'realityOS' Trademark Filing Hints at Possible WWDC Announcement [Updated]

[lysingur]

One use of AR/VR is remote learning. There are already trainers who offer their services over the internet to budding athletes in other countries. It's not hard to imagine with AR glasses, this phenomenon will become more widespread. Any kind of in-person service will benefit from AR. Imagine being able to communicate with the interior designer on your kitchen remodelling without having to send drawings and photos with markups back and forth the entire time. Two people can just put on some AR device and know exactly what the other person has in mind.

 

[ArmCortexA8]

REALITYOS is already taken in Australia according to IPAustralia who manages all trademarks in the Commonwealth - owned by Realityo Systems LLC - https://search.ipaustralia.gov.au/trademarks/search/quick/result?q=realityOS

 

[Le0M]

I doubt it. I just don’t see people wanting to spend their life in a non-reality, it will get old quickly. Other than AR walking navigation in places you’ve never been, I don’t see use cases that make sense. And you thought people were paranoid about Google Glass having a camera in public, this thing sounds much worse. And no I don’t see headsets replacing smartphones for most people. I mean seriously, replace a small device with a large bulky device that always draws more energy and can only be used if you are wearing it on your head? No thanks

The reason why people watch tons of movies and tv shows is PRECISELY because people wants to escape from reality, cuz reality can be hard.
So, whenever this device will reach a low price, people will throw themselves to get one.

 

[darngooddesign]

Just like HomeOS, it won't be the real name. Probably just an internal name reference. realityOS is pretty difficult to pronounce. Even AROS or metaOS sounds better.

Eros and Meh-Toes.

 

[JosephAW]

Apple sees that the life arc of the iPhone product has almost peaked and will soon start downwards. They have to start working on the next killer project even if the technology is not ready yet. They believe it is in this direction. Their first iteration will be bulky and limited but will be refined over the next 15 years.

How many of you would want to use the first iPhone as your daily driver in 2022, no one, yet 15 years later look where we are now. Apple used high end Cray computers to simulate MacOS GUI before they could actually code it for the limited chips at the time.

Behind the scenes something is being tested that is bulky and heavy with lots of wires but has sparked the imagination of a core group carrying on the Apple innovation vision.

 

[Le0M]

REALITYOS is already taken in Australia according to IPAustralia who manages all trademarks in the Commonwealth - owned by Realityo Systems LLC - https://search.ipaustralia.gov.au/trademarks/search/quick/result?q=realityOS

That is REALITYOS, not RealityOS. but the company is the same.

 

[Count Blah]

$3k lol

A brand new product, in this price range, is a difficult ask. It’s not like iPhone, where you had a flip phone in your pocket already and this new device came along that did what the flip phone did, but then turned it up to ELEVEN. This replaces nothing, this will have next to nothing to offer, at the start, see AppleTV subscription on day one, only this costs orders of magnitude more.

The iPhone isn’t as appealing, without the multitude of apps. So who is going to build all the apps, for a user base that rhymes with Ousands, in the first couple years. Look at PS5 - how many PS5 exclusives are there NOW, because the hardware is neigh impossible to get, all this time later - and there are MILLIONS of them. At $3k a pop, ain’t no way Apple comes close to PS5 numbers.

And when software does come out for appleVR, how much do you think it’s going to cost? $1? Lol. It’s taken a LONG time to get PS5 exclusives rolling at $70 a pop, with millions of hardware units sold, all while knowing the demand is super high for more PS5s.

I know Apple has the price points all figured out, on how to roll out mid/lower level versions to get a larger install base, to entice developers. But that is all contingent upon the $3k version meeting certain goals. I know quite a few Apple fans, and to a person, no one has expressed interest in this. Which was VERY different, compared to Apple silicon, new MBPs, heck even Apple Watch got infinitely more excitement built up around it.

Rambling, I know. Apple will need to knock people’ socks off with this and I’m just wondering how it will be possible - new product line, outrageous pricing and the need to get developers on board. ?‍♂️?‍♀️?

 

[Le0M]

Think about how a AR / VR headset could allow users to attend a live concert or sports game from the comfort of their own home. I could in theory watch a BTS concert or a soccer match live without needing to travel to another country or fight with ardent fans for limited tickets (the majority of which just end up being scooped up by scalpers). You are no longer confined by physical limitations like seating capacity.

This. This scares me a lot.
The fact that more and more people won’t be physically at a said event, hence all watching from the same point of view, is exactly this: they won’t be looking through their own eyes, but from someone/something else’s point of view.
And what happens if we all get used to have one point of view?
There is gonna be less and less diversity, people will all think alike, like sheep, and goodbye critical thinking.
It’s already like this for movies and tv shows.

 

[Abazigal]

This. This scares me a lot.
The fact that more and more people won’t be physically at a said event, hence all watching from the same point of view, is exactly this: they won’t be looking through their own eyes, but from someone/something else’s point of view.
And what happens if we all get used to have one point of view?
There is gonna be less and less diversity, people will all think alike, like sheep, and goodbye critical thinking.
It’s already like this for movies and tv shows.

I don't see how you can equate everybody being able to get the best / preferred seat in a concert irrespective of everyone else with the loss of critical thinking / perspective.

 

[Nicole1980]

People already do spend a serious part of their lives on several different non-realities. Playing games in front of a computer monitor (or TV) or watching Netflix and other streaming services kind of fits the definition.

Many do. But theres a huge world of people out there you apparently are forgetting about who can't wait to get away from their 'screens' at the end of a workday.
They love the outdoors, camping, kayaking, walking in REAL nature. With the random sights of an animal, the smell of the greenery. Or they like creating real things with their hands, whether thats through painting, drawing or some other kind of art.

You seem to have this Wall-E idea that most humans want to be in front of a screen non stop. But in reality, I know plenty of people who couldnt give a --- about the latest popular game or show.

Believe it or not, the world is not entirely full of people like you, or even me.

 

[darngooddesign]

A brand new product, in this price range, is a difficult ask. It’s not like iPhone, where you had a flip phone in your pocket already and this new device came along that did what the flip phone did, but then turned it up to ELEVEN. This replaces nothing, this will have next to nothing to offer, at the start, see AppleTV subscription on day one, only this costs orders of magnitude more.

The iPhone isn’t as appealing, without the multitude of apps. So who is going to build all the apps, for a user base that rhymes with Ousands, in the first couple years. Look at PS5 - how many PS5 exclusives are there NOW, because the hardware is neigh impossible to get, all this time later - and there are MILLIONS of them. At $3k a pop, ain’t no way Apple comes close to PS5 numbers.

And when software does come out for appleVR, how much do you think it’s going to cost? $1? Lol. It’s taken a LONG time to get PS5 exclusives rolling at $70 a pop, with millions of hardware units sold, all while knowing the demand is super high for more PS5s.

I know Apple has the price points all figured out, on how to roll out mid/lower level versions to get a larger install base, to entice developers. But that is all contingent upon the $3k version meeting certain goals. I know quite a few Apple fans, and to a person, no one has expressed interest in this. Which was VERY different, compared to Apple silicon, new MBPs, heck even Apple Watch got infinitely more excitement built up around it.

Rambling, I know. Apple will need to knock people’ socks off with this and I’m just wondering how it will be possible - new product line, outrageous pricing and the need to get developers on board. ?‍♂️?‍♀️?

Apple literally has billions in the bank and Tim Cook is an expert at managing risks and costs. If Apple has decided this is their next big thing, they have already decided on their short, mid, and long-term goals, and what they feel is required to meet those goals. Its like AppleTV, Apple just threw a lot of money at the "lack of content" problem until they had content.

 

[BellSystem]

I see it useful for consuming experiences that were previously inaccessible for one reason or another.

For example, I find myself going to cinemas way less of late because I can eventually catch them on video streaming services, and it lets me do away with the less convenient aspects of visiting one (eg: having to travel to the theatre, no toilet breaks, can't watch at a timing of my preference). I agree there is no replacement for a giant move screen, but I haven't really enjoyed the rest. Merely tolerated them.

Think about how a AR / VR headset could allow users to attend a live concert or sports game from the comfort of their own home. I could in theory watch a BTS concert or a soccer match live without needing to travel to another country or fight with ardent fans for limited tickets (the majority of which just end up being scooped up by scalpers). You are no longer confined by physical limitations like seating capacity.

In addition, I suspect that the smartphone won't be replaced by any one device, but I feel that Apple at least is laying the groundwork to expand on it via its line of wearables (currently Apple Watch, AirPods and the rumoured AR glasses).

The Apple Watch places Siri and a small screen on your wrist that you can use for quick glances of information. AirPods places Siri next to your ears, and may gain additional health-tracking feature in the future. The AR glasses would give users a field of view as large as their eyes can see (which would be bigger than even the largest folding phone), and allow them to partake in AR experiences without having to continually hold up their mobile device. None of these devices replaces the smartphone, but they augment the experience in their own unique ways.

This is also why I am not really concerned about Apple not having a folding phone. The extra screen space provided by them will pale in comparison to even the largest tablet in the market.

You are wrong about the cinema. You don’t go because it’s inconvenient….you don’t go because everyone in the audience is talking and using their phones at full brightness during the film because the social media age has turned everyone into self centered idiots. That’s why you don’t go to the cinema anymore.

Hopefully all those people get VR headsets and stay in their homes so the rest of us can once again enjoy the real world.

 

[syklee26]

Go back to archives and see commenters say the EXACT same thing about the iPhone before it’s release.

completely different; iPhone is essentially a phone with added functionality to merge many devices into one, whereas AR/VR Glasses.... not sure what utilitarian purposes it would serve.

Having said that, I always give Apple a benefit of doubt that they will get this right.

My one big concern is whether AR glasses could cause motion sickness, which would render them unusable.

 

[HarryKeogh]

Just as I was correct about the failure of “smart” phones, tablets (it’s just a big phone), and the Apple Watch (ugly and doomed to fail since they didn’t even name it the “iWatch”), this product is doomed because I just don’t see a need for it.

 

[nwcs]

Same old story. Whatever tools people come up with will be used for some good things and some bad things. The idealists ignore any actual downsides while the cynics discount the good things. The product will eventually come to pass but it will not be a world changer.

 

[Count Blah]

Apple literally has billions in the bank and Tim Cook is an expert at managing risks and costs. If Apple has decided this is their next big thing, they have already decided on their short, mid, and long-term goals, and what they feel is required to meet those goals. Its like AppleTV, Apple just threw a lot of money at the "lack of content" problem until they had content.

Sure, but at $5 a month, it’s easy to dip your toe in the water and give it a try. Now compare $5 to $3000, the prospect for success is VERY dependent upon people spending BIG $$$ for a brand new product line. Comparing AppleTV to VR is like comparing buying an Impossible burger on a whim to try it out, versus committing to and buying a jet ski when you’ve not really been a water sports person.

Sure, Apple has BIG pockets, but success is dependent upon Apple convincing people, they need to part with $3000, to experience something unique. Again, this isn’t trying something out for $5, it’s not up selling a flip phone to an iPhone, this is a brand new experience for $3000.

It HAS to be amazing and something people will be willing to commit big $$$ in a crap, high inflation economy. Apple has the sales targets already, to make a big commitment to this new segment, it just needs a certain number of people to buy version one. I’m REALLY interested to see how they are going to attempt to do this. The EVER Apple optimist Abazigal talks about going to concerts or sporting events, but there is nothing more immersion breaking than jumping around camera angles, and that is exactly what is needed optimally watch these events. Maybe give the user an option of switching to different camera feeds themselves. That would really change the experience and allow total immersion. But production folks HATE that concept, so now Apple would be at odds with the content providers. Like I said, I’m REALLY interested to see how it shakes out.

 

[Abazigal]

You are wrong about the cinema. You don’t go because it’s inconvenient….you don’t go because everyone in the audience is talking and using their phones at full brightness during the film because the social media age has turned everyone into self centered idiots. That’s why you don’t go to the cinema anymore.

Hopefully all those people get VR headsets and stay in their homes so the rest of us can once again enjoy the real world.

The audience I often share a room with have been quite considerate for most part.

Think about the drawbacks of watching a movie vs streaming it at home. With the latter, you can:

1) Rewind and rewatch your favourite parts as many times as you want, like that gripping fight scene in Ip Man where he takes on 10 opponents at one go. In a theatre, if I wanted to rewatch a particular part of a movie again, I had to buy a ticket all over again, which also means sitting through the boring parts that I don’t particularly enjoy.

2) As above, being able to skip / fast forward the less exciting parts of the movie. Being able to pause the show when I need to visit the toilet (I no longer find sitting through a 3-hour long movie as appealing as before), or watch it in multiple parts (I found Eternals so boring that I ended up viewing it over 4 days). Or I can eat my own food at home vs contending with the overpriced food at the cinema.

3) I don’t have to travel to my local mall at 10.30 am on a Saturday morning just to get good seats. I don’t have to sit through 10-20 minutes of irritating ads at the start. I will take all these conveniences over a giant theatre screen any time of the day.

Everybody is able to watch the same show the way they want, without having to deal with the restrictions that come with everyone all being in the same room and having to accommodate one another.

 

[Abazigal]

Sure, but at $5 a month, it’s easy to dip your toe in the water and give it a try. Now compare $5 to $3000, the prospect for success is VERY dependent upon people spending BIG $$$ for a brand new product line. Comparing AppleTV to VR is like comparing buying an Impossible burger on a whim to try it out, versus committing to and buying a jet ski when you’ve not really been a water sports person.

Sure, Apple has BIG pockets, but success is dependent upon Apple convincing people, they need to part with $3000, to experience something unique. Again, this isn’t trying something out for $5, it’s not up selling a flip phone to an iPhone, this is a brand new experience for $3000.

It HAS to be amazing and something people will be willing to commit big $$$ is a crap, high inflation economy. Apple has the targets already, to make a big commitment to this new segment, it just needs a certain number of people to buy version one. I’m REALLY interested to see how they are going to attempt to do this. The EVER Apple optimist Abazigal talks about going to concerts or sporting events, but there is. Thing more ‘sitting in the front row’ immersion breaking than jumping around camera angles, and that is exactly what is needed optimally watch these events. Maybe give the user an option of switching to different camera feeds themselves. That would really change the game, pun intended. But production folks HATE that concept, so now Apple would be at odds with the content providers. Like I said, I’m REALLY interested to see how it shakes out.

Where are we getting the $3k price tag? The product isn’t even out on sale, yet I see this figure being thrown around like it’s a done deal.

My guess is that AR glasses will be priced somewhat similarly to the Apple Watch as an optional accessory to the iphone. The VR headset will likely cost a little more (probably over $1k).

 

[George Dawes]

Instead of farting about with stuff like this i wish they’d concentrate on squashing existing bugs and bringing out a real os for the ipad

 

[UBS28]

I’d be interested in it. But not for $3000.

 

[Danoc]

This is truely a product I don’t understand the market for. I feel like the two products they are chasing, a ar headset and a car…. Are just not game changers.

When the iPhone came out, it was similarly priced in comparison to other less usable smart phones, and had mass market potential… $3000 for AR goggles? Outside of people who use it for 3D creative work, who is this for?

I have trouble seeing these in the general population unless they reach under $500, and even then… I still don’t see the appeal of the meta verse

With AR glasses, you can see the power of Super Saiyans in real time:

 

[Freida]

Your imagination is so limited if all you can see is this.

Unfortunately, AR/VR is here to stay and it will be huge in the future. From Education to medical, to engineering etc. - HUGE!

Say goodbye to the world you know today because in 10-20 years things will shift

I doubt it. I just don’t see people wanting to spend their life in a non-reality, it will get old quickly. Other than AR walking navigation in places you’ve never been, I don’t see use cases that make sense. And you thought people were paranoid about Google Glass having a camera in public, this thing sounds much worse. And no I don’t see headsets replacing smartphones for most people. I mean seriously, replace a small device with a large bulky device that always draws more energy and can only be used if you are wearing it on your head? No thanks

 

[contacos]

What's so funny? The iPhone 13 Pro & Pro Max cost almost AU3k!

Well it doesn’t in US$ so this would be more like 6k AU

 

[darngooddesign]

Sure, but at $5 a month, it’s easy to dip your toe in the water and give it a try. Now compare $5 to $3000, the prospect for success is VERY dependent upon people spending BIG $$$ for a brand new product line. Comparing AppleTV to VR is like comparing buying an Impossible burger on a whim to try it out, versus committing to and buying a jet ski when you’ve not really been a water sports person.

Sure, Apple has BIG pockets, but success is dependent upon Apple convincing people, they need to part with $3000, to experience something unique. Again, this isn’t trying something out for $5, it’s not up selling a flip phone to an iPhone, this is a brand new experience for $3000.

It HAS to be amazing and something people will be willing to commit big $$$ in a crap, high inflation economy. Apple has the sales targets already, to make a big commitment to this new segment, it just needs a certain number of people to buy version one. I’m REALLY interested to see how they are going to attempt to do this. The EVER Apple optimist Abazigal talks about going to concerts or sporting events, but there is nothing more immersion breaking than jumping around camera angles, and that is exactly what is needed optimally watch these events. Maybe give the user an option of switching to different camera feeds themselves. That would really change the experience and allow total immersion. But production folks HATE that concept, so now Apple would be at odds with the content providers. Like I said, I’m REALLY interested to see how it shakes out.

I agree with all of this. We don't know how Apple is going to price it, but I'm sure they are being realistic about costs and sales goals. Sports and concerts seem like a natural fit, I bet there will be a VR extension of their MLB deal.

 

[urnotl33t]

Given your statement, I'm guessing you're not in product development. But don't feel badly - neither am I, and it's for this reason. Your post is a bit rosier than reality: when the iPhone was first announced, I (and many other technology enthusiasts) thought it was a mistake. The phone market was already crowded, and we already had smartphones for those who really wanted to fiddle with things. Who would care about a premium-level smartphone from an unproven phone maker, and in the candy bar form factor without any physical keyboard, at that? Apple should just stick to iPods instead of adding a cellular modem into them, we said. Yet even then, the first-generation iPhone made the best smartphones of the time appear primitive.

AR/VR has immense potential. It's currently niche and limited largely to those who are really driven to use it and fiddle with things. Sound familiar? I'm not going to predict an immediate hit for Apple, but if there's any company that can pull this off and make it seem like this was the obvious way to do it all along, it's Apple.

I was hesitant at v1 for the iPhone, but it really was the pivot of iPhone 1.5 (1.25 maybe?) that set it in motion, with the rapid price drop they did. Later, it was v2 with the inevitable App Store and 3G wireless that sent it to the moon.

Nonetheless, they believed in their product, focused intently on it, pivoted to keep it sustained, then seized on the wireless carrier's "new and zero-utilized (at the time)" 3G network. (Plus the business acumen to partner with ATT and become the envy of all other carriers, which was the arm wrestling-in-public/neener-neener against Verizon for saying "no" at first). These things were the crucial life support it needed in Year 1 to carry it to the WWDC in Year 2.

iPhone v1 by itself on 2G Edge? Yeah, underwhelming for sure. It could've died there if it was anyone other than Steve Jobs sitting behind it.