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

[JamesHolden]

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...

I think you overestimate the value of "presence". Zoom, FaceTime, etc. are good enough. I don't disagree that VR has the potential to offer more "presence", but I don't think that's really a selling point and virtual meetings are definitely not VR's "killer app".

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.

Animojis or a more realistic rendered face, either way it will be cartoonish and I don't think most people will want to use that for serious business calls. That sounds gimmicky and adolescent.

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.

I don't doubt that. I fully expect whatever Apple releases to set a new standard.

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.

This is such utter nonsense. This idea gets parroted on these forums without any evidence whatsoever. Let's look at the facts. Apple has never released a new product, only to drop the price significantly a year later. Let's assume the price is the rumored $3K. There's no way Apple drops the price by 2/3 in a year. Utter nonsense.

First, there's no way they will bring manufacturing costs down that quickly. Second, they aren't going to screw over their early adopters like that. And third, when have they ever released a first generation product aimed at developers? Never. (The AS developer Mini doesn't count, because the Mac already existed and the AS developer Mini was to get software ready for new AS machines, not to launch a whole new product category).

Finally, why would a developer invest in a headset that no consumer is buying? To write apps for next year's (rumored) headset revision? This line of thinking makes no sense at all and completely contradicts many decades of Apple behavior. Whatever price point Apple sets for this device will be the price point for the foreseeable future. Yes, the price will drop some in the coming years and there will likely be Mini or Air versions at some point, but that is probably years away.

"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.

It may or may not be. I'm not convinced that people want to wear goggles. I'm also not convinced that people want to check out of reality in large numbers. VR is disorienting for a lot of people. I'm a techie (who admittedly has been losing interest in tech for a while now) and I find VR very unpleasant. It feels weird and unnatural. I can't get into it.

In my opinion, VR only gets interesting when it's a direct neural connection, a la the Matrix, when there's nothing to wear and you can not only see, but feel, the simulated reality.

 

[JamesHolden]

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

There are a number of companies developing AR products for the medical field. Anyone who thinks Apple's headset will be used this way is delusional, however. Apple has never gotten the Watch certified by the FDA as a medical device. These medical AR systems are far more complex and need to meet certain standards. If Apple won't get the Watch FDA certified, there's no chance they get the headset certified. Apple's headset will not be used for surgery. It's a consumer electronics device, not a purpose built medical device.

These AR/VR threads remind me of all the threads before the Watch launched. None of the absurd fanboy features and use cases people imagined turned out to be true. In the end, Apple built a better Fitbit. With the headset I expect them to build a better Oculus.

 

[JamesHolden]

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.

Which has nothing to do with Apple. Apple has never had the Watch FDA certified. They certainly aren't going to get their headset FDA certified. These medical AR systems are purpose built by companies who focus on that industry and adhere to all of the many many standards and regulations. It takes many years for products to be approved for medical use. Apple isn't a medical device company. They are a consumer electronics company. Suggesting that Apple's headset will be used in medicine, especially surgery, is nonsense.

 

[JamesHolden]

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.

Why would you even need AR goggles while driving? Every car these days has a big screen for maps, etc. How would wearing AR goggles benefit a driver? And of course it will be illegal to wear them! What happens when the battery pack dies while you're driving and suddenly everything is black?

 

[Realityck]

This is such utter nonsense. This idea gets parroted on these forums without any evidence whatsoever. Let's look at the facts. Apple has never released a new product, only to drop the price significantly a year later. Let's assume the price is the rumored $3K. There's no way Apple drops the price by 2/3 in a year. Utter nonsense.

First, there's no way they will bring manufacturing costs down that quickly. Second, they aren't going to screw over their early adopters like that. And third, when have they ever released a first generation product aimed at developers? Never. (The AS developer Mini doesn't count, because the Mac already existed and the AS developer Mini was to get software ready for new AS machines, not to launch a whole new product category).

Finally, why would a developer invest in a headset that no consumer is buying? To write apps for next year's (rumored) headset revision? This line of thinking makes no sense at all and completely contradicts many decades of Apple behavior. Whatever price point Apple sets for this device will be the price point for the foreseeable future. Yes, the price will drop some in the coming years and there will likely be Mini or Air versions at some point, but that is probably years away.

While there was a shared opinion of DTK used to test AR content, it wasn't identified. Obvious guess would be AR glasses from the startup company (Akonia Holographics) Apple acquired in 2018. The $3K pricing is made up, mostly based on assumptions that it was an expensive mixed reality headband instead of AR glasses. By now Apple has been successful with Akonia Holographics AR glasses, after all that effort hails from 2012 continuing to present time. I like the "why would a developer invest in a headset that no consumer is buying." Well who said it was a headset anyway?

 

[JamesHolden]

While there was a shared opinion of DTK used to test AR content, it wasn't identified. Obvious guess would be AR glasses from the startup company (Akonia Holographics) Apple acquired in 2018. The $3K pricing is made up, mostly based on assumptions that it was an expensive mixed reality headband instead of AR glasses. By now Apple has been successful with Akonia Holographics AR glasses, after all that effort hails from 2012 continuing to present time. I like the "why would q developer invest in a headset that no consumer is buying." Well who said it was a headset anyway?

Time will tell what it is. However, the point remains the same. Apple isn't going to introduce a new product category with a device aimed at developers and then massively drop the price a year later. Agreed that the $3K pricing is speculation, but I think we all know this product isn't going to be cheap. It would be a huge surprise if this device turned out to be AR glasses versus a headset.

 

[Realityck]

Why would you even need AR goggles while driving? Every car these days has a big screen for maps, etc. How would wearing AR goggles benefit a driver? And of course it will be illegal to wear them! What happens when the battery pack dies while you're driving and suddenly everything is black?

So you don't have to look at the dash instead look where you are driving. Same as using a hands free phone setup for using your iPhone. It wouldn't be illegal to wear glasses unless you can proved distracted driving, want to compare that to people texting while driving on a iPhone, at least you look while driving. Obvious they still are glasses, just won't have 3D mapping or something else at the same time. There was an assumption you made there that glasses are like computer displays that loose power and you can't see thought them.

But during the past year, the company decided to shift markets and repurpose its displays for AR, using what it calls its HoloMirror technology, which the company says is the perfect solution for the transparent eyepiece that combines the view of the outside world with a computer display.

Analyzing Apple Glass Leak (Part 2) – Akonia Waveguide with an LCOS MicroDisplay

Introduction “Act in haste, repent in leisure,” they say. In my first article on FPT’s Jon Prosser’s video leak giving information on Apple Glass, I didn’t discuss wha…

kguttag.com

Akonia, Owned by Apple, Still Filing Patents under Akonia​

It turns out that Apple (mostly under Akonia’s name) has been filing new patent applications. While Apple owns Akonia, Akonia looks like it is operating as a somewhat separate entity. The people still give Akonia as who they work for on Linkedin.

 

[JamesHolden]

So you don't have to look at the dash instead look where you are driving. Same as using a hands free phone setup for using your iPhone. It wouldn't be illegal to wear glasses unless you can proved distracted driving, want to compare that to people texting while driving on a iPhone, at least you look while driving. Obvious they still are glasses, just won't have 3D mapping or something else at the same time. There was an assumption you made there that glasses are like computer displays that loose power and you can't see thought them.

Akonia uses holography to create transparent augmented reality display

Akonia Holographics, a startup in Longmont, Colorado, spent years trying to make holographic data storage work. It didn’t succeed, but now it found a new use for the same technology. The company now plans to use holography to make inexpensive transparent displays for augmented reality...

venturebeat.com

The assumption I made is that this device is a headset, not glasses. The rumors and leaks so far seem to suggest as much. Why would glasses needed multiple cameras? If the headset blocks out vision completely and uses cameras to show one's surroundings, then 100% it will be illegal to use when driving. If the glasses are true glasses with AR overlay, then maybe not. Personally I see no advantage to using AR glasses when driving versus looking at the screen on my dashboard. I'm certainly not going to pay thousands of dollars for that.

 

[Realityck]

The assumption I made is that this device is a headset, not glasses. The rumors and leaks so far seem to suggest as much. Why would glasses needed multiple cameras? If the headset blocks out vision completely and uses cameras to show one's surroundings, then 100% it will be illegal to use when driving. If the glasses are true glasses with AR overlay, then maybe not. Personally I see no advantage to using AR glasses when driving versus looking at the screen on my dashboard. I'm certainly not going to pay thousands of dollars for that.

I think given the examples found online, it's hard to size up what Apple has ready at this point in time. But the acquired company still filing patients under the start up name an operating as a independent company is interesting. The more you dig the more you want to ask whats really ready 3 years later?

 

[Jensend]

So you don't have to look at the dash instead look where you are driving. Same as using a hands free phone setup for using your iPhone. It wouldn't be illegal to wear glasses unless you can proved distracted driving, want to compare that to people texting while driving on a iPhone, at least you look while driving. Obvious they still are glasses, just won't have 3D mapping or something else at the same time. There was an assumption you made there that glasses are like computer displays that loose power and you can't see thought them.

Akonia uses holography to create transparent augmented reality display

Akonia Holographics, a startup in Longmont, Colorado, spent years trying to make holographic data storage work. It didn’t succeed, but now it found a new use for the same technology. The company now plans to use holography to make inexpensive transparent displays for augmented reality...

venturebeat.com

Analyzing Apple Glass Leak (Part 2) – Akonia Waveguide with an LCOS MicroDisplay

Introduction “Act in haste, repent in leisure,” they say. In my first article on FPT’s Jon Prosser’s video leak giving information on Apple Glass, I didn’t discuss wha…

kguttag.com

They probably want the patents, and secondarily the people (Acqui-hiring). A lot of companies like this are bought up without their products ever becoming anything.

 

[enterthemerdaverse]

I'm not convinced that people want to wear goggles. I'm also not convinced that people want to check out of reality in large numbers. VR is disorienting for a lot of people. I'm a techie (who admittedly has been losing interest in tech for a while now) and I find VR very unpleasant. It feels weird and unnatural. I can't get into it.

People are generally wisened up to how rich people are telling them to 'check out of reality', 'stay home' and 'send us all your data and subscribe to our latest app'.

It's like the scam the elite of Hong Kong ran on the population. They made life ridiculously expensive, forced people to live in shoe box size apartments, and trick people to ignore real world issues like the wealth gap and environmental pollution.

Sticking people in VR, or "Meta" and giving them a half baked chatbotgpt to be their friend is a way to isolate people, sniff all their data, distract them from the real world power grabs, and charge obscene amount of money for this gimmick.

 

[JamesHolden]

I think given the examples found online, it's hard to size up what Apple has ready at this point in time. But the acquired company still filing patients under the start up name an operating as a independent company is interesting. The more you dig the more you want to ask whats really ready 3 years later?

I wouldn't read too much into this. Apple buys a lot of companies. It seems unlikely to me that anyone can produce truly lightweight fashionable AR glasses today. Bulky goggles, yes. Lightweight glasses, no. If the product is bulky goggles, why not make them VR too? I think there's a much bigger market for VR than AR today.

 

[Jensend]

The assumption I made is that this device is a headset, not glasses. The rumors and leaks so far seem to suggest as much. Why would glasses needed multiple cameras? If the headset blocks out vision completely and uses cameras to show one's surroundings, then 100% it will be illegal to use when driving. If the glasses are true glasses with AR overlay, then maybe not. Personally I see no advantage to using AR glasses when driving versus looking at the screen on my dashboard. I'm certainly not going to pay thousands of dollars for that.

I think people are going to use Apple's headset to do mostly the same things people use headsets for now.
But the higher resolution will make the "virtual monitors" use case more viable.
And the lack of gaming-focused controllers may make some kinds of games less viable.

Very few consumers today are using AR headsets. The NReal Air and Light are the most used consumer "AR" devices from what I can tell, but it seems that most people use them more as video glasses—basically a 1080P TV anchored to their face. It's usually better to have a virtual screen anchored to world space, but that works best with a high field of view, which no transparent AR systems have.

I'm definitely more optimistic about VR/AR than you, but I think we have fairly similar views of what Apple will do in the short term.

I think the more bulky opaque headsets have a better ratio of upsides to downsides than transparent headsets, and the market agrees with me.
I doubt Apple has been keeping secrets about tech that is such a leap forward that it will tip that balance in the other direction.

But maybe all the rumors are completely wrong.

 

[bushman4]

Have to see it and understand it’s usefulness before I can say it’s good or a bomb
Most critics are obsessed with the price but I say let’s see what it can do
As for having the wow of the iPhone it’s doubtful however I don’t think Apple intended this product to be for the masses

 

[Realityck]

Have to see it and understand it’s usefulness before I can say it’s good or a bomb
Most critics are obsessed with the price but I say let’s see what it can do
As for having the wow of the iPhone it’s doubtful however I don’t think Apple intended this product to be for the masses

Originally before the 3k price rumor, some thought this represented something that was a possible iPhone successor. Now it’s hard to imagine it would work out as well. Particularly when iOS iPhones do so much comparably, and we have yet to see all the changes and user contributed tweaks that also suppose to be involved with iOS 17.

 

[JapanApple]

There are people who like headsets and then there’s people who Don’t like. Saying the majority of people prefer not to wear them is a relative. It’s always that in new technology; always people who are naysayers people that believe they know everything. Tech people know that people choose what they want and go with it.

 

[ericwn]

There are people who like headsets and then there’s people who Don’t like. Saying the majority of people prefer not to wear them is a relative. It’s always that in new technology; always people who are naysayers people that believe they know everything. Tech people know that people choose what they want and go with it.

All it takes is a practical use case for the majority of the population to see life enhancing value in it. Hope Apple has that vision. Because so far no one else has marketed anything similar to the masses, outside of special use cases like gaming.

 

[Realityck]

There are people who like headsets and then there’s people who Don’t like. Saying the majority of people prefer not to wear them is a relative. It’s always that in new technology; always people who are naysayers people that believe they know everything. Tech people know that people choose what they want and go with it.

It’s not that simple, the most common issue is the consumer wears prescription glasses, and wearing a headset might or might not allow that. So even though we have been discussing what people prefer, it is an another variable to developping headsets and AR glasses.

 

[JapanApple]

It’s not that simple, the most common issue is the consumer wears prescription glasses, and wearing a headset might or might not allow that. So even though we have been discussing what people prefer, it is an another variable to developping headsets and AR glasses.

Yes it is. This isn’t life or death buying concept. It’s simple behavior.

 

[JapanApple]

All it takes is a practical use case for the majority of the population to see life enhancing value in it. Hope Apple has that vision. Because so far no one else has marketed anything similar to the masses, outside of special use cases like gaming.

well, product maturing isn’t easy for any industry. Eare few example of existing. But it was early. To me if it take i make money from it. If it doesn’t if the population does want. it wouldn’t matter, there is real of high demand without precedence of past product. If it does succeed without a precedence Predecessor product there’s no reason to believe he was Ever need for one

 

[ericwn]

well, product maturing isn’t easy for any industry. Eare few example of existing. But it was early. To me if it take i make money from it. If it doesn’t if the population does want. it no matter there is real of high demand without precedence Then there is no national TV that we need such presidents to be successful.

Not sure what you are trying to express but if you have a mainstream use case, let me know. If it’s simply trying to be a better zoom meeting - I remain sceptical.

 

[Night Spring]

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.

Tim Cook doesn't need to do anything more than what he's already done to have a legacy he can be proud of.

 

[JamesHolden]

I think people are going to use Apple's headset to do mostly the same things people use headsets for now.
But the higher resolution will make the "virtual monitors" use case more viable.
And the lack of gaming-focused controllers may make some kinds of games less viable.

Agreed. Like I said in another post, despite all the fantasy leading up to the Watch's release, in the end, the Watch was nothing more than a better Fitbit. I think the same will be true for the headset. It will be a better Oculus. It won't be groundbreaking. It won't replace the iPhone. We won't suddenly all shift to VR interfaces. But it will no doubt be the best version of VR/AR we've seen yet.

Very few consumers today are using AR headsets. The NReal Air and Light are the most used consumer "AR" devices from what I can tell, but it seems that most people use them more as video glasses—basically a 1080P TV anchored to their face. It's usually better to have a virtual screen anchored to world space, but that works best with a high field of view, which no transparent AR systems have.

I see how AR can be beneficial in certain use cases. I don't think either AR or VR will ever become the primary way we interact with our tech. Most people I know are already overwhelmed with too much information, too many notifications, etc. There is indisputable evidence that social media, mobile, and our always connected society is driving major mental health issues. I don't think most people want to wear glasses that further bombard and overwhelm them.

People bring up use cases like directions, which is obvious, but is an AR arrow really that much of an improvement over a quick glance at your phone or watch? No. It's a gimmick. Then we have people talking about medical use, which I agree is a very promising AR use case. But Apple is not a medical device company. They haven't had the Watch FDA certified. They aren't going to get their headset certified either, so forget surgery, etc.

No one has come up with a killer app for AR. People aren't going to buy glasses just to see a piece of furniture from the IKEA catalog in their space or get directions or find a restaurant. All of these things can be accomplished easily with mobile phones. AR might be a little cooler, but it doesn't add enough value in my opinion.

I'm definitely more optimistic about VR/AR than you, but I think we have fairly similar views of what Apple will do in the short term.

I'm not pessimistic. I just see VR/AR as an accessory, not the next big thing. There are certain situations where I see AR or VR being very useful. What I don't see is VR/AR becoming the primary way we interact with technology. If Apple prices their headset right, I think it will be another Watch for them. If it costs several thousand dollars, forget it.

I think the more bulky opaque headsets have a better ratio of upsides to downsides than transparent headsets, and the market agrees with me.

Agreed. AR is gimmicky. VR has a lot more potential.

I doubt Apple has been keeping secrets about tech that is such a leap forward that it will tip that balance in the other direction.

If you look at the iPhone, it wasn't a huge technological leap either. Touch screens had existed for years. Mobile was already a thing. Apple improved the touch experience with multitouch and gave us a much better user experience overall. They didn't reinvent the wheel. I don't think they're keeping secrets either.

But maybe all the rumors are completely wrong.

Could be! If so, like the Watch, I think the headset will be less than expected rather than something mind-blowing.

 

[Surf Monkey]

So you don't have to look at the dash instead look where you are driving. Same as using a hands free phone setup for using your iPhone. It wouldn't be illegal to wear glasses unless you can proved distracted driving, want to compare that to people texting while driving on a iPhone, at least you look while driving. Obvious they still are glasses, just won't have 3D mapping or something else at the same time. There was an assumption you made there that glasses are like computer displays that loose power and you can't see thought them.

Akonia uses holography to create transparent augmented reality display

Akonia Holographics, a startup in Longmont, Colorado, spent years trying to make holographic data storage work. It didn’t succeed, but now it found a new use for the same technology. The company now plans to use holography to make inexpensive transparent displays for augmented reality...

venturebeat.com

Analyzing Apple Glass Leak (Part 2) – Akonia Waveguide with an LCOS MicroDisplay

Introduction “Act in haste, repent in leisure,” they say. In my first article on FPT’s Jon Prosser’s video leak giving information on Apple Glass, I didn’t discuss wha…

kguttag.com

You’re lost in a ridiculous fantasy. There is NO WAY IN HELL that these or anything like it EVER gets approved to wear behind the wheel.

 

[Realityck]

You’re lost in a ridiculous fantasy. There is NO WAY IN HELL that these or anything like it EVER gets approved to wear behind the wheel.

You’re looking at very early example of various AR glasses not what might be represented now. if they presently are thinner, lighter, resemble fashion eyeware then whats the reason they couldn’t be? Yes we have No leaked example from the Apple’s start up. But look at how AR glasses are with 2018 Intel example. Yes this based on only so so examples, like everything being discussed it’s all speculation. None of us can accurately say what Apple might show at WWDC is this or that. We just know it has to be something thst doesn’t look so obvious because that will never be acceptable.

Intel is making smart glasses that actually look good

Smart glasses that won’t make you look like a Google Glasshole.

www.theverge.com