Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
So maybe v1 is only engineers and entrepreneurs like me whose purchase intent is not ownership of an uber-functional, perfectly operating new widget, but rather to learn and to stimulate our thinking as to how we might put the new tech to use - - or how we might put the next gen of the new tech to use.

You continue to fail to grasp the concept that this is new tech and as such can largely be pure research as opposed to applied research. Probably the headset announcement when it comes will be applied research since Apple is a tech products company, but that does not deny the reality that Apple is big enough and wealthy enough to be heavily investing at the pure research level. V1 product - no matter how flawed or unprofitable - brings it to the rest of us so we too can contribute to the evolution of the tech.

No I don't. Apple are not releasing this to the public for research purposes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: prefuse07
Apple has been the master at combining single-use electronics into premium multi-use devices. Instead of an iPod, cellphone, and point-and-click camera, carry a smartphone. Instead of a Fitbit and iPod Shuffle, wear an Apple Watch.

Likewise, Apple may be developing a headset that combines AR and VR functionality. Use AR outdoors and it will label the tree species for you. Use VR indoors for a more immersive Apple Arcade experience.

Still, not everyone who uses AR on their iPhone Pro will want goggles. Not everyone who owns a PlayStation owns the PS VR headset.
 
  • Like
Reactions: prefuse07
I personally enjoy my iPhone 13 mini. In my heart of hearts I firmly believe it to be the perfect size for someone such as myself who doesn't use his phone to watch videos or play games. And yet because the iPhone 13 mini enjoyed a "Newton-level" of commercial success, Apple discontinued it. Producing the mini was the right step, I thought. But because Apple didn't sell enough of them, there won't be newer models to buy in the future. Likewise, the Apple goggles might be a fine gadget, but without enough sales they will go extinct.
The iPhone did not go extinct, you just prefer an old variant no longer produced. Apple sells millions of newer stronger models. The v1 glasses indeed may enjoy only a "Newton-level" of commercial success, with Apple discontinuing it for a newer more competent version - - not extinct.
 
Likewise, Apple may be developing a headset that combines AR and VR functionality. Use AR outdoors and it will label the tree species for you. Use VR indoors for a more immersive Apple Arcade experience.
The industry has already been moving towards this. That's why I've been arguing that the AR/VR distinction is largely irrelevant, and will become even less relevant in the future.

Put light blockers in front of transparent AR glasses and they become VR. Put some good cameras on the front of an opaque VR headset, and it becomes an AR headset.

Transparent AR glasses so far have had a much more limited field of view than VR headsets, so they aren't as well suited for full on VR experiences.

Video passthrough in VR won't be as high quality as just letting natural light through to the users eyes, so they won't be as good for many "AR" style uses as transparent glasses.

So while most headsets/glasses will support AR and VR uses, you'll have to decide which use case is the priority.

The way I look at it is, if your primary focus is the digital content, an opaque device will probably work best for you. If your primary focus is the real world, a transparent device will probably work best for you. The transparent/opaque distinction is what is important, not whether a device is called AR or VR.
 
The industry has already been moving towards this. That's why I've been arguing that the AR/VR distinction is largely irrelevant, and will become even less relevant in the future.

Put light blockers in front of transparent AR glasses and they become VR. Put some good cameras on the front of an opaque VR headset, and it becomes an AR headset.

Transparent AR glasses so far have had a much more limited field of view than VR headsets, so they aren't as well suited for full on VR experiences.

Video passthrough in VR won't be as high quality as just letting natural light through to the users eyes, so they won't be as good for many "AR" style uses as transparent glasses.

So while most headsets/glasses will support AR and VR uses, you'll have to decide which use case is the priority.

The way I look at it is, if your primary focus is the digital content, an opaque device will probably work best for you. If your primary focus is the real world, a transparent device will probably work best for you. The transparent/opaque distinction is what is important, not whether a device is called AR or VR.
According to this report, transparent OLED displays are not even close to being a consumer product anytime soon:
 
According to this report, transparent OLED displays are not even close to being a consumer product anytime soon:
I’m pretty sure transparent OLED technology is irrelevant to AR. You can’t directly focus on a display that is so close to your eyes. AR technologies all basically redirect light from a different source.
 
So this turned out to be nonsense then. It’s now all over the media Apple will be unveiling the headset at WWDC
 
The industry has already been moving towards this. That's why I've been arguing that the AR/VR distinction is largely irrelevant, and will become even less relevant in the future.

And that's why I've been saying, for at least a year, that Apple's focus and thrust will be AR. And that VR will come along for the ride. That's really a no-brainer.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Allen_Wentz
And that's why I've been saying, for at least a year, that Apple's focus and thrust will be AR. And that VR will come along for the ride. That's really a no-brainer.
Is your prediction that it will be a transparent device? Or do you believe it will be an opaque device?
 
Apple already sells the Sony DualSense controller on the online Apple Store. They could just as easily sell the PS VR2 headset on the Apple Store and get Sony to write drivers for their devices if all Apple wanted was a more immersive VR experience available to people who play Apple Arcade games.

So I'm thinking what Apple is developing is a competitor to Microsoft's HoloLens 2 AR/MR headset. But that's 3,500 dollars! What does Apple think your average consumer will get out of AR/MR?
 
Search for "Nreal Air AR Glasses, Smart Glasses with Massive 201" Micro-OLED Virtual Theater, Augmented Reality Glasses, Watch, Stream, and Game on PC/Android/iOS?Consoles" on Amazon, this is what apple should copy, not those ski goggles.
 
Search for "Nreal Air AR Glasses, Smart Glasses with Massive 201" Micro-OLED Virtual Theater, Augmented Reality Glasses, Watch, Stream, and Game on PC/Android/iOS?Consoles" on Amazon, this is what apple should copy, not those ski goggles.

Apple's AR device is not ski goggles. Apple has been collaborating with Stanford University's AR/VR Laboratory for the last 7+ years. If you're seriously curious you might poke around on the internet and see what's been under development there.
 
Those images bring up the idea that computers can see what the human eye can't. Will we have 'cyber-eyes' in the future to help navigate a cluttered and chaotic future. Hmm...

LMAO

We have something in our ear that helps us with our balance. If our eyes aren't seeing the world properly this nice little sensor in our ear sends a signal telling us to fall over or feel sick.
 
  • Love
Reactions: bobthebuilderissus
I personally enjoy my iPhone 13 mini. In my heart of hearts I firmly believe it to be the perfect size for someone such as myself who doesn't use his phone to watch videos or play games. And yet because the iPhone 13 mini enjoyed a "Newton-level" of commercial success, Apple discontinued it. Producing the mini was the right step, I thought. But because Apple didn't sell enough of them, there won't be newer models to buy in the future. Likewise, the Apple goggles might be a fine gadget, but without enough sales they will go extinct.
i mean, yeah but the mini series isn't a new concept for apple. The SE was 3x the amount of success that the mini has, so its reasonable to discontinue a series that has a purpose severed by another model produced by apple. and in case you didn't know there isn't any other pairs of apple goggles already, so i don't think sales will really matter that much (unless you know, they only sell 13 or something like that lol)
and if we go farther than that, like all the way back to 2007, not to many people bought the iphone 2g either (compared to other cellphone sales at the time), yet here we are today.
 
LMAO

We have something in our ear that helps us with our balance. If our eyes aren't seeing the world properly this nice little sensor in our ear sends a signal telling us to fall over or feel sick.

Huh?

I was referring to the fact that the human eye has a limited bandwidth of colors that it can detect. Not actually colors, but 'electromagnetic radiation?'.

Point in fact, last week the Aurora Borealis was out. I saw a slight green tint to the sky, and thought I'd try to get a pic of it. The iPhone picked up the HUGE red area above the now vivid green area closer to the trees and horizon. Will we have 'all seeing eyes' in the form of a headset that will 'see' for us? In effect 'translate' our world into a format we can see? I mean, imagine seeing infrared radiation, or wifi, or generic heat, or cold, or actual chemicals. What a fasinating world it could/would be. Seeing things we are completely oblivious to in 'normal' light. Sounds too cool... Not to mention seeing things that er far away that would seem a heck of a lot closer. A brave new world indeed...
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.