But you haven’t even see it lol. This better be a great product.It’s not for me, thanks tho x
Totally agree.I agree. They have a record unlike any other tech company. I just don't think that the comparison with the iPod is as apt as people are making it out to be. For one, a lot of those comments seem to be a bunch of tech nerds disappointed that Apple was making a product so mainstream (in what they saw as a saturated market) and not niche enough. In other words, the exact opposite of what the "headset detractors" are saying (that the product is too niche and will only appeal to tech nerds). Playing music portably was already a popular thing when the iPod came out. VR is still not mainstream (not at the level of Apple's other product categories), and what appeal it does have is mostly in gaming (something Apple doesn't have traction in outside of mobile gaming). Apple redefined the category with the iPad and the iPad is still essentially the only viable tablet out there. But it starts at an affordable price and always did. When it came out, a lot of people dismissed it as a "big iPhone" and honestly, it kinda was that when it first came out. It took a while for it to grow into the laptop replacement it is today and its strengths over a laptop (like for creatives with the Pencil) began to be apparent.
So I guess this could be the next iPod/iPad, who knows. If it does get to that point, it won't be at that price. 🤷♂️
I’m sorry but the iPhone costed 4 times what any decent phone would have costed. Nobody cared though because the device was revolutionary, there was nothing like it in the market. That’s what people expect of this device, to leapfrog the competition and revolutionize the market. Of course if it’s anything like the Apple Watch (overpriced with no advantages over the competition) then this will be a failure.If that rumored $3000 price is real; no it won’t be a hit.
End of the day, you price high like that, you’ve got a niche product regardless of how cool it is.
The iPad, iPhone and iPod were wildly successful because they were cool, addressed a fairly ubiquitous use case, AND met a psychological, accessible price point.
Once you’re pricing north of $2000, the amount of possible buyers for anything “inessential” drops off a cliff.
The Apple Watch Series 7 is the best selling smartwatch. that's pretty good for a failure.Of course if it’s anything like the Apple Watch (overpriced with no advantages over the competition) then this will be a failure.
Sure, there are some people that are comfortable with that and there are others that look for excellence.The Apple Watch Series 7 is the best selling smartwatch. that's pretty good for a failure.
You suspect? Tim Cook has been saying that for more than half a decade.I suspect Apple's real interest is in AR. VR will come along for the ride and be a nice secondary market.
The OG iPhone pricing was in line with what cell phones cost if you didn't get them subsidized by a carrier (some argued that it was actually cheaper than outright buying some devices). The 100/200 (I think it was a while ago) price drop that happened a month or two after it came out wasn't great feeling either. Clearly it wasn't enough because they decided to participate in the subsidized phone model for the 3G.I’m sorry but the iPhone costed 4 times what any decent phone would have costed. Nobody cared though because the device was revolutionary, there was nothing like it in the market. That’s what people expect of this device, to leapfrog the competition and revolutionize the market. Of course if it’s anything like the Apple Watch (overpriced with no advantages over the competition) then this will be a failure.
One thing I will give you though is that the iPhone was revolutionizing an stablished mainstream market while this device is actually going to start it.
Wow, this rumor just never dies, and keeps using the same old render.
My favorite quote from that thread: "The Reality Distiortion Field is starting to warp Steve's mind if he thinks for one second that this thing is gonna take off." 😌Wow, that was an enlightening read. Everyone on these forums should be required to read that thread before posting.
Totally agree.
AR/VR sees nowhere near the same mainstream use as activities like listening to music or making phone calls. Thus, I do not at all believe Apple’s HUD will see the same adoption rates as iPod or iPhone. ESPECIALLY not at $3k.
That said, I’ve dabbled a little bit in the Oculus space. And even then, the potential there is undeniable. I completely see a scenario where Apple could dip a toe in that world and open it up to a much larger audience than is currently present (yes, even at the $3k price point). And like other Apple offerings, there will eventually come cheaper, more entry-level options of their HUD, capturing even AR/VR-curious dollar possible. And that’s when more mainstream engagement that segment will likely accelerate. But v1 is specifically targeting the hard core Apple nerd with the bank account that facilitates early adoption.
Always nice to see when Apple expands their line of products, but I’m not sure how would their market it. Probably end up like Airpods Max, a nice headphones you don’t really need, and if you do, there’s (imo better) alternatives to consider.
The VR market is very different from the headphones market. There are already a ton of headphones offerings at every price point, and limited potential for audio quality improvements that consumers will care about. The model of Sony headphones I use have been manufactured for almost 40 years now. The wireless headphones market is smaller, but few people care about the audio quality difference between a $200 and $400 set. A VR device is a whole new computer platform with tons of room for improvement, not just a single-purpose device in a mature market.All price dependent. Not everything apple does is a home run. Take the HomePod and airpod max for example. Over priced for the market and not everyone falls for the apple tax.
30 years ago, we couldn’t even render simple polygonal 3D scenes in real-time at a decent frame rate.30 years of experience with VR things, they are always the next big thing, they are always ready but in the end nobody wanted them and nobody really used them. I mean there is an entire episode of Murder She Wrote which plays in the VR world: That Time Murder, She Wrote Took On VIRTUAL REALITY
The iPod wasn’t a hit at its original price.Sorry, but a $3000 headset is not going to be the next iPod. Pretty hilarious that anyone thinks it’s an apt comparison.
All VR will have AR features in the near future… it will scan your environment and you will be able to choose to view your real environment within the VR environment.AR - Yes
VR - No thanks
Yeah, I’d like to see a render with a CG head wearing this concept. The geometry doesn’t see to fit with any face.i think the render is updated. same crappy design without even consideration for a nose (maybe our faces are wrong), but it looks shinier and crisp.
That just requires less than 5ms of latency. Apple GPUs are pretty good at low latency rendering.Unless Apple figures out the motion sickness issue some people (self included) have with VR, this is going to be a non-starter for some consumers.
I still expect it to end up being the best selling VR system though eventually.
Latency or frame time?That just requires less than 5ms of latency. Apple GPUs are pretty good at low latency rendering.
There is room at the high end that nobody else is targeting. It will be popular with creators making VR or 3D content, enterprise applications / visualizations, and gamers with money to burn. It will be interesting to see if Apple came up with other applications for launch. This is certainly a long term play. The Reality Pro with a consumer model coming later. If you’re not an enthusiast, that product is still years away.If that rumored $3000 price is real; no it won’t be a hit.
End of the day, you price high like that, you’ve got a niche product regardless of how cool it is.
The iPad, iPhone and iPod were wildly successful because they were cool, addressed a fairly ubiquitous use case, AND met a psychological, accessible price point.
Once you’re pricing north of $2000, the amount of possible buyers for anything “inessential” drops off a cliff.
Both ideally. Your eye refreshes every 5ms, so maximum frame rate is every 5ms that is behind reality no more then 5ms. 90 fps with no more then 5 ms lag and rendering with time-warp should be fine. Modern headsets already do a good job with this, I’d expect Apple’s headset will do better with the strength of their silicon. Eye tracking also helps to make sure IPD is correct.Latency or frame time?
Yeah but most people don’t spend 3k on a TV - you can get 4k 65” TVs for less than 1k and OLED TVs for not much more than 1kI get so tired of hearing comments like this, when people spend close to 3k on a high end iPhone, thousands on a new TV or AV equipment and thousands on computer hardware. YOU might not be able to afford it, but it will sell. People spend $US19 on an Apple rag!
Nobody else targeting? HoloLens has been out since 2016 (V2 2019) and are popular in the enterprise space. And A/VR creators are dependent on A/VR consumers - if it is a long play at $3k it will be a very long playThere is room at the high end that nobody else is targeting. It will be popular with creators making VR or 3D content, enterprise applications / visualizations, and gamers with money to burn. It will be interesting to see if Apple came up with other applications for launch. This is certainly a long term play. The Reality Pro with a consumer model coming later. If you’re not an enthusiast, that product is still years away.
Low field-of-view with only additive light just doesn’t have much use in that form factor, even if it were as cheap as an Oculus Quest.Yeah but most people don’t spend 3k on a TV - you can get 4k 65” TVs for less than 1k and OLED TVs for not much more than 1k
And Apple aren’t in the niche market - if they bring a product out they want to sell volume. They couldn’t even get us to part with $350 for a HomePod (an amazing product) so they killed it.
If we all had $3,000 to buy A/VR headsets, HoloLens would be selling like hot cakes.
100% agree. This is not going to be a consumer device initially. $3k is fine for business.There is room at the high end that nobody else is targeting. It will be popular with creators making VR or 3D content, enterprise applications / visualizations, and gamers with money to burn. It will be interesting to see if Apple came up with other applications for launch. This is certainly a long term play. The Reality Pro with a consumer model coming later. If you’re not an enthusiast, that product is still years away.