Report: Apple Mixed-Reality Headset to Feature Iris Scanning for Authentication and Payments

[Kostas3000]

If a technology can basically take full control of what our eyes see and what our ears hear, the "problem" being solved is ANYTHING that uses our vision and hearing. In the very best case, this is basically a personal Star Trek holodeck or Matrix-like simulation where anything you want to experience with those 2 senses can be experienced in a realistic way.

I'll offer a few concepts...

Those of us who use Apple and Windows tech for work probably have desktop and laptop computers to cover both home/office and on-the-go computing needs. Inevitably, we face situations every day where we wish we had ready access to either... or perhaps when we have access to one, we wished we had access to the other, etc. Or we might wish we had more screen RE for some task. Or now we need the Windows machine. Etc.

If the resolution is good enough, you could have a dynamic Mac Studio Ultra-Ultra-Ultra with any number of screens always with you... and a Maximus PC too. Sitting in that cramped seat on the plane where you can't even unfold a laptop to get something done, VR could give you an apparent expansive mobile desktop in a row where you only have enough room for a virtual keyboard. Need 2 screens or 6 screens for something? No room in reality but endless room in virtual reality. Need 50 screens? Use 50 screens.

In other words, think about all of your productive tech from phone-to-tablet-to-laptop-to-desktop. What if it was all available to you at all times and anywhere because it's ALL IN there? Now you have ONE device that pretty much covers everything Apple offers... and could cover pretty much all AV experiences too.

Rather watch the big movie on a screen bigger than the iPhone or iPad you have with you? Your biggest/best TV could be IN there too. Prefer an IMAX-like theater screen? That can be IN there too. IMAX anywhere you are. Prefer to watch surrounded by an audience? A virtual audience could be around you. Want the audience to be a bunch of super models? There they are. And so on.

Eating lunch in a drab setting under overcast skies. Transport yourself to your ideal setting anywhere in the world for lunch.

Wishing you could be court-side for the big game but can't afford court-side tickets? VR could be a way to attend every kind of sporting event and show in the best seat in the house. And everyone else could sit "there" too. One set of seats that might cost $8K-$50K for a single show could now be sold for a much more affordable "attendee" that actually numbers in the many thousands.

Etc. Basically, imagine if you had access to the holodeck. What would you like to see/experience? Your answer to that question is conceptually doable with a technology that can fully feed your eyes and ears. See the Beatles play live in 1964? Do it. Walk with dinosaurs instead of your daily walk without them? Do it. Take to orbit or explore the solar system or visit any historical event as if you are there, etc. Pilot the Millennium Falcon? Do it. Do it. Do it.

Right now a whole lot of people pay a whole lot of money to ride a stationary bike while looking at a screen to barely imply they are actually riding it THERE (wherever "there" is on that 2-dimensional screen). VR could make it seem so much more like you really are there. For example, look left, right and behind you and there is something "there" to see in those directions too.

How I imagine this is like that. The power to show my eyes anything and play any sounds to my ears means I could basically be anywhere in the universe at any point in time and have anything I want to watch or hear there play. Would I like to type this post from an office on the moon with a view of the Earth? Conceptually, it could seem like I'm there, doing that. I may actually be jammed into a corner of dirty subway train riding to my stop. But this lets me escape that and have all my goodies with me whenever I want them.

Will Apple's cut of this be that? I don't know. For all of that to happen, my imagination has just written some big software development checks that may not be cashable for many years to come. But if the hardware is able to do it, then it's only software to make it do such things. If enough software experience developers get interested, any visual & audio event becomes potential to deliver.

so well said

 

[bugFinder]

What are they gonna call it? Eye ID, Retina ID, See ID

iid (independently and identically distributed)

 

[t0rqx]

Then, the IRIS data will actually be saved on the device AND in a Government repository. And once the government knows what everyone using this device’s irises look like… ummm.

Once they know, they will… I’m sure the first thing they’ll do with... ahh with this very valuable information...

I lost my conspiracy notes. What will they do with eye information that they can’t already do with the volumes of information they have already obtained through all the other ways that the government tracks us?

I recommend watching the movie “The Net” starring Sandra Bullock and you will able to understand. Why harvest from one source if there are multiple available a lot of scenarios are thinkable.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

I recommend watching the movie “The Net” starring Sandra Bullock and you will able to understand. Why harvest from one source if there are multiple available a lot of scenarios are thinkable.

Yes, but as the government is ALREADY harvesting from EVERY source available (traffic CCD’s, credit card transactions, emails, packages, GPS, security cameras in stores, people’s social media posts) what does having information about someone’s iris ADD to that? It doesn’t provide more detailed information of where a person is or where they’ve been or what they’re doing or what they’re saying.

 

[Luposian]

As soon as I saw this article, I said "Nope!". My irises are MINE! My face is MINE! My fingerprints are MINE! I only give up that which I have no choice to do otherwise (like in the case of fingerprints) and will do everything in my power to refuse or do differently than expected, if unable to refuse. At Universal Studios, I was expected to use my RIGHT hand (scanned) to get in... I deliberately used my LEFT. But, oddly enough, when I am required to give a fingerprint, why do they ALWAYS require the RIGHT hand (yes, this has been demanded of me)? What is so special about that hand? Look in your bible for the answer.

Revelation 13:16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:

And as for the forehead? Here ye go!

Covid temperature screening hi-res stock photography and images - Alamy

Find the perfect covid temperature screening stock photo, image, vector, illustration or 360 image. Available for both RF and RM licensing.

www.alamy.com

At what point will forehead scans be used to scan an invisible tattoo or a chip or other metric?

Welcome to the new digital world... only predicted by the bible a few thousand years early...

 

[DailySlow]

Don't forget iCloud backup's lack of proper encryption issues. Even if you do trust apple without encryption you are going to end up having to trust everyone else.

I trust Apple more than the rest but to truly trust then to never make a mistake and expose their keys is foolhardy.

And the VPN bypassing for Apple services.

 

[richinaus]

There's a big difference about the iPhone. The iPhone was the first to the party and set the standard of phone app stores as it is now, and is a mass adopted product around the world, in some countries with dominant market share. VR/Mixed Reality while still selling well with the Quest 2 selling over 20 million units in two years, is still niche in comparison for a lot of people. Which is why VR is a lot more open, even on Meta's platforms as the industry cannot afford exclusivity or closed ecosystems, which Meta as Oculus tried initially but quickly dropped as it wasn't working.

Plus here's the bigger thing: Making apps and games for a phone, is vastly different than making apps and games for a VR/Mixed Reality HMD. VR/Mixed Reality is a lot more graphically intense and has a much more complicated development process since it all involves 3D graphic work and making sure it all performs at 60 FPS or higher or else the user will get motion sick. You're rendering things twice in VR/Mixed Reality for each eye to create the stereoscopic 3D that makes it all look and feel real, just like the Nintendo 3DS did, which requires a lot of horsepower. It's why the Meta avatars look so bad and low quality as going at a higher polygon count would cause performance drops on the current standalone hardware. You're also designing everything with six degrees of freedom (6DOF) so you gotta account for people moving around in your app.

I fully expect Apple to take the same route as Meta and state this first headset as a pro device [for developers and creatives mainly] to allow a couple of years of app and experience development.

There is nothing out there really that makes it a purchase for mass consumers, and it would certainly be a difficult sell for those who just want to use it casually [which is what the quest 2 is for].

I use real time rendering nearly every day as a creative tool, and it taxes the computers massively. I think a lot of people have unrealistic expectations of what can be delivered on a standalone device like a headset as these, but if there is anyone out there who can get the right chips in there it is Apple right now.

For me, the next few years will be very exciting. I think for most people it will be 2025 at least before they can really start to enjoy XR.

 

[return2sendai]

Finally! The end of money. Now I can pay with flowers!

 

[newyorksole]

It's a market interest gauge to see how many people actually want to buy a redundant toy that does everything your phone already does, so trying to figure out who actually would buy it.

The reason why it keeps in the rumor mill and never releases is because Apple's Market Research actually shows very little interest beyond tech hobbyists.

MKBHD buying one isn't enough of a reason to release. Also, looking at Oculus and PSVR sales numbers as well as developers actually committing to make experiences beyond the 2 hour mark paints a very bleak picture for this device.

Google Glass was very ahead of its time and it flopped so hard Google canceled as quick as possible.

There is Zero interest beyond gamers and tech hobbyists.

It's also the same reason Apple is avoiding making a foldable phone. Zero interest beyond tech hobbyists and people who buy things for status symbols.

ehh idk man. I think they gague interest in other ways besides just controlled leaks and seeing how other products are selling.

you underestimate how many gamers are out there and you also underestimate Apple’s ability to differentiate their products from others AND their marketing ability.

I fully believe this is coming out and will be a hit. their wearable devices have been extremely successful. even the expensive AirPods Max.

I know this is a totally different product and category… and PRICE, but we will see…

 

[Unregistered 4U]

At what point will forehead scans be used to scan an invisible tattoo or a chip or other metric?

Never. At the time that was written, the technology of those days gave them the idea that, in addition to a right hand, scanning someone’s forehead might be good way to track people (for those folks that actually showed their foreheads). Nowadays, and as you’ve seen, there’s a LOT better ways for tracking people that doesn’t require any interaction with foreheads at all!

Of course, Revelation IS a bit of a fever dream. The “idea” of being able to track everyone is still the gist of it even if it’s not via foreheads OR hands. And, for those that follow that, rejoice! For the end times are upon us and your rewards are forthcoming!

 

[bLackjackj]

The Information warned that some previously planned features may not make it into the final version of the headset when it is unveiled next year.

🙄🤦‍♂️ and there it is,..our get out of jail free card if all the guessing for click bait headlines fails to materialize!

No folks at The Information, YOU commited yourself 100% in this article, start praying that it's true!

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

so well said

Thank you but really barely started. The ability to take over what our eyes see and ears hear would open up enormous possibilities even my big imagination can't imagine. Perhaps and/or hopefully, setting up that much potential is what's taking so long. We'll see sooner or later.

Basically, I have zero expectations that this is essentially Oculus ++ with an Apple logo on it. I don't think Apple would need this much time to roll out an Apple improved/refined version of that. So obviously, I'm thinking bigger than that myself... which means either I'm setting up expectations far beyond what the thing will be or maybe the thing will deliver at or greater than my own expectations.

 

[svish]

Excited to see the final product!!

 

[_Spinn_]

My old Lumia 950 XL had iris scanning to unlock the phone.

 

[BlueFo]

Apple's mixed-reality headset will feature iris scanning to authenticate payments and log into accounts, setting itself apart from Meta's new Quest Pro headset, according to a paywalled report from The Information.

Concept render based on purported leaked information by Ian Zelbo​

Two individuals, who apparently helped develop Apple's headset, told The Information that users will be able to scan their irises to quickly log into their accounts and make payments, similar to Face ID and Touch ID – a feature first rumored by Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo. Iris scanning is also said to make it easier for multiple people to use the same headset and sets the device apart from the Quest Pro, which lacks any such feature.

To enable iris scanning, internal cameras track where users are looking. Eye tracking also allows Apple to reduce graphical fidelity in a user's peripheral vision, thereby reducing the amount of processing power required for the headset's graphics. Apple's purchase of German startup SensoMotoric Instruments in 2017 is said to have allowed it to build the technology.

The report reiterated the rumor that Apple's headset will feature 14 cameras, compared to just 10 on Meta's Quest Pro headset, designed to capture motion to accurately represent real-world movements on digital avatars. Two downward-facing cameras apparently capture the wearer's legs, offering another feature that the Quest Pro does not have.

The headset purportedly resembles "a pair of ski goggles" and look different from the Quest Pro. Apple's design is said to rely heavily on "mesh fabrics, aluminum and glass," and conceals its outward-facing cameras better than the Quest Pro. The device is also apparently thinner and lighter than the Quest Pro, which weighs 722 grams.

In addition, the report claims that Apple's headset allows those who wear glasses to magnetically clip on custom prescription lenses inside the device.

On the exterior of the headset, an outward-facing display is said to allow other people to see the facial expressions of the wearer. Despite concerns over how the display may use additional battery life, it is reportedly able to operate at a low refresh rate to conserve power, similar to the always-on displays of the Apple Watch and iPhone.

The Information warned that some previously planned features may not make it into the final version of the headset when it is unveiled next year.

Article Link: Report: Apple Mixed-Reality Headset to Feature Iris Scanning for Authentication and Payments

I see no way this sells any better than the Oculus, which is abysmal. We have about a 50/50 return rate with the Oculus, or it sits in the plastic wrap on the shelf collecting dust for over half a year until an employee gets it dirt cheap in an idle inventory adjustment to flush it out the door. Also, Games are short and overpriced.

Also, how is this better than a smartphone, tablet, or even a TV?
Playstation VR I had a very basic issue: After a while, my arms got tired and all I really wanted to do was play games with a controller on a large TV. Same with media consumption.

I am really trying to understand why Meta, Google, and Apple all seem to think AR/VR is NOT a niche industry with a very solid ceiling beyond which growth is impossible.

Google Glass may have been early, but if the concept is so appealing to over 50% of the human race, why have we seen only Sony and Oculus make it to market since Google Glass despite the technology obviously catching up?

I really do not see a huge market for these goggles. They're obviously going to be illegal to use while driving a motor vehicle. No one wants to look like a bunch of idiots walking around looking like goofy morons on the street, so that's not in the cards. And I have a big screen TV with better methods of input (controller/keyboard and mouse), so it's a very specific use case in the house for a very specific experience.

But then I have to add one last thing: I and a good chunk of the human race get claustrophobic and get motion sickness from these goggles, which automatically rules me out of ever making a purchase, even if I remotely found the experience interesting beyond a try it once just to see. That's a lot of customers you won't be able to sell to. Along with the weight causing neck cramps, headaches, etc. They will need to seriously design around this.

I am sorry if you're an AR/VR fan, but I work in selling electronics and VR is not a hit. In fact, most people complain about having to take multiple breaks because the games wear them out and they'd prefer and mouse and keyboard or controller. And then they walk out with a PS4/5 or Xbox. Then we put the Oculus back on the shelf and it's used, and it sits there for about 3 months collecting dust until the process repeats itself. PS VR has a better stay rate due to Sony investing REAL money into great titles and content as well as tie ins to AAA titles such as a side story, etc for the device instead of mediocre ports for a cash grab at a ridiculously inflated price.

AR/VR is a completely different kind of gaming than pc gaming. Comparing the 2 is completely illogical. AR/VR gaming allows for a sense of immersion, like you're actually there. Of course there will be individuals like yourself who oppose this type of technology but the "niche" you're talking about isn't as small as you think. The amount of people getting into AR/VR is actually quite large. You complain about claustrophobia but the biggest thing about VR is the immersion, the feeling that you're actually there. I personally own a Oculus Quest 1 and it's a great way to get some activity while having fun (although I dislike the face pad that came with it). On the other hand, PC gaming where you sit staring at a screen for hours is seriously detrimental to your posture and overall health.

About the PSVR having a better stay rate, that isn't true. The Quest 2 is currently the top selling VR headset due to a a few reasons including no wire, better specs and a huge game library. Pricing is about the same across both platforms and all the games I've spent money on, I can say it's worth it.

And to all the other comments complaining about "privacy", throw away your devices and go live in the woods. We live in an age where major corporations have every bit of data about us and complaining about it isn't gonna do anything. Your phone literally knows your location at all times. Your computer can record your keystrokes as you're entering your credit card information. Big corporations know everything and they know that the consumers know this. This is why companies like apple try to emphasize trust as much as possible. Apple is among lower end of companies trying to sell your data.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

And to all the other comments complaining about "privacy", throw away your devices and go live in the woods. We live in an age where major corporations have every bit of data about us and complaining about it isn't gonna do anything.

I find that most folks that REALLY hold that sort of view about privacy aren’t generally posting to public forums about it.

 

[ponzicoinbro]

AR/VR is a completely different kind of gaming than pc gaming. Comparing the 2 is completely illogical. AR/VR gaming allows for a sense of immersion, like you're actually there.

VR “Immersion” matters not to gamers if they feel sick or uncomfortable after a while. If they want comfort, if they want to game with their keyboard and mouse, and if they want to munch or talking to a friend in the room while they are playing then VR is the poorest and most priciest choice.

A game is only truly immersive when it is well designed and you don’t need to think about what is strapped to your head and just enjoy. Immersion is all about level and story development, not about headset.

The whole teleport thing is hated by gamers too. VRChat has legs…but they are the buggiest legs ever and it is simply an unresolvable problem to make a Call of Duty game in VR with ‘legs’. You’ll just keep losing to the players who are using the normal version of the game, if there is cross play.

 

[BlueFo]

That Quest Pro at 722 grams. That's a LOT of weight on your head and neck and assuming it isn't well balanced then I assume most of it is at the front and over your eyes. That will be really uncomfortable to wear for long periods and for regular repeated use.

Compared the quest and quest 2, the quest pro is balanced. One of the annoying things of the Quest 1 was that all the tech was in the front which put strain on my neck after a little bit. However, for the Quest Pro, they've put the battery on the back of the headset making the front weigh less and effectively balancing it.

 

[robbietop]

AR/VR is a completely different kind of gaming than pc gaming. Comparing the 2 is completely illogical. AR/VR gaming allows for a sense of immersion, like you're actually there. Of course there will be individuals like yourself who oppose this type of technology but the "niche" you're talking about isn't as small as you think. The amount of people getting into AR/VR is actually quite large. You complain about claustrophobia but the biggest thing about VR is the immersion, the feeling that you're actually there. I personally own a Oculus Quest 1 and it's a great way to get some activity while having fun (although I dislike the face pad that came with it). On the other hand, PC gaming where you sit staring at a screen for hours is seriously detrimental to your posture and overall health.

About the PSVR having a better stay rate, that isn't true. The Quest 2 is currently the top selling VR headset due to a a few reasons including no wire, better specs and a huge game library. Pricing is about the same across both platforms and all the games I've spent money on, I can say it's worth it.

And to all the other comments complaining about "privacy", throw away your devices and go live in the woods. We live in an age where major corporations have every bit of data about us and complaining about it isn't gonna do anything. Your phone literally knows your location at all times. Your computer can record your keystrokes as you're entering your credit card information. Big corporations know everything and they know that the consumers know this. This is why companies like apple try to emphasize trust as much as possible. Apple is among lower end of companies trying to sell your data.

I have a gym membership. I want to relax when I game. Maybe some people like to mix the two, but gaming for me is a relaxation, not a workout.

You also missed my other point that what else is AR/VR good for outside of gaming or IKEA home design?
I don't want to watch sports, or YouTube, or other media on a headset. Also, what use will it have for music? I have stereo speakers or Sony/Airpods Max head cans for that. I have a TV and phone and tablet for movies, TV, etc.
I have heard it's great for news immersion, so you can feel you are there at the local event; however, the news is banned in my household and I want nothing to do with it.

I fail to see the larger market for it outside of gaming or home design such as IKEA, etc. I am the only gamer in my family of 5. And based on estimates of its cost, we are the demographic Apple wants to sell to (Median income and higher). So, that's 1/5 potential customers and the 1 has no use for it. So, that is a Potential 1/5 Sale; however, the 1 doesn't align with the Market Case, so it is a lost sale before the first pitch.
It reminds me too much of 3D TV shows and movies that everyone said was gonna revolutionize media consumption and gaming, and all it really amounted to was a few failed Disney movies and a lot of angry customers with useless technology as everyone abandoned it.
And lastly, if they want me to even consider purchasing it, I am going to need a better argument than Resident Evil 4 in VR or the very short RE7 expansion. You're gonna have to convince Square Enix, Bethesda, Naughty Dog, etc to make a 60+ hour game with all the same features, story, characters, and capabilities as the controller based game, otherwise, I'll just skip the weird hat and play it on my TV.

 

[robbietop]

ehh idk man. I think they gague interest in other ways besides just controlled leaks and seeing how other products are selling.

you underestimate how many gamers are out there and you also underestimate Apple’s ability to differentiate their products from others AND their marketing ability.

I fully believe this is coming out and will be a hit. their wearable devices have been extremely successful. even the expensive AirPods Max.

I know this is a totally different product and category… and PRICE, but we will see…

It's a headset to play games I CAN ALREADY PLAY ON MY PHONE OR TV.

You have to really give me value above and beyond "Pull out phone and play". That's simplicity.
A headset is an ACCESSORY. The Apple Watch IS NOT a standalone product. It REQUIRES an iPhone.

As for AirPods Max, it has a use beyond using phone or tablet. I can wear them to watch something privately if others are watching something else on TV, to be respectful. I can listen to music as loud as I want without waking the neighbors at night. Same with movies as I lay in bed and my SO sleeps. They have value beyond just mirroring the phone.

I don't want to have to lug around my TV. I get that. Headset helps out. However, I CAN NOT use the headset at work, out to dinner, walking in the streets, or driving. This leaves the home as the primary use location, where I have a 75" TV I can stream content to my TV. Also, VR is a solo affair, unless you wanna buy four or five of them for the whole family, which is prohibitively expensive.

So, it's a solo use for one person at a time product that can display to a TV to share with others; however, only ONE person can wear the headset at a time. So, if you want to enjoy together, you will need multiple and anything over $200 is gonna be a hard no for multiple purchases for a majority of the country.

These are things no one even remotely mentions because they are selfishly focused on the fun THEY will have BY THEMSELVES. I hung out with people who had Oculus and PSVR. It was boring watching someone else play.

 

[robbietop]

Capitalism has run out of markets to expand into. The idea of a virtual universe is they have a new frontier to conquer. Expect micro-transactions from every company in this space whos business model doesn’t rely on selling the hardware itself.

Yeah, this sounds like they are trying to prop up a new market and say "Hey, come buy this! It's the NEXT BIG THING OMG WOW ONLY $2500! Super cheap!"

 

[robbietop]

I definitely see a way this sells more than Oculus. For starters, Apple is not Meta. Their user bases couldn't be more different. Apple knows they have enough of a bleeding edge (aka: rabid) user base that will jump in on v1 (regardless of price, features, etc.) to likely justify the undoubtedly significant R&D for such an endeavor. If &D isn't recouped with v1, certainly by v2 they will.

Secondly, Apple's ecosystem is also a significant difference here. Their HUD will only, and obviously, slide right into the mix, adding some additional features to their ecosystem previously not possible. As the category matures, you can bet the farm we'll see tiers to their HUD: SE, Air, regular, Pro, Max, Ultra - whatever. HUDs for all! 🤪

Additionally, just because Meta didn't get it right, has absolutely zero bearing on the category's overall potential. Like, none. The category is in it's infancy - I'd argue it's still gestating in the womb. Meta's vision of the Metaverse is, unsurprisingly, missing the point completely. The potential here seems less about being taken away to another place and much more about how we interface with our current spaces. Sure, entertainment will likely be the port of entry to the platform, I get that. But the bigger picture seems more about how we interface with technology. I see VR more as an evolution of the keyboard, the mouse, trackpad and touch. Can completely see where some form of HUD + gestures will replace computer monitors. Why be limited to a 27" monitor when you can have your entire field of vision, x-axis included, as your monitor?

Anyway, there is definitely a category here. One that is merely beginning. Whether you agree, or not, want it or not, can see it or not, it is inevitable. This is actually not being built for you, or me - our time, our marketability, has runs its course. This is being built for current kindergarteners who will one day not crack open a laptop to go to work, but strap on some goggles or glasses and go to work. Should be interesting to see how this unfolds.

You are talking about tiered markets before the product even launches. You have to sell the thing to me in V1 and I don't see a need for it. I have a TV, multiple TVs. And I have a family. Are they just gonna sit there and watch Dad play by himself? No, they're gonna want their own.

Now, you're buying three of them. At whatever price Apple charges? Hell no!

It's a solo, BY YOURSELF affair. Unless you can mirror it to your TV, which is the definition of defeating the purpose redundancy.

Apple should just make a QLED, I'll buy that. VR headset, I have no use for. And I am a loyal customer since 2005 (iBook G4). I am also their target demographic (Median income and above). And I am the only gamer in my family. And the only one in my family who knows what AR is.

Dude, it's not gonna outsell the Apple Watch. That's the size of that market. It's a gaming accessory and nothing more.

 

[NT1440]

Yeah, this sounds like they are trying to prop up a new market and say "Hey, come buy this! It's the NEXT BIG THING OMG WOW ONLY $2500! Super cheap!"

That’s the cost of entry. The real idea is to monetize everything WITHIN these virtual worlds. That’s where the future revenue lies and why they’re betting tens of billions on it.

Luckily, the Metaverse as FB currently has it, is hot garbage their own employees don’t even want to use. So the slide of FB to irrelevancy continues. It will be the AOL of tomorrow where it’s just older people and everyone else will simply go “oh that’s still around, heh”.

 

[lazyrighteye]

You are talking about tiered markets before the product even launches. You have to sell the thing to me in V1 and I don't see a need for it. I have a TV, multiple TVs. And I have a family. Are they just gonna sit there and watch Dad play by himself? No, they're gonna want their own.

Now, you're buying three of them. At whatever price Apple charges? Hell no!

It's a solo, BY YOURSELF affair. Unless you can mirror it to your TV, which is the definition of defeating the purpose redundancy.

Apple should just make a QLED, I'll buy that. VR headset, I have no use for. And I am a loyal customer since 2005 (iBook G4). I am also their target demographic (Median income and above). And I am the only gamer in my family. And the only one in my family who knows what AR is.

Dude, it's not gonna outsell the Apple Watch. That's the size of that market. It's a gaming accessory and nothing more.

Why wouldn't I be talking about an eventual tiered offering before v1 has landed? This is a rumor site, silly. Pondering potentials is kind of the whole point. It's not like a tiered lineup is some bizarro concept few can wrap their brains around - Apple quite literally offers tiered lineups for almost every single one of their products. Should these goggles prove worthy, the platform well-received, you can bet apple already has plans on how they can evolve and expand this category. They're not literally making one thing and then, finger crossed, seeing what happens. They're investing in a platform they feel has legs, independent of wether it works for me, you, your family.

As far as the kids watching daddy play and wanting their own... Unless you are in the bracket that can get everyone in the family their own $2,500 toy, then, like the rest of us, "taking turns" is a critical skill us parents owe our kids to at the very least, understand. Personally, I'm hoping Apple's offering includes user profiles (not unlike macOS). Recent rumors even suggest those profiles will be accessible via rental scan - something, while cool, I'll believe when I see. lol

If rumors about pricing prove accurate, I'm not even sure one will be an option for me. To be clear, three was never in consideration. That said, my 12 yo reeeeally likes the neighbors' Oculus. He also knows my stance on anything tied to Facebook Meta: no dice. So he's hoping Apple's offering isn't too expensive. We shall see.

As I stated earlier, gaming is likely a port of entry. A feature. makes sense. But I think the platform holds much more potential than just gaming. And I bet Apple agrees. Besides, when has gaming ever been their strong suit? Exactly. Their sights are set well beyond "gaming accessory." Time will tell.

I've been wrong any times. Might be here. Not at all phased. Again, it's kind of the main purpose of this site: use your imagination, connect the dots, follow the bread crumbs and ponder potentials. Oh, and also have fun.

 

[robbietop]

Why wouldn't I be talking about an eventual tiered offering before v1 has landed? This is a rumor site, silly. Pondering potentials is kind of the whole point. It's not like a tiered lineup is some bizarro concept few can wrap their brains around - Apple quite literally offers tiered lineups for almost every single one of their products. Should these goggles prove worthy, the platform well-received, you can bet apple already has plans on how they can evolve and expand this category. They're not literally making one thing and then, finger crossed, seeing what happens. They're investing in a platform they feel has legs, independent of wether it works for me, you, your family.

As far as the kids watching daddy play and wanting their own... Unless you are in the bracket that can get everyone in the family their own $2,500 toy, then, like the rest of us, "taking turns" is a critical skill us parents owe our kids to at the very least, understand. Personally, I'm hoping Apple's offering includes user profiles (not unlike macOS). Recent rumors even suggest those profiles will be accessible via rental scan - something, while cool, I'll believe when I see. lol

If rumors about pricing prove accurate, I'm not even sure one will be an option for me. To be clear, three was never in consideration. That said, my 12 yo reeeeally likes the neighbors' Oculus. He also knows my stance on anything tied to Facebook Meta: no dice. So he's hoping Apple's offering isn't too expensive. We shall see.

As I stated earlier, gaming is likely a port of entry. A feature. makes sense. But I think the platform holds much more potential than just gaming. And I bet Apple agrees. Besides, when has gaming ever been their strong suit? Exactly. Their sights are set well beyond "gaming accessory." Time will tell.

I've been wrong any times. Might be here. Not at all phased. Again, it's kind of the main purpose of this site: use your imagination, connect the dots, follow the brad crumbs and ponder potentials. Oh, and also have fun.

Yeah, but what does everyone else do while someone is playing with it? Do other things?
I get that, but it's not really appealing from a family perspective.

And if the recent news about Meta's simulation and the collapse of NFTs, I am a betting man that AR will simply just be what Google Glass showed it was way back when.

I get the use case for Google Glass. It made perfect sense, but the price and a less social society was worried about privacy implications. We now live in a radically different world.

I do not see how VR anything moves beyond gaming. AR in a Google Glass way would make more sense, like SnapChat glasses, etc with a functional use case beyond gaming. But a Virtual World just makes no sense to anyone with commitments outside of that world. My boss would not be happy with me sitting around playing with my VR headset all day. Which leaves time at home, where I am more focused on dinner, relaxing, and watching content with everyone together. I just don't see VR going anywhere out of the gaming sphere.