Report: Apple Executives Cautious of Mixed-Reality Headset Amid Compromises

[Tim’s Weenie]

That’s a bold strategy Cotton, reporting that the top execs at Apple hate the Apple VR goggles and are distancing their self from it.

Let’s see if it pays off for Gurman. Lol 😂

 

[kemal]

I would like to see the product succeed. It could set the benchmark for what these devices should be.

 

[jz0309]

While Apple initially hoped to sell three million units within the device's first year on sale, it now expects to sell around 900,000 headsets. The company has decided to sell the device at its approximate cost to make, rather than sell it at a loss as it originally considered. The headset is still on schedule to be announced at WWDC in June.

just few days ago it was 7-10M, and 10x for next generation ...

 

[michaeljk]

if the top dogs at Apple are not very interested, or even keep their distance from this product, why does it still have life? Apple develops all kinds of technologies, and then decides not to put them out to market. In other words, is there someone near the top that has fought for this product to make it to the sales stage? Who is that?

Another thing.... People were worried that, with the death of Steve Jobs, Apple wouldn't release any innovative or entirely new product lines that weren't already in the pipeline while he was still alive. I may be wrong here, but it seems like this product would constitute the first truly new product that Apple has created for public consumption (and if it releases it). Tim Cook might just be the best large-scale corporate manager of all time, but he is also extremely risk averse and seems to lack much enthusiasm or maybe capacity for creative and aesthetic pursuits.

I hope Apple does come out with these, and even if they are too expensive on the first iteration (as Apple products tend to be for me), Apple will learn how to reduce the costs, technology will catch up with what they need and other companies will step in to fill in the gaps Apple doesn't fill. I currently use headphones in lots of places to achieve a sort of "partial solitude" in public. I would be more discretionary about using these in public spaces, but would still use them regularly.

One thing I wonder about is their comfort. Apple's over-the-ear headphones were way too heavy for wearing more than 30-40 minutes. I returned them after two weeks, and am currently wearing a much lighter, but just as high quality pair of Bose over-the-ear headphones. I can foresee, in 2-3 years, Apple developing a headset that is both headphone and AR set that becomes a truly immersive experience, which I would love for much of what I now do with my desktop and laptops (music creation and photography).

 

[Otaviano]

So, I think I've seen this movie before. You know, where a rumored Apple product is DOA before anyone's even seen it? I think the iPod, iPhone, iPad, and Apple Watch all "sucked" before they were launched too.

That is some revisionist history right there.

Anyhow this thing really sounds dead on arrival to me. A glorified video game console and Apple is not really known for getting gaming.

I can understand the pressure to come up with new products and keep growing revenue but was there really nothing else they could have looked at?

Bring back the Airport Base Station. Better yet build it into a new generation HomePod and HomePod Mini.

This thing sound like a glorified demo. Even the Zuck has moved on from this AR/VR none sense.

 

[slash8slash1]

If I could view a Champions League, Premier League or Bundesliga match as if I was there, a perfect seat, call me in. Then it would pay for itself. But then you would need a friend that also has one of these.. hmm..

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

300,000 for a product from Microsoft is a flop.

But that’s the point. Games already exist so there is content for this. Yet it’s not popular. Apple has NOTHING. So how good can these get?

There was not 1 app, nor even an App Store for iPhone before it released. Hardware must always come first. However, on release, Apple had plenty to demo.

We know from all past, brand-new-product releases that Apple will have created a bunch of apps for it and a few friends of Apple will also be demoing some "unbelievable", "magical" apps and gushing about the potential in their segments. It will certainly have more than NOTHING at the reveal. Think Watch reveal. iPad. iPhone. iPod. Which of the had NOTHING on reveal day?

 

[cdsapplefan]

If Apple executives are staying away from the product it must be bad and not what they envisioned. Looks like they are just throwing something up in the air and hoping it sticks

 

[Ethosik]

There was not 1 app, nor even an App Store for iPhone before it released. Hardware must always come first. However, on release, Apple had plenty to demo.

We know from all past, brand-new-product releases that Apple will have created a bunch of apps for it and a few friends of Apple will also be demoing some "unbelievable", "magical" apps and gushing about the potential in their segments. It will certainly have more than NOTHING at the reveal. Think Watch reveal. iPad. iPhone. iPod. Which of the had NOTHING on reveal day?

iPhone had iPod functionality, safari, and many other built in apps to use that made it worth it. I got one so I didn’t have two devices with iPod being added.

 

[sw1tcher]

Because this device is stupid. Facebook (the biggest proponent) has thrown in the towel on the metaverse.

They have? That's quite the about-face from what they (Zuckerberg) said less than 1 month ago when Meta reporting earnings...

Meta beats revenue expectations, remains committed to metaverse | TechCrunch

This win for Meta comes amid harsh restructuring, resulting in over ten thousand jobs eliminated this year.

techcrunch.com

Tech moves through buzzwords like clockwork. Though the metaverse was all the rage when Meta changed its name — a sort of recursive and self-referential generation of hype — now, it’s all about AI. Despite big losses in its metaverse investments, CEO Mark Zuckerberg made it a point to tell investors that he is not making a u-turn into the AI lane. Rather, he sees AI as technology that works in tandem with the metaverse.

“A narrative has developed that we’re somehow moving away from focusing on the metaverse vision, so I just want to say up front that that’s not accurate,” Zuckerberg said. “We’ve been focusing on AI and the metaverse, and we will continue to.”

 

[NY Guitarist]

Just found this leaked photo of the Apple AR/VR headset.

 

[Stevenyo]

Not everyone followed this trajectory though. iPhone was an immediate hit, despite expectations that its price was prohibitive. I watched the original launch presentation for iPhone, went to an Apple Store the next day to look at it, and bought it right there. I remember thinking, "this is going to change everything..."

You mean 6 months later? The iPhone was announced in January 2007 and didn't go on sale until June 2007. And at launch it took waiting in line for many hours to get a chance to possibly buy one at an Apple store. (though ATT stores tended to have better availability, we bailed on the Apple store line with the understanding that there were more waiters than stock, but stopped by ATT late on the first day of sales and were able to pick one up.

 

[npmacuser5]

The price! The original Macintosh cost, $3,000. Translated to todays dollars, $10,000. Price of these headsets not the issue. What they provide for the price will determine their success.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

It seems like there are more and more studies coming out about how damaging social media and screen addiction is to teens (and I would bet it has similar effects on adults), and yet supposedly we're going to be wearing our screns all day (not even thinking of this headset specifically, but of the goal of AR glasses that all these companies eventually want), so that social media notifications are literally right in front of us? Setting aside the question of whether these goggles are going to flop or succeed, should we even want this?

Anybody who doesn't want any product shouldn't buy that product.

Your points about social, social networks, screen addiction, etc are all quite valid. But why are those negatives so popular? Because people want to be on those networks. Why are they addicted to their screens? Because they want to be. People are doing what they want to do.

There are no Apple Goggles today. So all of that is caused by the screen devices we already have. Shall we make the case to do away with cell phones, which made mobile screens/computing easy & cheap so that always-screens became possible? Nobody seems to be making cases to get rid of phones to try to address these problems... and that would certainly have much more impact than launching or not launching a whole new product.

Take the concept to an extreme: why are cigarettes still a product? There is a mountain of evidence showing that they are not just social or anti-social facilitators, addicting, conduits to public ridicule (smoke chambers at airports, shivering OUTSIDE in the winter because they need a smoke, etc) but they are thoroughly proven to KILL people. And yet the product persists. GOV has tried to pile taxes on it to make it unappealing based on price. And yet the product persists. Why? Because people will pay for it. Because they want it. If the want could go away, the cigarettes would follow.

Not making cigarettes wouldn't solve that problem either. We learned in prohibition that making something people want illegal won't get rid of that thing. The drug problem shows that GOV or law or prices or shady distributors won't stop people who want them from getting them.

Whether Apple makes goggles or does not make goggles won't fix the issues you share. People have to decide when enough is enough and opt for live and in person vs. virtual. The very real problems you reference will not be made or broken whether Goggles launch or not, succeed or not. That falls to each individual deciding for themselves.

 

[steve123]

In an attempt to keep headset wearers engaged with the real world, the device will have an outward-facing display showing their eye movements and facial expressions. Apple regards this feature as a key differentiator from enclosed VR headsets. One person familiar with the device says the exterior screens allow people to interact with a headset wearer without feeling as if they’re talking to a robot.

From a social interaction perspective, this idea might be good for the use case of authority figures such as a police officer, guard or a soldier. For the general use case, people are going to be asking the question, what else is that person looking at? If someone cannot see the same things the person with the headset is, there will be distrust of and cautious engagement with the person wearing the headset. Once someone experiences this distrust and exclusion, it will be difficult to get them to adopt it.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

iPhone doesn’t have sales in the 300,000.

How many sales did iPhone have BEFORE it launched?

How many units were sold on "big reveal" day?

You and I have NO IDEA at all how many goggles might be purchased. The very best guess is somewhere between none and about 8 Billion. Nearly 40 years after the launch of Mac and it still flirts around with about 10% of the computer market... and no one sees that as a flop/failure/why bother.

Your pessimism about this product is fine. Your opinion is yours. However, some of your speculation requires launch and market reaction to know both WHAT this is and how well it is received.

 

[JM]

Who cares?

It’ll be the most “amazing, spectacular device we think you’re going to love” when it’s released to the public.

Even if Craig and Tim are skeptical, they’ll do their darndest to tell us it’s great and wonderful.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Because this device is stupid. Facebook (the biggest proponent) has thrown in the towel on the metaverse. Plus with heading into a recession with massive inflation a $3000 headset is not top of mind for most people just trying to make ends meet right now.

But $1000-1800 phones are? $2000-4000 laptops? $2000 monitors?

Yes, times are tough. For some, any given time is always tough. For others, $15K Apple Watch Edition was an immediate buy.

 

[Ethosik]

How many sales did iPhone have BEFORE it launched?

How many units were sold on "big reveal" day?

You and I have NO IDEA at all how many goggles might be purchased. The very best guess is somewhere between none and about 8 Billion. Nearly 40 years after the launch of Mac and it still flirts around with about 10% of the computer market... and no one sees that as a flop/failure/why bother.

Your pessimism about this product is fine. Your opinion is yours. However, some of your speculation requires launch and market reaction to know both WHAT this is and how well it is received.

We have seen it with Meta and Sony and other headsets. Stuff that has A LOT of content. And it’s not groundbreaking. Cell phones were popular before iPhone. I had one.

 

[gleepskip]

I hope it’s better than its predicted, but then, I’m not hating on it like others.

I'm happy for you.

 

[anthogag]

Throw caution to the wind

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

The fact that there exist people stupid enough to have sensitive data out in the open does not constitute a “killer use case“ for this device. Those are the same kinds of people that lose those laptops and cause security breaches.

I have worked with sensitive information. The thought ”Oh, it’s a nice day out. I think I’ll just work at the coffee shop today.” has never, and will never cross my mind when I’m handling sensitive data.

Unfortunately, you are not everyone. If so, then I wouldn't occasionally see things that perhaps I should see just walking through life and occasionally seeing someones screen.

Good for you to do it right. Please train the rest of the world.

In the meantime, the privacy benefit of Goggles used as a monitor screen is a certainty privacy benefit. No one could possibly see that screen... unlike every other kind of computing screen we use today.

I don't actually consider this a big deal myself as I go about my business like you do when it comes to privacy... but someone brought it up and Goggles would certainly address that one in a maximized way short of secure rooms/offices and guards.

 

[aParkerMusic]

It's called Rumors. We don't actually know anything.

• Ask one contact at Apple how many of <product> will sell and they are the half full guy: "up to about 10 Million units."
• Ask the half-empty contact: "lucky if we get 500K"
• As the full glass guy: "bigger than iPhone"
• As the empty glass guy: "Ringo isn't even the best drummer in the Beatles."

All are Apple guys and all are offering guesses. All can be quoted in rumor stories. And all may prove to be right or wrong or something in between. That's rumors!

You also have article writers which sometimes have their own bent on some topic. If they are half full about something, they may be attracted to details that support their own view. If they are half empty, the same. For example, within any of these Goggle posts, we seem to have extremists and not much in the middle. Promote any poster to contributing author and you'll likely get a very positive or very negative Goggles article with carefully selected "facts" to support their own view.

I'm in the positive camp about this concept. But if I wished, I could write a blistering pile of doom about it too. Both extremes are easy to support with our own wild guesses because it's one big pile of imagination vapor right now. None of us know what it is, nor if it is really $3K, nor what it looks like, etc. So we are just imagining the best or worst without many seeming to have any room in between the extremes.

Soon Apple will take the stage and reveal whatever it actually is, whatever it actually costs, etc. Vapor will become much more tangible. Opinions will then evolve with 'reality' being revealed. Some may do as has been done in many pre-release product threads before: enormous flip flops of opinion. Others may amp up their existing opinions even harder. Until we know what it actually is, we're all imagining different vapor and then faulting each other for not having the exact same imagination as our own.

Nowhere did I indicate I don’t understand the nature of rumors, or indicate this newest “info” is anything but.

I will say, though, that sometimes the articles are written as if it is known-fact, and not rumor.

“While Apple initially hoped to sell three million units within the device's first year on sale, it now expects to sell around 900,000 headsets.”

There’s quite a bit of this in the article. I understand that it would be distracting to write “reportedly” or “allegedly” repeatedly in the article; can we at least get a bit of “according to the source”? I dunno, just my perspective reading this stuff.

 

[Ethosik]

Unfortunately, you are not everyone. If so, then I wouldn't occasionally see things that perhaps I should see just walking through life and occasionally seeing someones screen.

Good for you to do it right. Please train the rest of the world.

In the meantime, the privacy benefit of Goggles used as a monitor screen is a certainty privacy benefit. No one could possibly see that screen... unlike every other kind of computing screen we use today.

I don't actually consider this a big deal myself as I go about my business like you do when it comes to privacy... but someone brought it up and Goggles would certainly address that one in a maximized way short of secure rooms/offices and guards.

Goggles is not the solution to that problem. I don’t know why this is being discussed as a killer privacy feature when it introduces physical concerns. And people working in such sensitive data are probably employed and won’t be able to use any headset since their IT department didn’t pay for it.

These employees need training on protecting from others seeing their work. If that doesn’t help, they need to be let go. But goggles isn’t the answer in any way to this issue.

 

[t0rqx]

First key executives were not positive, then all of a sudden they were super-positive and now the key executives know its a doomed product. Make up your mind.

Airpower is a walk in the park compared to this product and they cannot even produce that one.