Report: Apple CEO Tim Cook Ordered Headset Launch Despite Designers Wanting to Wait for AR Glasses

[Serqetry]

But Apple itself said that development is paused indefinitely, since the technology to build such a kind of product isn't available. This is the reality, there is a vision but it is far beyond reach. But maybe this is comparable to the Newton and the iPhone. At time the Newton was built, something like the iPhone wasn't possible to do.

​

Development on Augmented Reality 'Apple Glasses' Postponed Indefinitely​

https://www.macrumors.com/2023/01/17/apple-glasses-postponed/

"Apple itself" has never said anything lol. That's what I don't understand about you people... how do you fall for people saying Apple said something when Apple has never officially said anything. None of the AR/VR rumors have any substance it could all be (and probably is) completely made up.

It's just like all the Apple content Youtube channels that make videos about a dozen or so different Apple events every year that are all "confirmed" and then they don't happen and they say the events were "cancelled". When Apple doesn't release a product that was never announced it usually doesn't mean it's cancelled or delayed, it usually means the rumor was wrong to begin with!

 

[AndiG]

Tech is simply not in the same position it was when Steve was alive. There are no breakthrough products left to build. The iPhone is a mature platform now and the watch is pretty much done in terms of the necessary features. Only thing Apple has left to do is try to expand market share and boost profits.

My opinion is that Apple missed at least two breakthrough technologies. The cloud and AI - at least. The homepod is bound to Siri and Siri failed development (after Apple said that there is no use for such a kind of product, like Apple insisted that the is no use for a touchscreen Mac).

But there is lots of tech developed, thats is going to change the world - just to name a few:

Robotics

Cars

Ai hype (at the moment it is a hype, but it could change the world)

Drones

 

[Strigoi]

When is something truely ready, especially with a new product category? A product is ready when it stopped being developed and is replaced by another product. R.I.P. iPod. You just have to release and go with it at some point. If I recall correctly Steve Jobs did the same thing with the OG iPhone. The demo product on stage was a total minefield. The smooth demo was a straightup miracle! I say: No guts no glory!

That said, I usually hard pass gen 1 products

 

[routine_analyst]

Buy Nintendo like Microsoft is trying with Blizzard. Run it as an independent studio as part of the Apple Arcade offering. Make this be the next gen console but make it run on a 5G network. Then lease the device to people like ATT does the iPhone.

MAYBE people would buy it. Seems too overpriced.

 

[Aggedor]

Yeah it's crazy how many people have fallen for the rumors for this long with no actual evidence. I assume when nothing happens this year they'll somehow believe Mark Gurman's annual "delayed" announcement again. Lol.

This seems like such a bad idea of a product. I'm just not going to believe it's real until I see something official from Apple.

Yep, same. It doesn't exist.

 

[dysamoria]

Oh so the AS based Macs are rushed, incomplete, and loaded with design and software flaws. Those M2 Pro/Max Macs just continue to get worse every year right? Next time you generalize think about what you are saying. Don't try to lump experimental AR headsets into the same category.

The software is mostly the target of my criticism. Yes, Mac OS is getting just as bad as iOS, partially because a lot of built in Mac OS apps are being replaced by their iOS counterparts, like iWork, Messages, etc…

EDIT: not having used an Apple Silicon machine, I can’t comment on the hardware. I did see people freaking out about how good they are in tens of performance, so that’s nice… and I also saw people’s criticism of the Mac Studio’s noisy fan and non-user serviceable storage, which isn’t.

 

[blackhawk10]

Apple mixed-reality headset device could be a big mistake. I've purchased just about every Apple product since the first Macintosh and will not purchase a mixed-reality headset device. Who wants to wear a pair of goggle like device on their face at home, office or wherever regardless how amazing they might be.

 

[Rogifan]

Someone posted this on another site. I think they’re spot on. 💯

“When there’s a gap in the market, the perfect product to address that gap feels like a natural solution. The iPad for instance will always be as its intended purpose / the bridge between an iPhone and a Mac. What is a headset though? It requires a completely different relationship between the user and the device that we don’t see with any other product Apple makes. This isn’t the matrix. Human beings are breathing, feeling individuals that need tactile work environments and the freedom to willfully connect and disconnect with their devices, not an artificial world strapped to their foreheads because we technically have the ability to do so. To think that the same developers that couldn’t be bothered to trade their tactile function rows with a static Touch Bar will be the same developers embracing 3D work environments is big funny. Tim Cook needs a vacation.”

 

[dysamoria]

Apple mixed-reality headset device could be a big mistake. I've purchased just about every Apple product since the first Macintosh and will not purchase a mixed-reality headset device. Who wants to wear a pair of goggle like device on their face at home, office or wherever regardless how amazing they might be.

At $3000, too…

 

[mmm...really]

Much like the original Mac, iPhone and Apple Watch it will initially suck, be underpowered and a poor value. Then Apple will learn customer use cases, technology will improve, Apple will adapt, costs will drop and chances are the product will mature and become accepted or disappear like the Pippin.

 

[MNLondon]

And the mini has the opposite problem! ***** product, good sales.

I was looking at the Mini and I took my Sony bluetooth speaker along with me, which was about the same price. I played the same piece of music through both in the Apple Store (with bluetooth, connected from my iPhone) and decided that my Sony was far, far better. I think Apple could make an improved speaker if they looked at how good the AirPods pro2 are, and produced a Bluetooth speaker with equal quality. I was shocked at how poor the Mini was for $99. Maybe $29 would be a better price point?

 

[gbc204]

I'm prepared to eat my hat if I'm wrong and plenty of people thought the smartphone in general was a product nobody needed, but I just don't see a clear use case for a product like this -- at least not from Apple and not in the consumer space.

• Immersive gaming is probably a big one, but Apple has never been a gaming platform for these kinds of games.
• Everyday AR might be neat, but not with ski goggles.
• Immersive FaceTime with long-distance partners, family or friends I can see, but the price will be too steep just for that.

That leaves all sorts of business and professional use cases. Frankly I don't know enough about that so I'm not going to make stuff up, but there does not appear to be great traction for others already in the market.

So who is this product really for?

Like everything else, it's for porn. And maybe some games. And it will sell gangbusters.

 

[I7guy]

Someone posted this on another site. I think they’re spot on. 💯

Seems like the writer of that quote is getting a nosebleed standing in their soapbox.

 

[Realityck]

Well at least Financial Times seems to think they achieved something, even its a big nothing.

 

[bmark]

Apple headset is non existent and will never come out. This rumour is getting old , it’s as bad as when a football team sacks their manager the first name is always a legend of the club returning to take over that never happens

Thanks for the info Nostradamus!

 

[ss2cire]

Hmmm if true, this will be all on Mr. Cook. As the article states, this will ultimately be his legacy.
I want one. Do I need one? probably not. Will I get one? For $3K absolutely not. I'd rather get another M Series MacBook Pro for that much. And then with limited functionality? hopefully that's software limitations not hardware... All I can say is, good luck Apple (Tim Cook).

 

[pers0n]

Sounds familiar!

Not even the samething. If they sell this thing at $200 it would sell very well, at $3000, its too high.

 

[darngooddesign]

Steve would never have released a product before it was ready. Jobs' worst decision was Cook - he will bring the company down in the long run. That's exactly what happened when Jobs left the company, and it will happen again.

The AppStore was launched only one year after the iPhone which means that they were both in development at the same time. Therefore the iPhone with its “just use web apps” stance was launched before the ecosystem was ready. But SJ knew that sometimes you have to ship a product.

 

[darngooddesign]

At $3000, too…

Dude, that price is as much a rumor as the rumored glasses which were rumored to launch last year.

 

[Rogifan]

Seems like the writer of that quote is getting a nosebleed standing in their soapbox.

For speaking the truth? Back before the Apple Watch was released Tim Cook was pretty sour on face wearables. I remember at one event he said people only wear glasses because they have to, not because they want to. Now we’re supposed to be bullish that people will want to wear goggles to interact with the world?

 

[Rogifan]

Not even the samething. If they sell this thing at $200 it would sell very well, at $3000, it’s too high.

So a brand new product category with most likely more complex technology than the Apple Watch would be sold at a price point cheaper than the Apple Watch? Haha.

 

[darngooddesign]

For speaking the truth? Back before the Apple Watch was released Tim Cook was pretty sour on face wearables. I remember at one event he said people only wear glasses because they have to, not because they want to. Now we’re supposed to be bullish that people will want to wear goggles to interact with the world?

There’s a difference between what you will wear at home vs what you want to wear while out in public.

 

[4nNtt]

Not even the samething. If they sell this thing at $200 it would sell very well, at $3000, its too high.

It would sell really well until Apple went out of business for selling at a loss of thousands of dollars per headset... Maybe Apple could introduce something less than $1000 at some point, but there will be compromises. It would likely be a single app at a time device, might need to tether to another Apple device, and probably wouldn't be powerful enough for professional software which is a big focus of the first headset. I could see Apple producing something like the Quest eventually, but I doubt they would use repurposed LCD displays like Meta. It will probably need to wait until displays designed for XR come down in price. Apple doesn't really like to make compromises of the sort where a part is inappropriate of the use case. That would water down the product line too much. Apple could make a $200 iPad with a non-retina screen, but they would never do that either. If Apple ever made a sub-$1000 product, it would likely be more narrowly focused on media consumption. Basically a wearable Apple TV.

 

[ralphthemagi]

Apple mixed-reality headset device could be a big mistake. I've purchased just about every Apple product since the first Macintosh and will not purchase a mixed-reality headset device. Who wants to wear a pair of goggle like device on their face at home, office or wherever regardless how amazing they might be.

You will if it actually works the way you'd expect it to work.

A headset can give you as many screens as you want which are any size you want. You can get $20,000 worth of screen real-estate with ease. The core problem with VR today is the same as it was 50 years ago—it's difficult to focus light directly into the eyes and keep it focused. So you put on a headset, and no matter how good the screen, no matter how wide the FOV is, you can't look around and see a sharp image. The fixed focal point means a large part of the image is always out of focus and, as such, the headset feels unnatural.

If Apple has actually solved this, through some new kind of optics or moving lenses that can maintain focus, it absolutely will be a game changer. I have to believe that they have or they wouldn't even try. You are never going to be able to convince the average person to wear a headset that displays a blurry image. But it will be very easy to convince people to wear a headset that is sharp edge to edge.

If you put this headset on and can actually look around and see a sharp image it absolutely will be the "next iPhone". It will take a massive chunk out of TV and monitor sales. Massive as in easily more than half. It may even crush theater sales (if they haven't been crushed enough). If this thing uses traditional optics and the edges are blurry it will be DOA and quite tragic.

 

[I7guy]

For speaking the truth? Back before the Apple Watch was released Tim Cook was pretty sour on face wearables. I remember at one event he said people only wear glasses because they have to, not because they want to. Now we’re supposed to be bullish that people will want to wear goggles to interact with the world?

It’s not the truth to me. It’s a bunch of hyperbole. Really: “Tim should take a vacation” resonates with you? That’s childish and immature and to me renders the entire point moot.