Michael Scott’s Asian character? Yeah that was a disaster. Hopefully Apple isn’t going to come out and do that on stage at WWDC.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Report: Apple CEO Tim Cook Ordered Headset Launch Despite Designers Wanting to Wait for AR Glasses
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don’t watch 3D movies in my living room because my TV doesn’t support it and none of the streaming services have any 3D movies. If my TV supported stereoscopy and Disney+ had Pixar movies in 3D, I’d probably chose to watch them in 3D, at least if there weren’t any significant compromises to the picture quality compared to the 2D version.
On the content creation side, 3D is a pain to make, at least for live action. You have to double up on the number of cameras and lenses, which makes for a much more expensive and bulky filming setup. Or you have convert in post, which is much like colorizing a black and white film… it’s possible, but doesn’t look as good as native color.
Also, there is a range of interpupillary distances, which means no static stereoscopic content will look correct for everyone who has stereoscopic vision.
The most popular cinema movie of the past year was mostly watched in 3D.
But what does any of this have to do with VR?
Hopefully there will not be any major issues with the product. Waiting to see it!!
My problem with this contention and with all MR headsets that are currently on the market is that they are bulky and having a screen strapped to your literal eyeballs all day, may impose health impacts that we are just not thinking about.
Who in their right mind would want to have a screen 2 inches from their eyes for 8 hours? Who?
If MR headsets are the next paradigm shift in computing, then someone has to solve this problem and it currently hasn't been solved yet, and hence, why, one of the reasons, MR headsets have been continuing to be a niche product, instead of a mainstream product.
The price is too high, no way it will get a million sales.
it will have a 1000 sales from the YouTubers and 900 returns also.
anyone else will buy it to show off their income status
pricepoints matter for products and unless this launches with enterprise ready software applications, I can’t see it selling much because the price is targeted for them
it will have a 1000 sales from the YouTubers and 900 returns also.
anyone else will buy it to show off their income status
pricepoints matter for products and unless this launches with enterprise ready software applications, I can’t see it selling much because the price is targeted for them
Disagree. if the project was already 7 years in, their teams are spending a TON of money for zero market return when other companies already have released similar products. Eventually, you just gotta make a leap. They are acknowledging that this will be a first-version product and likely have a roadmap for several versions already.
Gotta start somewhere.
Saw my first VR headset (on a person) on the ferry. I just gotta say... we thought everyone having their faces in their phones was bad. Wait until headsets become mainstream!
Last edited:
That’s because under Cook, the company has lost its soul. Once the life has been sucked out of a company, it just ends up being another job making stuff to sell to people, not really doing anything revolutionary.
IMO, this VR thing is selling people something that companies want, not what consumers want. It’s a vehicle for further marketing, not a game-changer in nearly every aspect of life like iPhone was. VR will be great for companies, not for consumers (unless they want to be bombarded with even more ads, content, distractions, etc.
I think the only people who would wear this all day is people who use it for work, with the headset probably plugged in for power. Regular consumers would probably just use it for short periods, since the battery life is probably short anyway.
But also I don’t know if looking into a VR headset all day is necessarily worse for eyes than looking at a bright monitor all day. Both probably aren’t good, which is why breaks are recommended, but it could be that looking at a VR display up close requires less brightness/intensity than a big monitor at a distance, so that it evens out the effect on the eyes. In other words, it could be that as long as what reaches your eyes is the same (same photon brightness/intensity), it doesn’t make a difference if it’s a big bright monitor at a distance or a small dim display up close.
There is probably some actual scientific data on all the effects of light and displays on eyes somewhere.
If Apple actually releases their own version of Ai, like chatgpt, with the AR glasses... AS there are some rumours of…
Does that change the equation?
For one thing, I can agree that an Apple Oculus device is a "me too" product with barely any reason to exist except to bring AR/VR to the Mac.
There has to be a viable reason for its existance that Apple sees as an advantage. Sure their mobile chips are ahead of the game. Sure Apple has brought AR api’s into iPhones and iPads for years already. They got 3d scanning lidar. They have Animojis that do facial tracking really well.
So you will be able to get best in class AR but no cameras because google eyeglasses tanked from public outrage.
I am not sure, maybe the proof is in the pudding? The iPod wasn’t an overnight success and it lead to the iPhone…
Does that change the equation?
For one thing, I can agree that an Apple Oculus device is a "me too" product with barely any reason to exist except to bring AR/VR to the Mac.
There has to be a viable reason for its existance that Apple sees as an advantage. Sure their mobile chips are ahead of the game. Sure Apple has brought AR api’s into iPhones and iPads for years already. They got 3d scanning lidar. They have Animojis that do facial tracking really well.
So you will be able to get best in class AR but no cameras because google eyeglasses tanked from public outrage.
I am not sure, maybe the proof is in the pudding? The iPod wasn’t an overnight success and it lead to the iPhone…
This reads like engineering teams airing their dirty laundry in public and means nothing more than they have less than 100% agreement— which is what you’d expect.
Before Ive left, the predominant theme here was that Apple compromised their products by putting form over function. Now people want to cry for the other reason. There’s no news here, no rumors, only gossip.
Before Ive left, the predominant theme here was that Apple compromised their products by putting form over function. Now people want to cry for the other reason. There’s no news here, no rumors, only gossip.
Apple Maps, Siri, Apple News, AirPower, Butterfly Keyboard, dongle MacBook Pros, Trash Can Mac Pro, Pro Display XDR stand, cheese grader Mac Pro wheels, iPad Pro 10.5 display white spots, etc.
I agree, I think it’s basically about getting the platform out there so that it can mature in the real world. Like the original iPad, it seems like a dinosaur now but look how far it came.
Name the last product Apple sold to devs first but don't name the last product Apple sold to devs first?
The Apple silicon Mac mini transition kit is exactly how I think they'll handle this.
Jobs said he made sure Ive would be calling the shots, before passing.
Besides, all the changes in that regard came after Ive agreed to depart.
I think this is a non-story. If products only shipped when engineers and designers believed they were "ready", no products would ship ever. Do you really believe the engineers and designers behind iPhone thought the product was "ready" when it launched? iMac? Apple Watch? If management didn't impose deadlines, we would still be waiting for the Ford T to ship.
Doesn't have to be a visionary, but rather just someone who holds true to Jobs' core values around product quality. The moment marketing and shareholders are put at the top, Apple is sure to become a thoroughly unlikeable company, profitable or not.
That's called "marketing". Ive wasn't named CEO, so obviously Steve made sure that Tim Cook was the one "calling the shots".
I happen to like the new Apple direction. They are much more willing to acknowledge and correct mistakes, and listen to the "voice of the customer". The Ive direction is what brought us the butterfly keyboard.
In terms of the headset, I'm going to hold judgement until I see the product. Clearly the management see a need that we don't. I see two options: Either Apple has seen a use case that we can't imagine before they present it to us - which doesn't seem likely but also not impossible given Apple's track record. The other option is that they want to simply be part of the game in case it suddenly amounts to something. Very similar to how Apple TV for many years was just "a string we will keep pulling", until suddenly it had matured into something actually useful for the masses.
This isn't the Apple that once was anymore, but I didn't expect it to be these days. Still operations taking over is never a good thing as imaging accounts also has a big say then. But this will be an overpriced limited buggy day one product. I wonder if it'll launch with the promise of gestures to come down the line, as opposed to one's launching with the product?
If this report is true.
If this report is true.
Not really. Most of the bugs are from a years long effort to modernize the internals of Apple operating systems. Everything is getting redesigned and rewritten in Swift and SwiftUI. Drivers are moving outside of ring 0. I’m surprised it isn’t worse then it is. This is one of those situations where if Apple doesn’t modernize internals they will end up in a classic macOS or Windows XP situation. Things should start to stabilize in the next few years. The new systems are much more bug resistant, but completely rewriting code bases are always going to cause problems. In some cases they may fix bugs or other bad behavior that third party programs relied on. A more modern os will help Apple be more agile and competitive in the future. The security improvements that come along with this should help grown enterprise use of Apple products.
If anything operations has been beefing up the size of the engineering team to handle this. Apple engineering has been growing at a steady pace. It has been smart hiring unlike competitors that were not effectively using new hires then went through mass layoffs.
Last edited:
What some don’t seem to realize is that Jeff Williams is a product guy despite being in operations. The shift to operations happened because Apple operations has people with an industrial design skill set. That may seem weird compared to other companies, but Apple has always been product before sales. Where others put salesmen and bean counters in operations, Apple puts product people. Apple knows if they create a good product people will buy it almost regardless of cost. Jeff is said to dive deep in to industrial design despite being focused on operations and was responsible for the design of many well received Apple products. It is said he surprised the design team when he first took over for Ives with his in-depth knowledge of thermodynamics. He is known to be very smart and multi-disciplined. He has a good track record of how to deliver on a products long game. I wouldn’t discount his opinion on how the headset should be designed and come to market. If this report is about Jeff Williams vs some former random unnamed industrial engineer, I’d say Jeff is more credible.
I wouldn’t be surprised if this story is spun to create controversy and drive clicks. The sources all seem to be former engineers which makes me question the accuracy of the report. They may well be former engineers because their opinions didn’t hold water.
I wouldn’t be surprised if this story is spun to create controversy and drive clicks. The sources all seem to be former engineers which makes me question the accuracy of the report. They may well be former engineers because their opinions didn’t hold water.
Last edited:
It's different with the iPhone since there's someone, a big product guy, calling the shots, ie Jobs. For example, early versions of the iPhone used plastic screen. Jobs wasn't happy that his iPhone was scratched due to his keys in his pocket, so he decided close to launch date that he wanted a glass screen. Foxconn had to literally wake up their workers at night to go and replace the screen on the produced iPhones. The product was ready to launch, but Jobs made a decision last minute that made the iPhone better.
Tim Cook is not a product guy at all. Yet him "rushing" this means he has other agenda, so I don't know. Have a bad feeling about this.
Last edited:
