The report that this is based on has a bit more to say about that. There were originally two devices that were being worked on. The VR/AR headset and a lightweight pair of glasses that could be worn all day (think of a greatly refined version of Google Glass). Tim Cook was a proponent of the glasses not the headset, but essentially all development went towards the headset. This left a small number of developers working on the glasses project "just to keep Tim happy". This article is leaving out that bit. The tech for the glasses to work as Tim envisioned just isn't a reality yet, and probably won't be for the next 5 to maybe 10 years so compromises were made, and now we have this headset. It could work. Who knows. I will be interested to see how it is presented 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 Executives Cautious of Mixed-Reality Headset Amid Compromises
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'd add lack of proper controller support because of whatever principles Apple feels they must uphold as well as a misguided area for focus for OS and first party software development (like the first Apple Watch). The headset hardware will likely be phenomenal, but I expect the device to be limited by Apple's limited vision for how AR/VR can best be utilized.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
I'm one of those people and I don't want to wear it for extended periods of time just like I don't want to stare at a laptop or desktop screen for extended periods of time. When I need a laptop, I open the screen and use it. In this concept, when I need a laptop screen, I might slip these on and use them. When I'm done with my computing needs, I close the laptop or remove the goggles.
That's conceptually the same to me. No difference at all. Open/close a lid vs. Slide on/off Goggles.
So what's different? One might offer any size screen on which to do that laptop work. The other is always limited to one size. There are companies trying to get folding screen laptops going as a new product for people who want more screen RE...
Perhaps this is Apples crack at that same kind of want... which also can address folding phones and tablets too (with no creases, hinges and added weight)?
I CAN see someone writing code or working in Excel exactly the same as they do either on a laptop now. For the coder, they might be able to view a screen for the code and view a second screen to see the code in action. That can be painfully cumbersome on a laptop screen.
And I've never met anyone doing heavy work in Excel that doesn't long for screens with more width & height to show more cells. Conceptually, this could let them have an Excel sheet on their own IMAX-sized screen if desired.
Your opinion about this is as good as mine. I'm simply offering some counterpoint to illustrate how the same view can look very different from another perspective.
Last edited:
I think it would come down to the effect/strain on my eyes, rather than having something attached to my head. Ergonomically the positioning of the screen is very flexible as opposed to a fixed monitor. Depending on form of input you could theoretically be laying down too. Lots of aspects to whether this will be comfortable for extended use or not.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
A very popular, high-margin fitness product is Peloton. Look up the price of the bike and then the ongoing subscription to use it and compare that to what is only a rumor price of $3K.
Yes, I know Peloton took some hits for a while but they did not die and are basically rising again. There are a LOT of dedicated Peloton users out there, paying that ongoing, forever "services" revenue every month... after paying up large one time for the bike.
Last edited:
That’s the problem with these goggles. Have a monitor you have many micro breaks that help with eye strain.
Plus, Apples goal here is that we wear this all day long.
Even though I am probably not buying it, I am really looking forward to WWDC to see if and how problems like these are solved.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Yes, of course, there's a LOT of possibilities for a vapor product.
Eye strain is a very real possiblity. 3D tech generally has that reputation. Use it for long and your eyes suffer. This very well may have the same issue.
Others might push harder: this may blind us from using it for 10 minutes. It might radiate our brains. Over-immersed morons in Goggles may walk right into traffic and be killed. "We" can imagine any number of negatives about an unknown anything.
As the Apple "think different" crowd though, we can also imagine any number of positives if we try. Maybe it improves our vision? Maybe it smartens our brains? Maybe the cameras save us from accidentally stepping into something oncoming the two eyes on our face would miss without goggles.
A virtualized monitor could dynamically float to any level, any angle, etc for ergonomics. On the other hand, will the neck muscles tire of the added weight? Will the brow sweat from the contact? Will we have impressions of goggles in our skin when we take it off? Will sealed pores clog and yield a side effect of pimple pattens shaped like goggle contacts? Will- like diving goggles- the lenses fog up when worn in certain conditions? Etc.
Thousands of questions with very negative connotations and very positive connotations float in collective imagination. We have no answers today. Just guessing & speculation. Lots of answers are a few weeks away and then many more at some point thereafter when these make it out of the lab. Then, we'll finally know what this is, what it costs, what it does, what it can't do, negative issues, positive issues, etc.
Last edited:
I agree with these points, I am very much aware we are just speculating here. There was meant to be little judgement in my comment.
A lot of these things will have to be resolved with software, so I am hoping for a good set of features on that front. The hardware would be my natural curiosity but that could very much evolve a lot over the coming years still.
The CEO of Apple and the head of software kept their distance from the most anticipated and advanced product Apple has ever produced. Seriously? You expect us to believe this????
iPads start at $329, iphones at 399, macs at $599…..not sure where you’re getting thousands for each device.
Headset isn’t gonna have a $499 option bud.
Also. I’m happy for anyone wealthy/foolish enough to drop 15k on the Apple Watch Edition in 2015. Lmao
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
My take is this:
- Apple has been at this a LONG time- at least 5-6+ years.
- They are well aware of everything else out there that is VR/AR
- They are well aware of what has already launched and not really had much uptake (and likely why)
- Apple has the reputation of not being first, but their cut at whatever will be best. So presumably, this will be best cut at VR/AR
- Apple most certainly knows what fans write on sites like this and is well aware of the wall of extreme pessimism about this thing- for years now- so they know they need to evaporate that with some solid launch dazzle. I expect them to dazzle.
- There is a long history of even Apple fans imagining towards the worst about new rumored Apple products and then flipping to "Shut up and take my money" once they get reality. There is not much history of the same scenario where Apple's new <whatever> flops and there is mass "I told you so."
- Apple has tons of cash and Human Resources to pursue ANYTHING. This isn't a make or break creation and they are not pressured to cut corners due to lack of money or talent. This can be as great as Apple can make it.
Last edited:
I just hope it is compatible with MacOS and not just iOS. I would be interested if I could replace my desktop screen at home instead of walking around with a headset on.
I’m an unusual use case, but physical limitations make it quite strenuous for me to use a fixed position screen that requires a support surface. Goggles could be enormously helpful to me - a screen that can be used in any physical orientation of the body anywhere would be a huge change for the better in my case. Goggles let your body decide where the screen is, rather than the other way round.
Again, not the norm, but still, you’d be surprised at how many people have use cases most people would never think of.
Jeff is a kid in a candy shop when you talk to him. Truly invested in his projects and team. I’m hoping he’s the next CEO. He doesn’t show it, but he’s a blend of Steve, Tim, and Craig.
Reminds me of the episode where Herb asks his brother Homer to design the car of the future but didn’t give any feedback before it’s unveiling.
Peloton includes a bike. A headset does not. Yoga mats are also used for fitness, but people wouldn't spend $3000 on them. Just because one fitness device can sell well at $3000+ doesn't mean a different fitness device can.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
"Start at"??? Where do they "finish"?
I don't think any of us speculating believe these are going to lean on old chips and minimal specs. Some rumors put up to 12 cameras on this thing. Rumors say it has TWO 4K "screens" in it. Presumably this is more towards Mac Pro than Mac Mini... new PRO MAX instead of 3+ year old iDevices that happen to still be for sale.
Hop into the Apple store, pick a computer and configure it with your own guess at enough power to do what is rumored to be possible with these. If you choose Mac mini to try to beat $3K, be sure to add a good monitor or maybe 2 of them since this has 2. Almost certainly that can't be minimal spec Mini to do the rumored stuff this can do so jack up those specs. Let's assume it doesn't have 12 cameras but maybe 6. Add 6 best guess comparable cameras to the order. External battery if you choose Mini to power Mini for "up to 2 hours." What's the price of that one?
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
OK, the point there was that there is a good sized market that will spend a big chunk of cash one time and then an ongoing subscription "services" fee for ONLY a fitness application. If someone looked it up, they would find that that pricing in total is not exactly far from the rumored $3K here.
And then consider that there are apparently other uses than only fitness with these goggles.
The difference between success or failure will be whether the people who do buy it end up using it a lot or they throw it in a drawer. $3000 will obviously limit the number of people, but if most of those buyers love it and use it constantly, that's a beachhead that can grow each year. But the point of $3000 is that it has to be much better than anything we've yet seen to avoid the drawer, and that takes expensive tech to achieve. I really hope it takes off because I'd love to have a useful VR headset (whether or not I buy version 1 or version 4).
I think a success case would require all of the following:
1. You can work on it all day, and it's better than a monitor for your Mac. So the screen is sharp enough (even if not 'retina'), and it's comfortable, with no nausea or eyestrain.
2. FaceTime meetings are amazing, like teleportation with a photorealistic avatar. (And better than normal for a call from VR headset to iPhone/Mac)
3. The method of interaction - using eye tracking and finger tapping - feels natural, and is just as good as trackpad for Mac and touch for iPad. So you want to use it as a general computing device with the apps that it ships with and the adapted iPad apps.
4. It demonstrates good potential for games, with a few good titles coming out in its first year that look great and work well with the interaction method.
5. It's good for other forms of entertainment: big screen movies/shows, immersive live events and putting you in other environments (rainforest, coral reef, beach, orbit, etc).
If it can pull off these 5 things, it will be a steady growing success from the get-go and avoid the drawer. If not, it may be a long road to success (or short road to cancellation).
I think a success case would require all of the following:
1. You can work on it all day, and it's better than a monitor for your Mac. So the screen is sharp enough (even if not 'retina'), and it's comfortable, with no nausea or eyestrain.
2. FaceTime meetings are amazing, like teleportation with a photorealistic avatar. (And better than normal for a call from VR headset to iPhone/Mac)
3. The method of interaction - using eye tracking and finger tapping - feels natural, and is just as good as trackpad for Mac and touch for iPad. So you want to use it as a general computing device with the apps that it ships with and the adapted iPad apps.
4. It demonstrates good potential for games, with a few good titles coming out in its first year that look great and work well with the interaction method.
5. It's good for other forms of entertainment: big screen movies/shows, immersive live events and putting you in other environments (rainforest, coral reef, beach, orbit, etc).
If it can pull off these 5 things, it will be a steady growing success from the get-go and avoid the drawer. If not, it may be a long road to success (or short road to cancellation).
High end stationary bikes cost around a grand even with no screen/service. They have a well established value, and a dedicated and loyal following. The spin community is huge and largely affluent. Peleton was able to tap into that, VR is different.
An Apple headset with a Fitness+ subscription is competing with a Quest II and a Supernatural subscription. I don't see a winning value proposition at the rumoured $3000. Once the headset comes down to around $1000 and Apple learns what fitness users need, it will be a different story.
Edit: To add, even if Apple were to sell the same number of headsets as Peleton does bikes, it would be probably considered a failure based on the scale Apple operates at.