Kuo: Apple's AR/VR Headset Announcement is 'Last Hope' for Persuading Investors It Will Be the Next 'Star Product'

[Jensend]

Just because the VirtualBoy from Nintendo was laughably low res and limited by technology of the time, doesn’t mean it wasn’t a VR device (to complete the AR/Google Glass comparison).

The problem with labeling the Virtual Boy a VR device is that it requires such a wide definition of VR that it basically becomes meaningless.
The VirtualBoy is no more a VR device than a camera-less Nintendo 3DS glued to a table is. (I was oddly specific here because the 3DS did have a few phone style AR tech demos included with it.)

In my opinion, VR only includes devices that update the displayed image in response to movement from the user’s head, while displaying a scene that lines up with the user’s natural perspective. In other words, the virtual world should appear to be fixed in place as the user moves their head to look around the scene.

Is your definition any more precise than ”a device with near-eye displays”?

Google Glass was an AR device. Not a good one, but 100% an AR device. It overlayed information onto the real world, albeit in an extremely rudimentary way.

Every display overlays information onto the real world. Or are you only counting transparent displays? If I watch the reflection of my TV in a window, does that make it an AR device?

My definition of AR would only include devices that can visually anchor virtual objects to the real world.

 

[Jensend]

Ok. Watch this. Highly influential computer reviewer trashes Oculus.

An “oh, sorry, I was wrong” would have sufficed.
Linus spends a ton of time in VR (he’s way better at Beat Saber than I am).
I’m not sure how bringing him up is good for your case that VR sucks and everyone who likes it is wrong.

 

[Jensend]

Avatars: Not even gamers build out an avatar beyond initial setup. You really think 35-65 year olds are gonna spend more than 30 minutes a year interacting with their avatars? Really? After working 8-12 hours a day, they're gonna sit there and play with a VR representation of themselves? They're not gonna watch TV or a movie or play a game? Something more interesting than a virtual children's barbie doll?

Fortnite has made billions of dollars selling avatar cosmetics. Several other highly profitable games make most of their money selling avatar cosmetics.

 

[JamesHolden]

Facebook is just clumsy and awkward... Enthusiast gaming is not a mainstream market however hard you want it to be. It needs only to nail ONE thing perfect, and that is presence in online meetings... Everything else is gravy on-top at this point.

Of all the use cases people kick around, online meetings has to be the worst example. What advantage does a VR meeting have over a Zoom meeting? Technology is about solving problems. There are huge advantages to a Zoom meeting over a traditional conference call. Everyone in the Zoom meeting can see each other and read each other's facial expressions. Participants can share their screens with one another. Etc. How does VR significantly improve this experience? Instead of seeing my fellow participants, I see their Animojis?

Then there's the issue of cost. Everyone already has a computer on their desk at work or a mobile phone in their pocket. It costs essentially nothing to have an online meeting. Are businesses really going to drop several thousand dollars per participant so that everyone can conference call in VR? No chance, especially with the way things are going in the economy.

 

[Realityck]

Of all the use cases people kick around, online meetings has to be the worst example. What advantage does a VR meeting have over a Zoom meeting? Technology is about solving problems. There are huge advantages to a Zoom meeting over a traditional conference call. Everyone in the Zoom meeting can see each other and read each other's facial expressions. Participants can share their screens with one another. Etc. How does VR significantly improve this experience? Instead of seeing my fellow participants, I see their Animojis?

Then there's the issue of cost. Everyone already has a computer on their desk at work or a mobile phone in their pocket. It costs essentially nothing to have an online meeting. Are businesses really going to drop several thousand dollars per participant so that everyone can conference call in VR? No chance, especially with the way things are going in the economy.

Has Apple ever discussed VR? AR yes with iOS/IPadOS examples shown in Augmented Reality dev links and utilities. The media/rumor press is playing outer limits control.

There is nothing wrong with your television set. Do not attempt to adjust the picture. We are controlling transmission. If we wish to make it louder, we will bring up the volume. If we wish to make it softer, we will tune it to a whisper. We will control the horizontal. We will control the vertical. We can roll the image, make it flutter. We can change the focus to a soft blur, or sharpen it to crystal clarity.

The problem is they keep wanting you to see a mixed reality headset. So does this industry to help make all the VR failures seem to be Apple's fault if their combined fumbling is unwelcome to consumers.

 

[JamesHolden]

Has Apple ever discussed VR? AR yes with iOS/IPadOS examples shown in Augmented Reality dev links and utilities. The media/rumor press is playing outer limits control.

There is nothing wrong with your television set. Do not attempt to adjust the picture. We are controlling transmission. If we wish to make it louder, we will bring up the volume. If we wish to make it softer, we will tune it to a whisper. We will control the horizontal. We will control the vertical. We can roll the image, make it flutter. We can change the focus to a soft blur, or sharpen it to crystal clarity.

The problem is they keep wanting you to see a mixed reality headset. So does this industry to help make all the VR failures seem to be Apple's fault if their combined fumbling is unwelcome to consumers.

You’re right about Apple’s focus being AR. That said, I think splitting hairs over AR and VR is silly. VR is essentially AR with one’s surroundings blocked out. VR is total immersion. AR is partial immersion. If Apple releases an Oculus style device, it will support VR. It will also let you see your surroundings (hence all of the rumored cameras) and function as an AR device. We’re not talking about a sleek pair of glasses with AR functionality. That kind of product is many years away.

Whether Apple’s device is AR or VR or both makes no difference. Businesses still aren’t going to drop several thousand dollars per employee who needs to participate in online meetings. No headset is going to improve the online meeting experience so significantly over today’s Zoom calls to warrant that kind of investment. Furthermore, if the device is not a VR device, Apple will have really shot themselves in the foot because some of the best use cases require full immersion, like watching a movie, virtual monitors, and gaming.

 

[robbietop]

Fortnite has made billions of dollars selling avatar cosmetics. Several other highly profitable games make most of their money selling avatar cosmetics.

Fortnite: average age fortnite

18-24, so, kids.

 

[robbietop]

An “oh, sorry, I was wrong” would have sufficed.
Linus spends a ton of time in VR (he’s way better at Beat Saber than I am).
I’m not sure how bringing him up is good for your case that VR sucks and everyone who likes it is wrong.

If PSVR2 is way better than Oculus, and is selling so poorly it's making news, how is Apple gonna do better?

Gaming companies can't sell the damned thing....

 

[Jensend]

Of all the use cases people kick around, online meetings has to be the worst example. What advantage does a VR meeting have over a Zoom meeting? Technology is about solving problems. There are huge advantages to a Zoom meeting over a traditional conference call. Everyone in the Zoom meeting can see each other and read each other's facial expressions. Participants can share their screens with one another. Etc. How does VR significantly improve this experience? Instead of seeing my fellow participants, I see their Animojis?

Then there's the issue of cost. Everyone already has a computer on their desk at work or a mobile phone in their pocket. It costs essentially nothing to have an online meeting. Are businesses really going to drop several thousand dollars per participant so that everyone can conference call in VR? No chance, especially with the way things are going in the economy.

I actually think interacting with others in VR has advantages over Zoom meetings*, but those advantages won’t be worth buying a headset just for those meetings. When people already have a headset for other reasons, sure, it may make sense to have some meetups in VR.

The only exception would be if your job would benefit from 3D visualization in a meeting, like with architectural design. But even then, at least some of the participants would also be using VR on their own at times.

*You mention screen sharing, and that is a great use case for VR, because you can share on a big communal screen, while each participant can still see all of their own screens, and you can also see the avatars of other people, all without worrying about content overlapping or running out of area.

 

[Realityck]

Whether Apple’s device is AR or VR or both makes no difference. Businesses still aren’t going to drop several thousand dollars per employee who needs to participate in online meetings. No headset is going to improve the online meeting experience so significantly over today’s Zoom calls to warrant that kind of investment. Furthermore, if the device is not a VR device, Apple will have really shot themselves in the foot because some of the best use cases require full immersion, like watching a movie, virtual monitors, and gaming.

It actually does from a consumer safety perspective. Partial immersion could allow you to interact with what you are doing in the real world like walking, driving, working. Full immersion does not work with normal activities. The example you suggested are virtual replacement for using both eyes to look at a VTC meeting or watching a large screen TV, or looking at gaming displays. It's pretty easy to see where AR you could much more commonplace. VR would look like you are at a meeting with no faces.

 

[aibloop]

Of all the use cases people kick around, online meetings has to be the worst example. What advantage does a VR meeting have over a Zoom meeting? Technology is about solving problems. There are huge advantages to a Zoom meeting over a traditional conference call. Everyone in the Zoom meeting can see each other and read each other's facial expressions. Participants can share their screens with one another. Etc. How does VR significantly improve this experience? Instead of seeing my fellow participants, I see their Animojis?

Then there's the issue of cost. Everyone already has a computer on their desk at work or a mobile phone in their pocket. It costs essentially nothing to have an online meeting. Are businesses really going to drop several thousand dollars per participant so that everyone can conference call in VR? No chance, especially with the way things are going in the economy.

Presence is a real thing... Seeing the person(s) in-front of you and communicating effectively has the promise to replace billions in travel expenses and carbon emissions for pointless in-person meetings that can be replaced by this...

Animojis... If you saw the video for the tech used for it, yeah sure. Animojis is a part of that techstack AND they have used animojis to beta test it, except surely this will be your face very soon OR atleast quite close to release OR at release. Apples solution WILL be reading facial expressions and where you look aka eye-tracking.


The only question is how well it works together. I think likely it will work MUCH better then any oculus VR goggles you have tried.


Cost... This is the Pro version, to push out to devs and content Pros in the first run. ALSO it will be their 1st release version of the product... Take that as you will. It will be mostly right, but certainly will improve by miles to second release. YOUR version will likely be 899$ in a year... Being mostly the same as what will be released this year, except based on 3NM M3 and aimed at consumers.


"I want a better and faster horse! A horse that is foldable for easier storage!" SOME version of this tech is the future... Be it something that sits infront of your eyes, or something that can display 3d in some way. Being along for this ride IS important.

 

[Surf Monkey]

Ad:

You see a tall beautiful woman on the top of the slopes, she pulls down her sexy sleek Apple Reality Goggles, and sets down the slopes, showing speed. % incline, a view from her sexy tall fashion boyfriends Apple glasses coming down from a different slope.

She stops and takes over the view of her fashionably handsome boyfriends downward ride and he comes up to her, swoooosh, Apple Reality! Only at apple store!

Potential increase in ski accidents, documented by Apple Watch’s impact detection. Additional potential liability issues around “distracted skiers” using Apple goggles.

Ad:

A rebellious cool young zoomer skates through the crowd of old tired complainig old people, stuck to their dreary android fold phones... A guy looks out the window with a HUMONGOUS neon gaming system going like a circus.. wroomwroom go the fans.. He sees this cool young zoomer with his Apple Reality Glasses on, skate past the window... Apple Reality! Only at Apple store!

Another potential liability situation. People skating into traffic and being run over by self driving Teslas.

Ad:

A fashionable cool guy walks down the street with Apple Reality Glasses on... Dont give a rats ass that people stare and gawk... He is cool... He dont give a ****... Apple Reality! Only at Apple store.

This one will happen and will be extra annoying to everyone around.

...It only takes Gurman and Kuo leaking suspicious-as-heck news that are obviously covering their own backs... and you are ready to dismiss an exciting Apple product that we know very little about. I look forward to you all saying how great ur Apple Reality glasses are in a about year or so... xD

It isn’t an exciting product as far as we know. All signs point to it being a massive Hail Mary to lay down a “legacy” for Tim Cook who is pretty obviously running head first into a Newton 2.0 situation.

 

[Surf Monkey]

Presence is a real thing... Seeing the person(s) in-front of you and communicating effectively has the promise to replace billions in travel expenses and carbon emissions for pointless in-person meetings that can be replaced by this...

Animojis... If you saw the video for the tech used for it, yeah sure. Animojis is a part of that techstack AND they have used animojis to beta test it, except surely this will be your face very soon OR atleast quite close to release OR at release. Apples solution WILL be reading facial expressions and where you look aka eye-tracking.


The only question is how well it works together. I think likely it will work MUCH better then any oculus VR goggles you have tried.


Cost... This is the Pro version, to push out to devs and content Pros in the first run. ALSO it will be their 1st release version of the product... Take that as you will. It will be mostly right, but certainly will improve by miles to second release. YOUR version will likely be 899$ in a year... Being mostly the same as what will be released this year, except based on 3NM M3 and aimed at consumers.


"I want a better and faster horse! A horse that is foldable for easier storage!" SOME version of this tech is the future... Be it something that sits infront of your eyes, or something that can display 3d in some way. Being along for this ride IS important.

Sounds like a hellish future a-la Severance to me. No thanks.

 

[Surf Monkey]

Fortnite has made billions of dollars selling avatar cosmetics. Several other highly profitable games make most of their money selling avatar cosmetics.

To 55 year olds? Come on now.

 

[Jensend]

If PSVR2 is way better than Oculus, and is selling so poorly it's making news, how is Apple gonna do better?

Gaming companies can't sell the damned thing....

And ten years ago, Nintendo’s handheld gaming system was outselling Sony’s handheld gaming system several times over, but I wouldn’t point to Sony’s poor sales to claim that nobody wants a handheld gaming system.

PSVR2 is not “way better than Oculus”. It has different compromises than the Quest 2.

 

[Jensend]

It actually does from a consumer safety perspective. Partial immersion could allow you to interact with what you are doing in the real world like walking, driving, working. Full immersion does not work with normal activities. The example you suggested are virtual replacement for using both eyes to look at a VTC meeting or watching a large screen TV, or looking at gaming displays. It's pretty easy to see where AR you could much more commonplace. VR would look like you are at a meeting with no faces.

Nobody is going to be walking and driving with the first generation Apple headset*. Now, I think camera passthrough makes it a more viable option for people who are using the headset for virtual monitors, virtual TV, fitness, some kinds of games (diorama style games, like Moss, or poker with your friends who live far away), but need to keep an eye on the real world around them, or simply would feel more comfortable if they can see the real world. But I don’t think the actual applications will be all that different, at least while opaque headsets are used.

*not literally nobody, but you get the point… if anything, camera passthrough means more people will try using the headset in potentially dangerous settings, thus decreasing safety compared to a full immersion scenario.

 

[Realityck]

Nobody is going to be walking and driving with the first generation Apple headset*. Now, I think camera passthrough make make it a more viable option for people who are using the headset for virtual monitors, virtual TV, fitness, some kinds of games (diorama style games, like Moss, or poker with your friends who live far away), but need to keep an eye on the real world around them, or simply would feel more comfortable if they can see the real world. But I don’t think the actual applications will be all that different, at least while opaque headsets are used.

*not literally nobody, but you get the point… if anything, camera passthrough means more people will try using the headset in potentially dangerous settings, thus decreasing safety compared to a full immersion scenario.

If a surgeon can see your body physically superimposed over a 3D CT scan represention to more accurately perform a surgery, why can less risky/precise references in 3d not be shown while walking or driving? Yes they use AR all the time in this manner. Enough with the focus on entertainment, think about how this technology could help you doing many things you do now that causes you to stare at your iPhone instead of moving about without that.

 

[itsboi]

So now we're comparing a $550 PSVR2 to this and using it as a reason why Apple will fail.
One is tethered to a PS5 (which is just now becoming accessible after 3 years), that only 30 million people have (vs the 2 billion people in Apple's ecosystem), and has zero use cases outside of gaming. Also launched with poor software titles, not even Half Life: Alyx is on that platform. It's gaming, a market Apple barely cares for.

I'd reserve judgement until June.

 

[Realityck]

So now we're comparing a $550 PSVR2 to this and using it as a reason why Apple will fail.
One is tethered to a PS5 (which is just now becoming accessible after 3 years), that only 30 million people have (vs the 2 billion people in Apple's ecosystem), and has zero use cases outside of gaming. Also launched with poor software titles, not even Half Life: Alyx is on that platform. It's gaming, a market Apple barely cares for.

I'd reserve judgement until June.

The AR/VR Headset is a rumor, in 2018 Apple bought this start up company that makes lenses for Augmented Reality glasses. Yes wait until WWDC because its from a different usage then this Sony products in its entirety.

Apple buys start-up that makes lenses for augmented reality glasses

Akonia Holographics makes lenses for augmented reality glasses that can display vibrant, full-color, wide field-of-view images.

www.cnbc.com

 

[itsboi]

The AR/VR Headset is a rumor, in 2018 Apple bought this start up company that makes lenses for Augmented Reality glasses. Yes wait until WWDC because its from a different usage then this Sony products in its entirety.

Apple buys start-up that makes lenses for augmented reality glasses

Akonia Holographics makes lenses for augmented reality glasses that can display vibrant, full-color, wide field-of-view images.

www.cnbc.com

All of the doom essays flooding every AR/VR thread made me believe Apple has already unveiled their product.

 

[Surf Monkey]

Nobody is going to be walking and driving with the first generation Apple headset*. Now, I think camera passthrough make make it a more viable option for people who are using the headset for virtual monitors, virtual TV, fitness, some kinds of games (diorama style games, like Moss, or poker with your friends who live far away), but need to keep an eye on the real world around them, or simply would feel more comfortable if they can see the real world. But I don’t think the actual applications will be all that different, at least while opaque headsets are used.

*not literally nobody, but you get the point… if anything, camera passthrough means more people will try using the headset in potentially dangerous settings, thus decreasing safety compared to a full immersion scenario.

Yeah, there’s very little chance that these will end up being legal to wear while driving.

 

[Surf Monkey]

If a surgeon can see your body physically superimposed over a 3D CT scan represention to more accurately perform a surgery, why can less risky/precise references in 3d not be shown while walking or driving? Yes they use AR all the time in this manner. Enough with the focus on entertainment, think about how this technology could help you doing many things you do now that causes you to stare at your iPhone instead of moving about without that.

Fun speculation, but has any of this actually been done by anyone?

 

[Realityck]

Yeah, there’s very little chance that these will end up being legal to wear while driving.

Why not? What about AR if implemented properly prevents its use and can be accomplished without some impairment or distraction. Heavens knows most people are distracted in cars anyway while driving.

 

[Surf Monkey]

Why not? What about AR is implemented properly prevents its use?

While DRIVING?

Think about it for a second.

 

[Realityck]

Fun speculation, but has any of this actually been done by anyone?

Watch how AR technology obsoletes the need of a surgeon needing to reference documents during a surgery. The doctor would be accessing the necessary data/scans of the patient directly accessible from the hospital computer access internally. Yes it's akin to a GPS for precise location work when operating, where none existed before. As shown a very difficult surgery made far easier to perform on a patient by using AR.