Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Gurman: 'Apple Reality Pro' to Be First of Three Apple AR/VR Headset Devices

I’m really interested to see how Apple approaches VR. There are some pretty decent headsets out there already but I don’t see a massive market beyond gaming and porn at the moment - and Apple are not massive in either market.

Whatever Apple release, I’m pretty sure they’ll do it right but at $3,000 it’s obviously not designed to compete with the Meta Quest 2 and the often cartoon-style graphics.

I can’t imagine any upcoming headsets being used outside the home so, without any criticism and with a genuine curiosity, I do wonder what Apple intends to do with VR and what justifies such a high price tag.
 
  • Like
Reactions: macvicta
darngooddesign said:
No one calls the iPhone by its full name "Apple iPhone".

'Reality Pro' does roll off the tongue well.
Click to expand...

iPhone was part of the i generation. iMac, iPod, iPhone. Those stood on their own. Apple Watch, Apple Music, Apple TV... the new naming convention does need the Apple prefix because otherwise, they're just common words. Watch, Music, TV. Apple Reality sounds like a service or an OS, not the devices themselves.

I know Google kind of stained this but Glass would've been a great name. But "glassholes" ruined it....
 
  • Like
Reactions: Darkwalker
ipedro said:
Apple’s naming conventions are going off the deep end. “Apple Reality Pro” doesn’t quite roll off the tongue. There’s a lot at stake at Apple for this device and they’re starting off with an unmarketable name.

There really isn’t anyone over at Apple to lose their shh on bad ideas and when executives come up short of perfection. It’s becoming clear as the years go by that Steve Jobs’ hot temper was one of the secret spices to Apple’s success.
Click to expand...
I said this before. Apple marketing doesn’t make sense. They think they need to name everything “Apple”. If the iPhone would have been released today it would be call Apple Phone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: freedomlinux, rafark and arkitect
Lounge vibes 05 said:
Because, as all of the rumors have said, these are *not* glasses.
These are devices with screens that cover up all of your vision, what you’ll see from them come straight through the device’s cameras and micro-led displays.
The “glasses” aren’t rumored to come out until 2024 at the earliest, more likely 25-27
Click to expand...
It doesn’t make sense for them to release this product then. It was supposed to revolutionize the industry but who in their right mind would use an AR headset like this outside? This would make sense if it were a VR headset, otherwise AR is going to be only for in door use.
 
ipedro said:
Not me. MacBook made perfect sense. iPad was one of the best names, next to AirPods despite both getting early flack. But iPhone 13... Pro... Max or MacBook... Pro... M1... Max, these sound like design by committee consensus names that big corporations with too many VPs come up with.

Reality sure, it's not AirPods but it'll work... but start adding suffixes and they're losing the simplicity and elegance Apple's brand has been known for.
Click to expand...
Apple reality ? Seriously? You think Apple reality is a good name? Do you guys understand that’s actually a phrase right? It has just the ‘s missing.

Seems like they just want to call it Apple Reality so they could abbreviate it to AR Pro.
 
  • Love
Reactions: rezwits
Saturnine said:
I’m really interested to see how Apple approaches VR. There are some pretty decent headsets out there already but I don’t see a massive market beyond gaming and porn at the moment - and Apple are not massive in either market.

Whatever Apple release, I’m pretty sure they’ll do it right but at $3,000 it’s obviously not designed to compete with the Meta Quest 2 and the often cartoon-style graphics.

I can’t imagine any upcoming headsets being used outside the home so, without any criticism and with a genuine curiosity, I do wonder what Apple intends to do with VR and what justifies such a high price tag.
Click to expand...

Nothing other than industry rumours seems to suggest that Apple is making a VR headset. Everything they've done, that they've prepared developers for, the technology they've been building and integrating into existing devices, all that they've been moving towards indicates Augmented Reality, not VR.

Apple tends to build the puzzle pieces out in the open and they make perfect sense in retrospect, once enough of the puzzle has been laid out. AR Kit in iOS, LiDAR in the iPad and iPhone, the M1 chip, wearables like Apple Watch and AirPods, all indicate an augmented reality device.

Two more points:

- Apple has shown regret in how the iPhone dawned an era of isolation and robbed attention. Everyone has their heads in their phones, everywhere you go. They've been trying to undo some of that (i.e. Screen Time, Notifications curation). The Watch seems to be an attempt at bringing people back into the real world, while still having access to the power of an internet smart device everywhere they go. A VR headset would be a step backwards from that. Most people don't actually want to be that isolated. People like experiencing entertainment with others, which is why we watch TV with friends and go to the movies.​
​
- Apple's post-Mac success has everything to thank to trends and "being seen". iPod's white earphones kicked it off. iPhones, AppleWatch, AirPods out in public, MacBooks in cafes and college campuses. These are Apple's most successful products. A VR headset that you wear at home? It breaks the FOMO formula that has worked so well for Apple.​

I don't know what Apple is going to release next year but I suspect they're much further along than people realize, like how the iPhone blew everyone away because it felt like it was impossible for that time, that it had been brought back from the future. The tech do pull off AR glasses almost exists. Nobody's done it well... yet. Leave it to the company that brought us the iPhone to miniaturize the tech and make it beautiful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: citysnaps
I'm really curious on how apple is planning on getting good developer support for that thing. And how it is controlled. Maybe via gestures, but in my experience, having something to touch adds so much to a VR-experience. Anyways, there are not going to be a lot of people spending north of $2000 on a traditionally underpowerd and not long-term-supported 1st gen apple product. And professionals who could are probably happy with their holo-lens and working in a ms-windows-centered environment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: brucemr
Apple has always leaned towards augmented reality instead of virtual reality - I still don't see them straying from this unless they think there's a major market for it.
 
ipedro said:
Nothing other than industry rumours seems to suggest that Apple is making a VR headset. Everything they've done, that they've prepared developers for, the technology they've been building and integrating into existing devices, all that they've been moving towards indicates Augmented Reality, not VR.

Apple tends to build the puzzle pieces out in the open and they make perfect sense in retrospect, once enough of the puzzle has been laid out. AR Kit in iOS, LiDAR in the iPad and iPhone, the M1 chip, wearables like Apple Watch and AirPods, all indicate an augmented reality device.

Two more points:

- Apple has shown regret in how the iPhone dawned an era of isolation and robbed attention. Everyone has their heads in their phones, everywhere you go. They've been trying to undo some of that (i.e. Screen Time, Notifications curation). The Watch seems to be an attempt at bringing people back into the real world, while still having access to the power of an internet smart device everywhere they go. A VR headset would be a step backwards from that. Most people don't actually want to be that isolated. People like experiencing entertainment with others, which is why we watch TV with friends and go to the movies.​
​
- Apple's post-Mac success has everything to thank to trends and "being seen". iPod's white earphones kicked it off. iPhones, AppleWatch, AirPods out in public, MacBooks in cafes and college campuses. These are Apple's most successful products. A VR headset that you wear at home? It breaks the FOMO formula that has worked so well for Apple.​

I don't know what Apple is going to release next year but I suspect they're much further along than people realize, like how the iPhone blew everyone away because it felt like it was impossible for that time, that it had been brought back from the future. The tech do pull off AR glasses almost exists. Nobody's done it well... yet. Leave it to the company that brought us the iPhone to miniaturize the tech and make it beautiful.
Click to expand...

Yeah... I've been saying that for years. AR is where it is for both commercial and personal markets.

VR will simply come along for the ride as the underlying technology (glasses, iPhone, UWB fast data/video links, etc) are common to both AR and VR.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kurtfoster and Appleman3546
I really hope there is an emphasis on AR instead of VR, that is something Microsoft got right with the HoloLens but Apple clearly has the better AR foundation
 
ipedro said:
Apple’s naming conventions are going off the deep end. “Apple Reality Pro” doesn’t quite roll off the tongue. There’s a lot at stake at Apple for this device and they’re starting off with an unmarketable name.

There really isn’t anyone over at Apple to lose their shh on bad ideas and when executives come up short of perfection. It’s becoming clear as the years go by that Steve Jobs’ hot temper was one of the secret spices to Apple’s success.
Click to expand...
Lol. Were you not around to the massive negative reaction to the name "iPad"? Every other comment about it mentioned "MaxiPad".
 
Nicole1980 said:
Omg, I will be so happy when Apple stops putting the 'pro' label on every ******* thing they make.
Give it a rest
Click to expand...
It lets you know up front. This will not be cheap. It also leaves room for a lower cost version to be slotted beneath it without diminishing the value of the original version.
 
I usually go with these names for any new apple category.

The original expensive one that is a watered down version of the future pro model.

The next to release is the inexpensive one which replaces some of the more expensive components of the original but is still technically faster, just made more inexpensive so they can reduce the price by $50-$100.

And finally the pro model, the model they originally thought of when creating the new product category, they just needed to fund the R&D by selling inferior products for years before delivering on the promise of the original device. By now competitors have moved in and you can get the original experience from them at half the cost, the pro model is twice as expensive as the original.

This formula has worked well for them since the iPad was invented.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back