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".
"Presence" Is already a recognized concept with exicsting VR products, seeing someones bodymovements along with voice is enough to give a feeling of "presence" What I am hoping Apples offering does is increase this by a marked amount since apparently it will feature gaze and facial expressions.
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.
I do agree, for serious business a realistic face would be prefrable.
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.
I don't doubt that. I fully expect whatever Apple releases to set a new standard.
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 $3K. There's no way Apple drops the price by 2/3 in a year. Utter nonsense.
First, there's no way they will bring manufacturing costs down that quickly. Second, they aren't going to screw over their early adopters like that. And third, when have they ever released a first generation product aimed at developers? Never. (The AS developer Mini doesn't count, because the Mac already existed and the AS developer Mini was to get software ready for new AS machines, not to launch a whole new product category).
The whole idea is based on their 1st offering being a Pro level product, hopefully differentiated by professional level sensors/cameras to record VR video/content. This would make the 3000$ pricetag more acceptable.
Next years release around 1000$ would be the consumer version. Along with continuing to release a Pro version for 3000$ with more Pro level features.
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 think Apple as opposed to Meta is recognized as the defacto tech leader in mobile computing and app sales. The early bird advantage can be immense. Many leading apps came from being available early on the Apple App Store. I think this fact alone will have developers be interested. Also, IF you can find a unique killer app for AR AND AR/VR takes off in a big way, its a goldmine.
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.
Definitely a big barrier of entry for the mainstream. I too think that mainstream acceptance of the tech will only start to take off for real once there are glasses that are no bigger then regular eyewear. I do however think that releasing a clunkier version 1st is crucial to be able to reach that point. Not having ANY development on your platform in VR/AR is risky and would leave Apple to start from scratch with the regular eyewear sized AR/VR glasses in 2025/26 and it might leave Meta/facebook with a lead that could be hard to catch up to.
Metalenses that are very thin are already starting to reach market. Very interesting tech that will allow for ultrathin cameras aswell. 2025/26 is projected to be when it goes into full production.
I think neural implants ofcourse WILL be superiour. But the barrier of entry is insanely high, having a brain implant is a crazy invasive procedure that likely will be for people that have lost their ability to move 1st. It will have medical applications foremost. And then the research from that might lead to a version people can use far down the line.
AR/VR OR a holographic display technology is likely going to be adapted before anything like neural implants become feasible imho.
For me, the reason I think AR will be useful and crucial for apple, is that the smartphone market will start to become fully saturated and their advantages with processing power and market lead will evaporate if they do not have distinct advantages to the immense expanding android base. IF Apple can expand their iPhone usability with AR, it will give them a distinct advantage for years.
www.theverge.com
