VR HMD, knock yourself out. I‘ll stick with a TV for that while at home. Bonus points over an HMD for being able to reach for snack or drink without knocking it over. I doubt anyone who owns a TV would find an HMD adds value for the movie use case.

And many people find an iPad to be stupid because it’s basically a laptop without a keyboard and with a dumbed down OS.
I have a nice TV. But many people prefer projectors so they can have a bigger screen than TVs provide, even though projectors have worse image quality. VR TV has some advantages over my current TV, but the discomfort of the headset means I rarely use it for that purpose. People in my household often use a personal device to watch video even when the big TV is available.

 

[leicaman]

Gurman needs to drop a little less acid if he thinks that airboard thing is going to happen.

 

[JamesHolden]

To be fair, do remember a whole generation of people have been born and grown to near adulthood since the iPhone was released. Also, when it comes to innovation, so many other companies are ahead of Apple in so many areas. Apple’s strength is bringing it all together into a holistic package.

Well, a whole generation was born and grew up to near adulthood when the GUI was released. I don't see how that matters. Like I said before, there are big leaps, followed by years, often decades, of incremental innovation...that eventually culminates in another big leap. The issue is, the iPhone generation you reference, has no patience. Everything isn't amazing all the time. Every new thing isn't a mind blowing innovation. But, for some reason, this generation seems to expect that.

What companies are more innovative than Apple and in what way(s)? I agree that ONE of Apple's strength's is brining it all together, but that's hardly their only strength.

 

[macfacts]

I can't see any reason why one wouldn't be able to watch movies. But what resolution would they have to be in order to be a decent viewing experience? Is 4K large enough -- perhaps not? Maybe 8K??

Reason 1: low storage space
Reason 2: low battery life.

 

[JamesHolden]

Yes, people tend to run to this "extreme", seeming to imply this would be the ONLY monitor option and thus full-time, all-the-time requirements of goggles strapped to all of our heads.

Instead, I see this like a new kind of laptop screen, of which I currently try to use as sparingly as possible because I'd rather work on screens considerably larger than 16". However, when mobile, the choice is big (16") laptop screen, smaller (but up to biggest) tablet screen or smaller (but up to biggest Phone screen). None of those are as nice- or efficiently productive- as my desktop 40" ultra-wide. I wish I could have that much screen RE when I'm on the road, in the plane, etc.

Therein lies an opportunity. The problem: some people seem to want bigger and bigger screens for everything. Companies are experimenting with folding phone screens now and some people are buying them because they want a screen bigger than the non-folding kind. Some are experimenting with screens that roll up and some people are buying. Why? Because they want screens that are big but take up less space. How else could a bigger screen be available to the mobile computing user?

One way MIGHT be VR glasses/goggles perhaps delivering a MUCH larger screen (or screens) on demand. Instead of a clamshell in a bag, maybe it's a keyboard + goggles in a bag for some people? That seems quite plausible to me. There's already laptop/tablet hybrids that separate screen from keyboard (2 separate pieces). There's already portable screens that are only screens for sale. Presumably one could pack a Mac mini or Studio and one of those in a bag for a very powerful mobile desktop.

If these arrive with M2 or M3, is the Mac computing power in them? If so, bring a bluetooth keyboard and some have a desktop-power Mac with any size screen. Others not interested or not needing a screen bigger than 16" can stick with the "as is."

Those working at a desk 8-10 hours in a day will likely have a screen(s) already in place that suits their work. It's the mobilescenarios where I foresee an opportunity for a 17" MB without a physical case big enough to make that work... or an 18" or a 20" or a 30" or a 50", etc... all fitting nicely inside of a smallish, laptop-like travel bag.

I foresee NO scenario where people are roaming around full-time with goggles strapped to their heads. I foresee no scenario where the only monitors anyone can use in the future are goggles strapped to their heads. All of the existing options for screens would still be available for anyone who prefers existing options.

I also see no scenario where people are roaming around full-time with an open laptop on their laps. People bring along the laptop (screen) when they need a laptop. Perhaps other people bring along a goggles (screen) + a keyboard (bottom half of a laptop) when they need a modestly different kind of laptop?

I generally agree with everything you wrote. The problem I have with that thesis, though, is that it ignores the (rumored) cost of the device. Only a very small number of people will have the means AND desire to buy a fancy VR headset that serves as a giant mobile screen. If the headset really comes in at $3K+, it will be out of reach for most people. I don't disagree that the use case has merit, but I think the device needs to be 1/4 (or less) the price before a significant number of people buy it for that purpose. If you think about it, most people spend the majority of their time on really small screens (the phone). Laptops are the most popular computers. Most people simply don't need a giant screen. Outside of a small percentage of users, I just don't see that as a major selling point, especially at $3K or more.

 

[svish]

Great to hear that it can work independently without an iPhone. In Air typing will definitely take some time to work correctly. Many software updates might be required.

 

[Jensend]

The name is virtual reality. If a reality is presented to our eyes so that they are fooled... that it looks as real as actual reality, it should appear retina.

It's not "virtual reality" if it's a blurry mess. That's called bad experience.

I have to believe Apple will deliver very sharp images to our eyes befitting the tag "reality." If so, it seems it should look as real as the desktop screen on which I'm typing this right now. Yes, that's a 5K screen but I'm probably 24-30" from it. These rumored 4Ks (two of them) are apparently within an inch or two of our eyes.

We'll see if there's anything to this or not. But I watch a seemingly super-sharp, 4K TV from perhaps 8 feet away every evening. Very small print that shows on select commercials is readable and clear... with eyes 8 feet away. I have to suspect jamming 4K pixels into a space small enough to fit inside goggles is going to be serving up what will seem to be incredible resolution to eyes only and inch or two away.

Mr_Ed, in all threads about goggles, you are perpetually negative about them. I’m not. These have been rumored for about 5+ years now. I suspect ANYTHING Apple works on for 5+ years will deliver a very good experience.

So I appreciate your pessimism about goggles and acknowledge that every negative thing you’ve offered in all threads may prove to be true. But until we actually see what Apple rolls out, I’ll simply be more hopeful that whatever this is is more likely to be great than a big pile of…

All things I’ve purchased from Apple for a few thousand dollars have been a delight to me. If these are the rumored $3K, I expect a great new kind of product.

Again, it’s plausible Apple has wasted 5+ years and who knows how much money developing a pile of…

…but I’ll- perhaps naively- just assume something better.

This is simple math to show the visuals won’t be as sharp as real life. 4K over a 100 degree FOV is an average of 40 pixels per degree. ”Retina“ resolution is commonly given as 60PPD. I use my 24 inch monitors from an approximately 24 inch viewing distance, which means they are about 82PPD.

So what PPD is needed to perfectly fool the human eye? That’s a much more complicated answer. Even if you have a display that can show the smallest human discernible gap between two lines, there is still an issue of sampling error that means you need something like twice as much resolution as Apple’s definition of Retina.

And this isn’t even taking optics into account. Making the image clear across the full FOV the device supports is not a trivial problem.

edit:I said it was simple math, and then failed to do the simple arithmetic correctly. Still not “Retina” level, though

 

[JamesHolden]

The PS VR(2) uses a flimsy rubber gasket to block light. The Quest Pro has optional light blockers.

Fair enough, but that honestly doesn't seem like something Apple would do.

The same thing I'm using to type as I'm sitting on the couch right now, a keyboard with a trackpad. But you could also augment that with eye and hand tracking. People here imagine gorilla arm from waving their arms in space, but you could use even less effort that a traditional setup if you could keep your hands on the keyboard, but click buttons and select text fields and such without even having to remove your hands from the keyboard.

I'm assuming the whole UI can be controlled without any peripherals external to the headset, just like any iDevice, but you'll be able to connect keyboards and other devices, just like with an iDevice.

And don't worry, you'll be able to see the keyboard from within VR.


Well, I work from home, so I don't see my coworkers.
But I have played cards and watched movies in VR with friends who live in different states and countries.

Behind my virtual monitors, I could have a stream from a 360 webcam out in nature. That would be more interesting than my work space.

You very well may be right about most of the population not wanting to wear any sort of VR kit, regardless of the comfort and any benefits it provides. But I think many people are judging feasibility based on the comfort and capabilities of today's headsets, and are simply unimaginative when they can't think of any potential benefits from VR/AR. You at least acknowledge some.

There are a lot of wild and far-fetched ideas about what this headset will do and how it will work. I am reminded of the Apple Watch launch. I remember reading some of the craziest ideas about what the Watch would do, how the UI might work, etc. In the end, I think many of the people who came up with all of those ideas were pretty disappointed. While the Watch was nice, it was hardly revolutionary and didn't really offer anything over what other wearables and fitness devices offered at the time. Of course, Apple being Apple, they created a great user experience, but none of those online fan fantasies proved remotely true. I have a feeling the same will be true when the headset finally launches.

What is missing, in my opinion, is the killer app. There's too much focus on fan fantasy UI ideas, yet no one has come up with a truly compelling use case. I read lots of very imaginative ideas about how the headset might work, but, in the end, what's the killer app? We already have VR games. We already have VR content. What is Apple going to bring to the table that others haven't besides the Apple experience? The tech industry has been trying to make VR happen for many many years, yet most people remain disinterested. I don't think building a better headset will solve that problem. Look at Nintendo. They have some of the worst graphics, yet their consoles are some of the most successful. They have great games. That's what matters. The problem with VR to date is that no one has managed to give the general public a compelling reason to get on board.

 

[emmab2006]

i heard it's made out of palm oil, and also when you put it on, it says welcome to the oasis, and the final rumor i heard is that gurman sucks... enough with rumors from this hack !

 

[TVreporter]

Forget typing, it’s going to make air guitar playing mainstream!!

 

[Nicky G]

Isn’t this the whole point of voice recognition and Siri?

I can't even get Siri to call my Mom's home number, much less on speaker. One iOS update it works, another it stops again.

 

[segfaultdotorg]

Didn't Android offer this years ago without the need for VR goggles?

 

[Jensend]

There are a lot of wild and far-fetched ideas about what this headset will do and how it will work. I am reminded of the Apple Watch launch. I remember reading some of the craziest ideas about what the Watch would do, how the UI might work, etc. In the end, I think many of the people who came up with all of those ideas were pretty disappointed. While the Watch was nice, it was hardly revolutionary and didn't really offer anything over what other wearables and fitness devices offered at the time. Of course, Apple being Apple, they created a great user experience, but none of those online fan fantasies proved remotely true. I have a feeling the same will be true when the headset finally launches.

I don't disagree with you there. I think my predictions have been fairly mundane though:

You'll be able to use it without any device external to the headset: the OS and built in apps will work with only hand and eye tracking, just as iPhone and iPad can work with just touch.

But you'll be able to use a keyboard with it and see a representation of that keyboard from within the headset.

If the eye tracking is good enough for the user to reliably select UI elements, I think it's inevitable that Apple will allow the user to select UI elements with some combination of eye tracking and gestures.

What is missing, in my opinion, is the killer app. There's too much focus on fan fantasy UI ideas, yet no one has come up with a truly compelling use case. I read lots of very imaginative ideas about how the headset might work, but, in the end, what's the killer app? We already have VR games. We already have VR content. What is Apple going to bring to the table that others haven't besides the Apple experience? The tech industry has been trying to make VR happen for many many years, yet most people remain disinterested. I don't think building a better headset will solve that problem. Look at Nintendo. They have some of the worst graphics, yet their consoles are some of the most successful. They have great games. That's what matters. The problem with VR to date is that no one has managed to give the general public a compelling reason to get on board.

I've already found several apps that I enjoy using that are unlike anything I can use outside of VR.

I think the current headsets are good enough for much of the gaming category. I don't think higher resolution will have a big impact on how fun games are to play, so I agree with your assessment there in regards to Nintendo.

But I think for more productivity related tasks, it's hard to judge the usefulness of VR when it significantly underperforms for tasks as simple and ubiquitous as reading text. I do want to see Apples take on a full OS in VR, rather than VR headsets that mostly just run a bunch of unconnected apps one at a time.

The tech industry has been trying to make VR happen for many many years

I think people generally exaggerate how long the industry has seriously been trying to make VR happen. The tech to make it decent has only been here for about 10 years. Fast enough GPUs, small high-resolution high-refresh-rate screens, heck, even affordable gyroscopes are quite new. Steve Jobs had a painfully long demonstration of how the iPhone 4 could track rotation while he played a Jenga game on stage to show the new technology.

 

[alfonsog]

Yep, I want to replace my car every 2 to 3 years because it is no longer supported. That's me.

I already replace my cars every 2 to 3 years since I buy them through my business so no big deal... one just got completely totaled by a drunk driver . Also my Mac Pro is still running fine after 10 years... and my 5 year old iPad Pro is still supported (and still on monthly AppleCare still since my 13 year old nephew uses it and I've had the screen fixed 5 times already)... and my 2017 27" iMac that my mom uses is on the newest macOS. I still get all the new stuff though. I don't understand why you think 2 to 3 years they don't support anymore. I may or may not get the headset depending on what the uses for it are.

 

[Piggie]

Three outcomes:

1: This becomes of of the most amazing popular products ever and is a tremendous success.
2: It kind of bobbles along, without really becoming anything great but Apple just keep messing with it occasionally (Apple TV)
3: It drops like a stone, a massive investment and fanfare, and other than fans/reviewers very few actually buy it, and developers realise thers is no mass market and a few years later it's just killed as a project.

Wonder which one it will be.

 

[MrTemple]

Sorry but there is not one aspect of this headset that interests me. Not one. Each new leak does nothing to entice me to want this. If you are interested, enjoy, but I just have no desire to strap this to my head.

Whether you want it (now) or not, mixed reality will be to the last three-quarters of this century what a rectangle of glass in your pocket was to the first quarter.

 

[User 6502]

This thing is less and less appealing even before being released.

 

[User 6502]

Whether you want it (now) or not, mixed reality will be to the last three-quarters of this century what a rectangle of glass in your pocket was to the first quarter.

Unlikely. Maybe second half va first half. Maybe. But considering the second quarter is about to start and no company has even released anything vaguely ready I doubt things will change in the next year or two. These things at the moment cost too much, offer bad performance, give motion sickness or a combination of the above. Apple will probably manage to have all these three issues at once.

 

[macduke]

These leaks are wild. This thing is either going to flop instantly or be the most amazing thing ever. I don’t see any middle ground here. Apple’s either still got it or they don’t.

At this price it should have an AI that trains on watching me work ay my Mac and then lets me sleep while working.

 

[User 6502]

it is possible we will all want or need a similar device in twenty years. There is no guarantee that we will want or need the apple version of it, or that it will even exist. Apple disrupted the smartphone market with the iPhone, and a lot of companies who were huge before it disappeared or became irrelevant. They just couldn’t make anything that could compete. This new product could be the same for apple, it could be that a new company or an existing one will make a significantly better version than apple and that apple won’t be able to compete. So far it doesn’t seem there is much to compete with, not a single rumour offers any insight into any feature that make apple’s product special compared to what is already available.

 

[nikaru]

These leaks are wild. This thing is either going to flop instantly or be the most amazing thing ever. I don’t see any middle ground here. Apple’s either still got it or they don’t.

At this price it should have an AI that trains on watching me work ay my Mac and then lets me sleep while working.

I see middle ground here. Like the Apple Watch. It is not the sensational product that changed everything like the iPhone, but a decent accessory with some neat features.

 

[iPadified]

Is this a site for tech enthusiast? It sounds that the majority prefer the nearly 100 years paradigm of 2D screen (the TV) than some thing new. methods for display. I guess the explnation is simpler: the majority lack 3-5k for this product which hurts their enthusiast status a lot. Reminds me of the 6k XDR display and the stand.

 

[koelsh]

Three outcomes:

1: This becomes of of the most amazing popular products ever and is a tremendous success.
2: It kind of bobbles along, without really becoming anything great but Apple just keep messing with it occasionally (Apple TV)
3: It drops like a stone, a massive investment and fanfare, and other than fans/reviewers very few actually buy it, and developers realise thers is no mass market and a few years later it's just killed as a project.

Wonder which one it will be.

I would propose a 4th outcome between scenario 1 and 2 where it's more than a hobby but not a tremendous success and becomes another world to itself like iPad.

4: It reviews really well and for an appreciable fraction of people it's the best thing since sliced bread while for techies it's little more than a toy due to artificial software limitations. For most people it's somewhere between too expensive and not useful/capable/sensible enough to serve their needs. People from all categories attempt to shoehorn it into their lives but eventually give up and return to Mac + iPhone.

 

[robertosh]

I think it will be technologically amazing, but will suffer from the same problem as the other VR headsets, there will be a lack of content. I think Apple expects developers to port apps from iOS world to the headset, but that will require a ton of work for just a minority that can afford these. Devs are already flooded by different devices, screen sizes, architectures...

 

[koelsh]

Is this a site for tech enthusiast? It sounds that the majority prefer the nearly 100 years paradigm of 2D screen (the TV) than some thing new. methods for display. I guess the explnation is simpler: the majority lack 3-5k for this product which hurts their enthusiast status a lot. Reminds me of the 6k XDR display and the stand.

Don't know about others but my enthusiasm has been dulled by 10+ years of iPad being "the next great thing" and waiting for it to become more than a big iPhone + keyboard case + pencil.