So, Apple Glass is real. Your AR ideas?

Would you use AR glasses with the features in the OP?

  • Yes

  • No


Results are only viewable after voting.

mattspace

macrumors 65816
Jun 5, 2013
1,430
1,086
Australia
Forget the fact that it looks like a space helmet and has basically a laptop PC strapped to your head for a second (the apple version won't be like that, it will likely be just a wireless display for your iPad. the MS version won't be like that either, its still a developer device) - but some of the technology demos they have are awesome.
Folks need to temper their enthusiasm with an understanding that the size of current VR & AR headsets is about as small as they *can* be - you're not going to see a product from Apple that's anything like a set of wrap-around Oakleys, with a clear OLED layer to give you a heads-up display on the world.

The only reason VR or AR work in a near-eye display, is because of the lens systems that correct for the display being well inside the minimum focus distance for human eyes. That stuff isn't easily miniaturisable - it's a physics problem, not an engineering problem.

The "space helmet" aspect of it isn't going away. Just like pencils can't be much smaller than a normal pencil, because of the limitations of human hands.
 

MandiMac

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Feb 25, 2012
1,225
635
Folks need to temper their enthusiasm with an understanding that the size of current VR & AR headsets is about as small as they *can* be - you're not going to see a product from Apple that's anything like a set of wrap-around Oakleys, with a clear OLED layer to give you a heads-up display on the world.

The only reason VR or AR work in a near-eye display, is because of the lens systems that correct for the display being well inside the minimum focus distance for human eyes. That stuff isn't easily miniaturisable - it's a physics problem, not an engineering problem.

The "space helmet" aspect of it isn't going away. Just like pencils can't be much smaller than a normal pencil, because of the limitations of human hands.
Exactly. That‘s why we won‘t see a headset before 2022, sadly. But we can look forward to it :)
 

mattspace

macrumors 65816
Jun 5, 2013
1,430
1,086
Australia
Exactly. That‘s why we won‘t see a headset before 2022, sadly. But we can look forward to it :)
What I'm more getting at is that the sorts of things being dreamed up by the Apple blogosphere / rumoursphere may not be possible ever. It may well end up being a fundamental limit of physics that you can't make a screen & optics system more compact than current VR headsets, just by virtue of how much distance the lenses need to have space to work, to correct & refocus light onto your retinas.

Heads-up-display glasses might just end up being a science fiction trope, like faster-than-light travel.
 

MandiMac

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Feb 25, 2012
1,225
635
What I'm more getting at is that the sorts of things being dreamed up by the Apple blogosphere / rumoursphere may not be possible ever. It may well end up being a fundamental limit of physics that you can't make a screen & optics system more compact than current VR headsets, just by virtue of how much distance the lenses need to have space to work, to correct & refocus light onto your retinas.

Heads-up-display glasses might just end up being a science fiction trope, like faster-than-light travel.
Yeah, sure, there's a lot that's not possible yet. But I remember times where a telecommunicator was science fiction as well ;) And Apple is undisputed king of miniaturization, who knows what happens in the next 20-30 years?
 

mattspace

macrumors 65816
Jun 5, 2013
1,430
1,086
Australia
Yeah, sure, there's a lot that's not possible yet. But I remember times where a telecommunicator was science fiction as well ;) And Apple is undisputed king of miniaturization, who knows what happens in the next 20-30 years?
You're assuming it's miniaturisation problem, from what I understand, it's not. It's more akin to "travel faster than the speed of light" than it is to "make a smaller vacuum tube".

There's a good reason why camera lenses haven't had any appreciable miniaturisation within existing sensor / film sizes - the physics of optics don't have any low-hanging fruit left.
 

MandiMac

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Feb 25, 2012
1,225
635
You're assuming it's miniaturisation problem, from what I understand, it's not. It's more akin to "travel faster than the speed of light" than it is to "make a smaller vacuum tube".

There's a good reason why camera lenses haven't had any appreciable miniaturisation within existing sensor / film sizes - the physics of optics don't have any low-hanging fruit left.
It‘s a question of what we expect - I‘m referring to a version 1 of these Apple Glasses, not of what the forum is dreaming about. Sure we won‘t get each and every feature, but still we‘re gonna see what happens next :)
 

mattspace

macrumors 65816
Jun 5, 2013
1,430
1,086
Australia
It‘s a question of what we expect - I‘m referring to a version 1 of these Apple Glasses, not of what the forum is dreaming about. Sure we won‘t get each and every feature, but still we‘re gonna see what happens next :)
I don't think Apple would produce a VR headset (immersion is a GPU arms race they can't compete in with a boat-anchor like AMD), and portable reality-mediating glasses are not going to happen, 'cause physics.

Look at Leap Motion's Project Northstar - a lot of that is about as small as it can be, not because of component sizes, but because projected distance is necessary for focus, and broadness is necessary field of view - most of the size of the thing is empty space.

What I could see Apple doing is making a 3D version of the XDR display, that uses the same sort of glasses tech that 3DTVs use - that's a marketable (for Apple) workflow - design in 3D, but still on a 2D monitor in a 2D UI paradigm, then shift the "object" to a mapped physical location for portable AR on an iPad / iPhone screen.
 

MandiMac

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Feb 25, 2012
1,225
635
I don't think Apple would produce a VR headset (immersion is a GPU arms race they can't compete in with a boat-anchor like AMD), and portable reality-mediating glasses are not going to happen, 'cause physics.

Look at Leap Motion's Project Northstar - a lot of that is about as small as it can be, not because of component sizes, but because projected distance is necessary for focus, and broadness is necessary field of view - most of the size of the thing is empty space.

What I could see Apple doing is making a 3D version of the XDR display, that uses the same sort of glasses tech that 3DTVs use - that's a marketable (for Apple) workflow - design in 3D, but still on a 2D monitor in a 2D UI paradigm, then shift the "object" to a mapped physical location for portable AR on an iPad / iPhone screen.
A VR headset would only be feasible with lots of GPU power behind it, so that‘s nothing like Apple Glasses. And who knows how good Apple‘s own graphics are? Let‘s assume they switch to ARM in 2021, maybe the graphics will be better than AMD‘s and NVIDIA‘s in 2022?

Isn‘t Leap Motion in serious deep trouble as of now? UltraHaptics isn‘t exactly a big player as far as I know...

We will see what Apple brings to the table. I think we will be both surprised and delighted, just like with Apple Watch :)
 

mattspace

macrumors 65816
Jun 5, 2013
1,430
1,086
Australia
A VR headset would only be feasible with lots of GPU power behind it, so that‘s nothing like Apple Glasses. And who knows how good Apple‘s own graphics are? Let‘s assume they switch to ARM in 2021, maybe the graphics will be better than AMD‘s and NVIDIA‘s in 2022?

Isn‘t Leap Motion in serious deep trouble as of now? UltraHaptics isn‘t exactly a big player as far as I know...

We will see what Apple brings to the table. I think we will be both surprised and delighted, just like with Apple Watch :)
Magic Leap - the great AR Ponzi Scheme is in deep trouble now, Leap Motion is more or less insulated against anything as they're opensourcing their headsets, as the hand tracking is the really major tech in terms of making AR work.

Frankly I think the idea that Apple will be able to produce graphics silicone as performant as Nvidia to be pretty laughable - they've tried once already and had to go crawling back to their previous A-series GPU provider because they couldn't invent the necessary IP themselves.

This is the other big misconception about immersive AR, that it can be done with mobile devices, because an iOS device can do it's cut-down 2D version. Immersion, and 3D stereo separation with the sort of graphical fidelity that's necessary to buy the "wear it on your face" inconvenience needs BIG graphics horsepower - we've seen what happens when companies try to make PC-Free AR systems - Magic Leap, it was a monstous pile of garbage, that didn't come remotely close to the graphical fidelity, or field of view they conned investors with in their faked demos / promotional videos.

On top of all of this, I keep coming back to the inconvenient truth - people get surgery on their eyes to avoid wearing glasses indoors or at night.
 
  • Like
Reactions: a2jack

tkukoc

Cancelled
Sep 16, 2014
1,533
1,914
I am one of those who just isn't into VR/AR at all. I've looked at current tech, played with tons of stuff. Heck, even got involved in coding some applications. But in the end I just feel the technology isn't there yet. Some stuff looks so good and works like it should but other stuff still reminds me of Nintendo 64 graphics.. I'm not trying to bash anyone who is interested.. I get it.. new tech is new tech. I just hope someone comes along and changes the game, maybe it will be Apple.. maybe not. I just don't think the technology is quite there yet to make things work well... but also my expectations are probably through the roof. And yes.. if Apple releases anything, I'll give it a go.. i'm a fanboy.. :) :apple:
 

MandiMac

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Feb 25, 2012
1,225
635
Some stuff looks so good and works like it should but other stuff still reminds me of Nintendo 64 graphics.. I'm not trying to bash anyone who is interested.. I get it.. new tech is new tech.
Yeah, you're right - for games it's really not there yet. But AR could be a game-changer, if you take Maps for instance. The graphics on the phone aren't anything to write home about, but it would be so useful.
 

cambookpro

Contributor
Feb 3, 2010
6,768
2,376
United Kingdom
What I'm more getting at is that the sorts of things being dreamed up by the Apple blogosphere / rumoursphere may not be possible ever. It may well end up being a fundamental limit of physics that you can't make a screen & optics system more compact than current VR headsets, just by virtue of how much distance the lenses need to have space to work, to correct & refocus light onto your retinas.

Heads-up-display glasses might just end up being a science fiction trope, like faster-than-light travel.
Have you seen the North Focals? That's what I imagine what Apple's version might roughly look like. Trading off field of view and graphical complexity for a more fashionable/wearable look.
 
  • Like
Reactions: a2jack and MandiMac

MandiMac

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Feb 25, 2012
1,225
635
Have you seen the North Focals? That's what I imagine what Apple's version might roughly look like. Trading off field of view and graphical complexity for a more fashionable/wearable look.
Yeah, this and a starting price of 399. That would be classic Apple.
 

mattspace

macrumors 65816
Jun 5, 2013
1,430
1,086
Australia
Have you seen the North Focals? That's what I imagine what Apple's version might roughly look like. Trading off field of view and graphical complexity for a more fashionable/wearable look.
Anything other than a full peripheral field of view, with pristine graphics, is a tech demo to attract VC funding, not a product.

Full FOV and easy to read text is the minimum viable product, which is why Magic Leap failed.

The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that (if it exists) it will be an accessory for a 3D XDR display, possibly even an accessory to make an iPad screen 3d - you point the iPad at the table, where the AR object is positioned, the iPad generates the AR image, your glasses then make the iPad screen look 3D) - it will be a thing to mediate your existing monitors and 2D paradigm into 3D, not a display in itself.
 
Last edited:

cambookpro

Contributor
Feb 3, 2010
6,768
2,376
United Kingdom
Anything other than a full peripheral field of view, with pristine graphics, is a tech demo to attract VC funding, not a product.

Full FOV and easy to read text is the minimum viable product, which is why Magic Leap failed.
I wouldn’t let perfect be the enemy of good. North’s product was widely praised. The Verge, who seem to review pretty fairly, gave the second generation a 7/10 with the main problems being the software and charging requirement. The former I’m sure Apple has the expertise to solve; the latter, as with the Apple Watch, will probably just be a fact of smart glasses for now.

I think full FOV is not an absolute requirement for a companion device to show notifications, overlay map directions, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MandiMac

mattspace

macrumors 65816
Jun 5, 2013
1,430
1,086
Australia
NextVR was an immersive video company, specialising in broadcasting sports, not really a VR company. Apple has an immersive video workflow in FCPX, and Eddie Cue is a basketball nut. It makes sense as an acquisition.

But I still don’t buy the “slimline” glasses claim.

People claimed to have seen eGPU-displays, Apple Cars, AirPower Mats etc.
 

MandiMac

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Feb 25, 2012
1,225
635
NextVR was an immersive video company, specialising in broadcasting sports, not really a VR company. Apple has an immersive video workflow in FCPX, and Eddie Cue is a basketball nut. It makes sense as an acquisition.

But I still don’t buy the “slimline” glasses claim.

People claimed to have seen eGPU-displays, Apple Cars, AirPower Mats etc.
Well, Jon Prosser has seen them and said they are sleek as hell. Additionally:
DFA7C4F1-9BC2-4583-9563-9A7556ED365B.jpeg
 

MandiMac

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Feb 25, 2012
1,225
635
Oh, and identification apps like iNaturalist or maybe Google Image Reverse Search could profit immensely from Apple Glasses. So much potential.

EDIT: Just listened to Jon Prosser‘s podcast called Recycle Bin (episode 20). He basically confirms that Apple Glasses don‘t look spacy or funky, nothing like Google Glass or Focals by North. Starboard will be used with your eyes and your hands - so this could be like Heavy Rain‘s implementation of the agent who uses AR after all. Still we shouldn‘t expect too much for version 1, much like the OG Apple Watch or OG iPad.
 
Last edited:

mattspace

macrumors 65816
Jun 5, 2013
1,430
1,086
Australia
Well, Jon Prosser has seen them and said they are sleek as hell. Additionally:
I don't believe that Apple has a product that is actually useful, while also not being the size of Hololens / VR headset.

John Prosser can say what he likes - there used to be an "apple leaker" who was considered credible by the Apple blogaratti (Gruber etc would reference them, and talk with them on Twitter), claimed to work at Apple, and to have personally worked with and on their fabled eGPU display.

No product ever happened.

If sleek AR glasses that are actually useful were possible, a specialist company would have them by now. When you look at Hololens, or Leap Motion / Ultraleap's Project Northstar, most of the size is taken up by the optical path, not components that can be miniaturised.

My understanding is the problem is more an "Airpower Mat", than it is a "Smaller bezels on the Macbook Pro" problem. But, we'll see - if there's no product, the rumour is going to need to be addressed eventually, the way they eventually used their pet Rene Ritchie for the eGPU Display.
- - Post merged: - -

Oh, and identification apps like iNaturalist or maybe Google Image Reverse Search could profit immensely from Apple Glasses. So much potential.
Potential to be banned from operating in almost every environment. If there's any outward-facing cameras on them, the hottest selling item for the next few years will be signs for venues and workplaces with "No iCreepers", "No Creeper Glasses" etc. And people hoping for HUD functionality etc while driving - not going to happen in a lot of jurisdictions - hell where I live, people lose a quarter of their driver's licence demerit points, and up to $1000 fine (iirc) for glancing at the time on an Apple Watch unless their car is parked, with the handbrake on (same for operating a GPS, or eating while driving, all on the basis of visual distraction).
 
Last edited:

MandiMac

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Feb 25, 2012
1,225
635
If sleek AR glasses that are actually useful were possible, a specialist company would have them by now. When you look at Hololens, or Leap Motion / Ultraleap's Project Northstar, most of the size is taken up by the optical path, not components that can be miniaturised.

Potential to be banned from operating in almost every environment. If there's any outward-facing cameras on them, the hottest selling item for the next few years will be signs for venues and workplaces with "No iCreepers", "No Creeper Glasses" etc. And people hoping for HUD functionality etc while driving - not going to happen in a lot of jurisdictions - hell where I live, people lose a quarter of their driver's licence demerit points, and up to $1000 fine (iirc) for glancing at the time on an Apple Watch unless their car is parked, with the handbrake on (same for operating a GPS, or eating while driving, all on the basis of visual distraction).
They got the eGPU thing wrong, sh*t happens. Still there are AR glasses out there like Google Glass or Focals by North (https://www.bynorth.com/), so there's that.

We'll see what the future brings, I wouldn't bank on visible outwards facing cameras here. It's more about the display though.
 

mattspace

macrumors 65816
Jun 5, 2013
1,430
1,086
Australia
They got the eGPU thing wrong, sh*t happens. Still there are AR glasses out there like Google Glass or Focals by North (https://www.bynorth.com/), so there's that.

We'll see what the future brings, I wouldn't bank on visible outwards facing cameras here. It's more about the display though.
Glass was a half-postage-stamp square (that obscured everything else) suspended in the same place in your vision, it's nothing like what people are ascribing to an Apple AR headset (pervasive HUD for real life).

Focals doesn't have a single image, or video, showing what the user's actual perspective through them is, and I can't find a single image of what the world actually looks like through them in any of the "reviews" online. It looks like the exact same story we had with Magic Leap - "demonstration purposes" images to "illustrate" the effect, but no actual video of it, despite glowing reviews of how amazing it was. Once the product was released, we saw that Magic Leap was no better than a ponzi scam.

Now, compare that with Leap Motion / Ultraleap - who have actual through-the-glasses footage:



But to get that field of view you need a headset this big:

iu.jpeg


Frankly, I think Prosser is either flat out lying, or he's being played.
 
  • Like
Reactions: a2jack

MandiMac

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Feb 25, 2012
1,225
635
Now, compare that with Leap Motion / Ultraleap - who have actual through-the-glasses footage:
I‘m pretty sure that Apple Glasses won‘t be anything like Leap Motion/Ultraleap. Basing on what we/Prosser know so far, is more of a guidance display and not so much a full-fledged AR experience like in your videos. That‘s a MR (mixed reality) headset in my book what Leap Motion was cooking up there. We‘ll know soon enough :)
 

ridgero

macrumors regular
Dec 16, 2017
142
262
It would be the first time in the history of humans, that almost every corner of the world will be video recorded.

Thats alarming
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.