Kuo: Apple's AR Glasses to Launch in 2020 as iPhone Accessory

[cfc]

Even if the first generation of these glasses is too ugly for people to wear all day I can still see them being very useful in some situations.

I am the developer of a workout app for the Apple Watch and the thought of using AR glasses during workouts is very appealing. The watch is so much easier to consult than a phone whilst you are exercising, but showing navigation and metrics in AR glasses would make things even easier.

To a lot of people it wouldn't matter what the glasses look like if they were sufficiently useful in some situations. Apple can gradually refine the looks as technology improves until it gets to the stage where people are happy to wear them all day.

 

[alms]

Sceptical. How can the tech be there?

Look what MS released? hololense 2. not very impressive, and the price tag. jesus

By offloading processing onto the iPhone that the person already owns, the cost of the goggles drops by $500-$1,000. Great if they can do it.

 

[Kabeyun]

(2011)

Please, Apple, learn Microsoft's lesson. Tablet PC was a failure.

Easy to say. There are always scoffers. Ballet and iPhone. Wired and iPad. But if you see Apple getting everyone to walk around sporting VR glasses, you give Apple more credit and people less credit than they both deserve. Even if they didn’t look like a 1950s sci-fi prop, people who wear glasses won’t put on goggles, and people who don’t wear glasses won’t start to for this.

And no, it’s not the same as getting the already-watch-wearing public to wear a different watch, as you suggest it is.

 

[ipedro]

I agree it seems too soon. The product that really sells it cannot be a big chunky expensive block. It needs to be light and affordable. That tech could be many years off.

The tech already exists for lightweight smart glasses that look like standard glasses. Retinal projection has miniaturized the display to where it’s virtually inivisble to anyone but the wearer.

As for processing power, the Apple Watch Series 4 fits the processing power of the iPhone 6 inside a tiny integrated system on a chip. The next Apple Watch chip coming out this year will again likely double that performance. The Watch’s electronics could fit within the stem of glasses.

The technology is already here. Now, we await Apple’s renowned implementation of existing tech.

 

[Gasu E.]

Sceptical. How can the tech be there?

Look what MS released? hololense 2. not very impressive, and the price tag. jesus

And also Magic Leap, not very impressive at all.

How can Apple possible create something that is ready for mainstream 2020? Also, carmack said AR is 3 - 5 years behind VR in regard of pure tech. VR is not ready for mainstream yet, and the displey tech etc etc with screen door is not very impressive. Not sure how apple can pull this off?

Also, what happend to: Its not about being first, its about being best?

AR could be ten years behind VR and still be more useful. AR does not require real-time verisimilitude to have practical uses, unlike VR. For VR, the tech needs to provide the "R"; for AR, nature already does that.

 

[deckard666]

Said it before with google glasses years ago and l’ll say it again “even people who HAVE to wear glasses don’t like to” and cameras in them come with all sorts of privacy issues. Total failure (again)

 

[satchmo]

Said it before with google glasses years ago and l’ll say it again “even people who HAVE to wear glasses don’t like to” and cameras in them come with all sorts of privacy issues. Total failure (again)

There will be privacy issues, but Apple will undoubtedly will frame a narrative that they, unlike Google, won't share any data.

 

[paul4339]

The tech is already here, and actually separating the computation unit from the glasses will help a lot. This is what you can get now:

I like this concept alot better...

1. People want to their glasses to fit; that they can easily wear. Something bulky won't get rapid adoption.
2. People don't like cameras; others don't like to be near you if they feel like they are constantly being recorded.
3. People generally want their devices to add value - taking away a current problem that exists to make life easier for them or enriching their lives.

 

[twolf2919]

There are so many companies selling Sunglasses. Sunglasses work. Tell me, how many companies are selling AR or VR headsets?

Apple tends to walk into an already established market and then makes it better.

iPod = CD Player / Tape Player / MP3 Players already existed.
Apple TV = Plenty of set top boxes existed before this
iPhone = Smartphones and Phones in general already existed.
iPad = Plenty of tablets available before that
Apple Watch = People had watches for ages.
Homepod = Google Home, Alexa, Smart speakers galore.

But where are the AR Glasses? Not even Samsung is selling a pair. And as I already said, VR, AR and 3D has not taken off because people don't want to wear things on their faces for it. Number one reason for 3D TV's failing to take off was people didn't wanna wear the glasses.

Also how the heck are you meant to wear AR glasses that look like and function like glasses (meaning they feature some kind of lenses that make them look like glasses) if you already wear spectacles? - Look at Microsofts AR Hololens product (intended now only for industry after failing in the consumer space) they are so big because it has to fit over your spectacles.

I think it'll be another failure like the Homepod to me. But look I'm not saying I'm right, your opinion is completely valid, you could be right. I accept that completely, this is just my thoughts on it.

I think you're taking liberties on some of these items to prove your point:
Apple TV: what other streaming boxes existed at the time (2007) Apple TV came out? I'm not aware of any. I had the first generation Roku and that came out in 2008.
iPhone: sure phones existed, but whether "smartphones" did is debatable. In my memory, iPhone was the first all-screen phone with capacitive touch - i.e. what anyone thinks of when the term "smartphone" is used today.
iPad: please name a few? And if you're going to name some that weren't all screen or didn't have capacitive touch, then you shouldn't be using iPad as Apple's first foray into tablets - that honor would then belong to the Newton.
Apple Watch: uh, smart watches are *not* the same market as classic watches.

Anyway, in general I think you're right - but for the wrong reason. Implied in your comment is the assertion that Apple lets other innovate and then, when a technology looks like it might take off, it jumps in with something better. But that's not how it really works - you can't just quickly come up with something better. Take the smart watch for instance. Samsung (and, arguably, Pebble) delivered smart watches before Apple did. But Apple had actually been working on its smartwatch for 5 years - definitely longer than Samsung. Apple just didn't want to sell it until it thought it was good enough.

But even if your argument was completely true, Apple *does* have a reference point upon which it could improve: Google Glass. While it never became a great seller - and was way too expensive - there was plenty user reaction to help Apple decide what people did/didn't like about AR glasses.

 

[futurist101]

Even if the first generation of these glasses is too ugly for people to wear all day I can still see them being very useful in some situations.

I am the developer of a workout app for the Apple Watch and the thought of using AR glasses during workouts is very appealing. The watch is so much easier to consult than a phone whilst you are exercising, but showing navigation and metrics in AR glasses would make things even easier.

To a lot of people it wouldn't matter what the glasses look like if they were sufficiently useful in some situations. Apple can gradually refine the looks as technology improves until it gets to the stage where people are happy to wear them all day.

Exactly. When the Apple Watch was first released I was very disappointed with the design they chose. Since that time, my concerns have vanished because I found its functionality very useful. I have a normal watch for formal occasions but I found myself even less concerned about wearing the Apple Watch in those instances as well.

I never thought of using AR glasses for workouts but I now see the potential. I also see two possible uses for the AR glasses that would make it a worthwhile purchase for:

1. GPS navigation: My iPhone/Apple Watch combo is great but AR glasses would be even better. I could literally follow the "virtual" arrow to my destination. Plus, if it provided useful on-demand info on restaurants/shops it would be incredibly beneficial for various situations.

2. Travel: I like to go off the beaten trail when I travel so if I could somehow download pertinent info (i.e. historical facts, significant landmarks, etc.) to my iPhone and have it actively available via the glasses during my travels that would be incredibly useful.

I can't wait for this device to be released.

 

[Fixey]

One area this product will be a great fit is cyclists, look a lot like cyclists glasses, so with AR one could cycle and have a map, location we’re your, arrow showing your destination etc..., the possibility is endless a great potential for cyclists, no longer have to take one eye off the road just to look down to our iPhones mounted on the handle bars, and with voice control safer cycling

 

[ceriess]

LOL... This is NOT going to happen. Thats a FACT.

 

[farmboy]

I'm not sure when--if ever--this product will be released. But assuming it's not a "hobby" or Google Glass-like misreading of the market,
wouldn't this tech be a logical integration with the HUD windshield display in the TitanMobile (yes, also assuming that project is more than just loud noises in the night)?

 

[jjudson]

Something tells me that the cameras will be unable to save pictures or video, and will only be usable to detect the environment to find surfaces on which to anchor virtual objects.

I actually have a little experience with the augmented reality space as I worked on a big joint project with a large well-known networking company along with a large well-known software company and a large well-known chipset-making company. This was to develop an augmented reality solution to use in industrial applications. The usefulness of this technology in that space is unlimited, especially as it applies to maintenance and troubleshooting activities. The camera in these devices must have functionality in both directions and do. Video can be transmitted to any recording device as well as to remote technical staff to provide assistance. It's not just about providing feedback on visual clues. It goes MUCH deeper than that.

 

[robbietop]

What they don't tell you is that Google Glass was illegal to be used while operating a motor vehicle in a few jurisdictions. If Apple were to do this, expect them to be prohibited from use while driving.

 

[AZREOSpecialist]

I'm not wearing any damn glasses

 

[cmaier]

I actually have a little experience with the augmented reality space as I worked on a big joint project with a large well-known networking company along with a large well-known software company and a large well-known chipset-making company. This was to develop an augmented reality solution to use in industrial applications. The usefulness of this technology in that space is unlimited, especially as it applies to maintenance and troubleshooting activities. The camera in these devices must have functionality in both directions and do. Video can be transmitted to any recording device as well as to remote technical staff to provide assistance. It's not just about providing feedback on visual clues. It goes MUCH deeper than that.

You misunderstand my point. I doubt the user will be able to extract photographs or videos. Obviously it will be recording and processing images and video, but if the user can’t obtain the resulting videos or photos, or extract them from the device, there is less to worry about from the perspective of the innocent public.

 

[Swazaloo]

2020 seems too early. Unless Apple has figured something out and drops a bomb like the original iPhone.

 

[cmaier]

There are so many companies selling Sunglasses. Sunglasses work. Tell me, how many companies are selling AR or VR headsets?

Apple tends to walk into an already established market and then makes it better.

iPod = CD Player / Tape Player / MP3 Players already existed.
Apple TV = Plenty of set top boxes existed before this
iPhone = Smartphones and Phones in general already existed.
iPad = Plenty of tablets available before that
Apple Watch = People had watches for ages.
Homepod = Google Home, Alexa, Smart speakers galore.

But where are the AR Glasses? Not even Samsung is selling a pair. And as I already said, VR, AR and 3D has not taken off because people don't want to wear things on their faces for it. Number one reason for 3D TV's failing to take off was people didn't wanna wear the glasses.

Also how the heck are you meant to wear AR glasses that look like and function like glasses (meaning they feature some kind of lenses that make them look like glasses) if you already wear spectacles? - Look at Microsofts AR Hololens product (intended now only for industry after failing in the consumer space) they are so big because it has to fit over your spectacles.

I think it'll be another failure like the Homepod to me. But look I'm not saying I'm right, your opinion is completely valid, you could be right. I accept that completely, this is just my thoughts on it.

You are changing the subject. You said people don’t want to wear glasses unless they have vision issues. I pointed out that millions of people wear sunglasses (often just for style points, by the way).

Now you’re off on some other point entirely.

 

[Quu]

I think you're taking liberties on some of these items to prove your point

You say I'm taking liberties to prove my point but then you assert smartphones didn't exist until capacitive touch?. Even Apple when they unveiled the first iPhone put four different smartphones on screen as the competitive landscape.

Due to this I'm not going to read the rest of the post sorry.

 

[Defthand]

Personally, I think the potential uses for AR glasses are exciting—assistive uses rather than amusements and distractions. But the skeptic in me expects the public and marketers will corrupt the experience.

 

[Quu]

You are changing the subject. You said people don’t want to wear glasses unless they have vision issues. I pointed out that millions of people wear sunglasses (often just for style points, by the way).

Now you’re off on some other point entirely.

People who don't need to wear glasses do not wear them. Sunglasses are the exception. Apple makes a pair of sunglasses? sure it'll sell. I doubt their AR glasses will be sunglasses.

Google and Microsoft have both already tried to make AR happen for consumers. Both failures.

 

[ddkkpp]

Apple is a privacy oriented company, so I don’t think these’ll have a camera. Maybe a laser array like faceID, but I doubt a company like Apple would put a camera on these things...

I like my glasses; hopefully they can be an attachment to them?

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I do believe AR is the future, likely won’t hit mass market for another 5-10 years.

 

[cmaier]

People who don't need to wear glasses do not wear them. Sunglasses are the exception. Apple makes a pair of sunglasses? sure it'll sell. I doubt their AR glasses will be sunglasses.

Google and Microsoft have both already tried to make AR happen for consumers. Both failures.

There are two types of glasses on the market that sell in any real numbers. One of those 2 types are worn just for looks much of the time. You are assuming Apple’s glasses will look like google’s or microsoft’s? That’s a stupid assumption. Did the Apple Watch look like the competition? Of course not - it looks like a watch. And apple’s glasses will look like regular glasses. They aren’t stupid, and they are very fashion-oriented (to the point where people on here complain about them ONLY caring about fashion).

When apple produces a pair of glasses that look like regular glasses, can have regular glass lenses in them (including prescription), and which ALSO act as a remote display for iPhone, they’ll sell like hotcakes. And that is what they are working on, not some Borg-looking google thing or a fighter-pilot-looking Microsoft thing.

 

[Quu]

There are two types of glasses on the market that sell in any real numbers. One of those 2 types are worn just for looks much of the time. You are assuming Apple’s glasses will look like google’s or microsoft’s? That’s a stupid assumption. Did the Apple Watch look like the competition? Of course not - it looks like a watch. And apple’s glasses will look like regular glasses. They aren’t stupid, and they are very fashion-oriented (to the point where people on here complain about them ONLY caring about fashion).

When apple produces a pair of glasses that look like regular glasses, can have regular glass lenses in them (including prescription), and which ALSO act as a remote display for iPhone, they’ll sell like hotcakes. And that is what they are working on, not some Borg-looking google thing or a fighter-pilot-looking Microsoft thing.

https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...20-as-iphone-accessory.2172616/#post-27163296