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.
What to Expect From WWDC 2023: AR/VR Headset, 15-Inch MacBook Air, Mac Studio, iOS 17, xrOS, macOS 14 and More
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Showing the mixed reality headset is part of the development process All the mechanics and basic software are in place and now it’s time for the developers to create their side of the headsets which is the Apps
So what we see on Monday is more for the developers
So what we see on Monday is more for the developers
So what? If the special use cases don't sell the headset in volume, something has to or the whole endeavor fails...which takes us back to the question, what is the use case that drives millions and millions of people to spend several thousand dollars on this headset?
I don't see the Newton analogy. The Newton was cool. My friend had one and I remember playing around with it. But how did the Newton pay off a decade later? The Newton was a total flop and Palm paved the way for future hand-held devices like the iPhone. I'm curious to know how you think the Newton paid off for Apple.
Every structural engineer...how many units will that sell? A few hundred thousand? You're just throwing out more fantasy special use cases. Furthermore, like in medicine, I think we'll see purpose-built solutions for these kinds of applications. People bring up AR surgery when they fantasize about this headset. There are some very interesting AR surgery solutions out there already. They are purpose built, FDA approved, etc. Apple's headset will likely never be used in this way because Apple simply won't jump through all the regulatory hoops (just as they haven't with the Watch).
Plus who is going to develop all of these apps for the structural engineers (or whatever other special use case you dream up)? These apps will have very limited appeal, so what's the incentive for a developer to devote time and resources to an app with a very limited potential customer base?
Again, what does the Newton have to do with this? It was a flop. Other devices like Palm were successful and paved the way for personal communication devices. How did the Newton pay off? How has Apple built upon or used Newton tech?
It's a huge red flag. The fact that no "killer app" has emerged on other AR/VR platforms is also very telling.
The external battery pack doesn't really worry me. Eventually that will go away. The bigger worry is the lack of mainstream use cases that motivate buyers and developers. No one will care about the external battery pack if there's a compelling use case. The problem is, no one has come up with one.
Agreed. I was just speaking with a customer at work last night who asked me to read something because he'd forgotten his reading glasses...which led to a brief conversation about how he hates having to wear glasses, etc. There's a reason a lot of people choose contact lenses.
It's a ridiculous use case. I get it for certain situations. Would it be nice to have a big virtual screen when I'm on a plane or riding the subway? Sure. Do I want to sit at my desk with goggles on in order to use a virtual monitor? Absolutely not. Even if someone is ok with wearing goggles all day, I think the pass-through video will be a problem for many people. Video just doesn't feel real.
I started with an Apple IIc. I abandoned the Mac for NeXT in college, but returned to Apple when Jobs and NeXT took over.
I think there's a path to success for the headset and, in my mind, that is gaming. It's the only use case that has motivated people to buy these kinds of products. Apple has been pushing AR for years, yet there isn't a single "must have" AR app on the iPhone. By far the most successful AR app has been...wait for it...Pokemon Go, a game! Shocker. The problem is, Apple has never understood gaming. Apple Arcade and the Apple TV make it clear that they still don't understand gaming. So I have very little hope that things will change with the headset.
Same here. There's absolutely nothing I can think of that would make me buy these goggles. I hope to be surprised and hope that someone out there will show me a really cool use case, but if the ideas tossed around on these forums are any indication, that's not going to happen.
They don't need to sell millions of this headset for it to be a strategic success. If Apple has any vision for VR/AR glasses then the very first thing they need to do is get some hardware into the hands of developers and actually start shipping hardware that people can work with.
This is a developer conference and the product they're really launching is the development framework to developers. xrOS or whatever it ends up being called is the announcement tomorrow, not this specific iteration of the hardware.
Of course they need it to sell millions of units. Otherwise no one will develop for it. Look at Apple TV. The Apple TV App Store is pathetic. The Watch sells millions and millions of units per year and many developers are abandoning it anyway. Get real. Without sales volume, no one develops for it. Without developers and apps, who buys this thing?
Really? Do you work for Apple and are you violating your NDA? Or are you just making stuff up on the internet?
If you're correct, that means all of the rumors are wrong. They're going to show a product and whatever product ultimately ships will be very similar to what we see on Monday.
Respectfully, I think you're totally wrong in this regard. They don't need this iteration of the hardware to be a huge commercial success in order for their long term vision for the market to be a success.
Beyond that, I shared what I thought just like you've been doing in this thread. You really seem worked up over this issue and frankly I don't care to match your snark and spittle on the subject. We'll know a lot more in 24 hours either way.
One has to be prepared that everything in the press is wrong. Making all kind of assumptions about what Apple is doing and using has been modeled from other companies hardware and software. Just suppose Apple really has considered what you said last. It's all about the developers and their apps and how it can expand how we connect via online. I admit early on I thought of all the various forms of glasses and headsets, but that as you mention requires marketplace penetration of some hardware which could take a long time to build up. It would be way better for Apple to leverage what everyone has already and can add to it as necessary.
Snark and spittle, lol. Unlike the fans who have their heads so far you know where, I'm being realistic. Of course Apple needs this iteration to be successful. They've spent billions on R&D. This a massive release for them, not some "hobby" like the Apple TV. The fact is, headset fans haven't been able to articulate a single mainstream use case that sells this product. No mainstream use case (besides gaming) has emerged on other platforms either.
I might be wrong and some developer out there might dream up an amazing use case that gets millions of people to buy this thing...and I could also win the lottery. Headset fans keep telling us we need to wait for developers to develop cool apps before we see the full potential. I'm still waiting for that to happen on Apple TV. The profound lack of imagination by headset fans on these threads is very telling. If this idea is so amazing, all of you should be able to come up with a laundry list of ideas that motivate people to buy this thing.
I don't understand why you seem so angry about this. Surely there's a middle ground.
I'll just go back to having my head up my ass I guess and you can continue yelling at people for disagreeing with you.
Except that it rarely is. Look at past Apple launches and rumors. They aren't always 100% accurate, but they are never totally wrong, or even 50% wrong.
I don't think people want to wear goggles strapped to their faces in order to connect online. It's all about developers and apps, agreed. Which is why the headset needs to sell a lot of units. Otherwise there's no incentive for a developer to develop. As I've said, just take a look at the Apple TV App Store. Apple promised us all these great new experiences on our TVs. Where are they, many many years later?
If the price is really in the neighborhood of $3K, it will be a very tough sell.
No one develops for the Apple TV or for the Apple Watch right? How does Apple sell those devices in the millions of units then if there aren't killer apps for them? Surely they should be flops right?
I think the concept of The Killer App at this point is pretty stupid. Sure, there will be a couple standout rad apps that people will end up referencing as potential reasons to buy a new device, but how it feels to use a thing is what ultimately determines whether or not a platform has a future.
I'm not angry at all. That's you reading into things. I have strong opinions in general and I back them up. All I see from the headset fans is fantasy and glitter...no substance. I'm still waiting for someone to give me a use case that sells millions of these units and incentivizes developers to embrace the platform. Instead all I get is misdirection and pithy dismissive responses.
I'd also argue there is no middle ground for a product that Apple has spent billions of dollars and many many years developing.
Wow, you can't handle anyone who disagrees with you, huh? Instead of ascribing non-existent feelings and motivations to me, why don't you tell me what kind of app/experience convinces millions of people to spend a few thousand dollars on this headset?
I wonder what I’ll see tomorrow that will seem extraordinary today but will be completely normal in 5 year’s time. Exciting to imagine.
I'm planning on selling most of my Apple Stock first thing Monday morning. Typically, since these events tend to be underwhelming, the stock takes a hit. I think this year Tim won't be able to control himself and will follow the business model of Bud Light and Target. This will also push the stock price down.
As far as anything new, I predict new emoji's and new multicolored watch bands and watch faces.
As far as anything new, I predict new emoji's and new multicolored watch bands and watch faces.
Disagree. We’ve already seen Apple try to do this sort of thing before and it has failed every single time. Apple specializes in refining pre-existing hot market segments. AR/VR is not a hot market segment anymore. In order to be successful in that segment Apple needs to basically create the demand from the ground up. Something Apple has NEVER been good at.
Since the last time that happened for Apple was over a decade ago I doubt many people will be holding their breath.
New product categories don’t come every day. Even the watch is more of an accessory than a product category on its own. I am predicting a pinch to zoom moment with the headset. Something that seems so obvious yet has not been done or done with any level of competence as of yet.
The Apple TV is arguably a fail. My point about the Watch is, even with millions of sales, developers aren't excited about it. That said, neither of these products needs a lot of third party development. Apps on the TV never happened, but the important stuff, the streaming video apps, are all there. Apple TV is cheap too. The Watch is also pretty affordable and, even with no third party apps, it offers a lot of benefits. Being able to quickly check a message without looking at your phone is a nice feature. Once Apple figured out that the Watch would never be a fashion item and pivoted to it being a fitness device, it took off.
No. They sell because the built-in functionality is enough and the price is right. If you're in the Apple ecosystem and you want a streaming box for your TV, of course you choose Apple TV. The Watch augments the iPhone experience and prevents you from having to dig for your phone.
Could Apple deliver enough built-in functionality with the headset that apps don't really matter? Maybe, but I don't see it and nothing I've read on forums or in the press makes me feel any differently.
When I say "killer app", I don't mean one particular app, but a killer application/use for the device. The Watch's "killer app" is fitness. The more expensive a product, the more important a "killer app" becomes.
I’m not sure this is really a response to my comment. I am not predicting that Apple will ultimately succeed with this product, I just don’t think that the hardware announced tomorrow has to be a mainstream viable product or it’s all over for Apple.
You may be right that Apple will fail at this, whatever it is they believe they are building towards. I just don’t think it all rests on the hardware we see tomorrow.
I think the quality and the scope of the os/api is really the interesting leading indicator that we’ll see as WWDC unfolds next week. That’s where I believe the most interesting things to be learned are.
Apple TV failed as a PLATFORM. But it’s perfectly competent as a commodity. It streams the major services and it advertises for Apple content. To that extent it’s a success. But that’s a vastly different metric than what applies to a platform.
Straw man. We didn’t say “all over for Apple.” The argument is that this specific product appears to be a massive gamble with little to no indication that it’ll pay off.
Except that it does because if it fails out of the gate the product is essentially tainted going forward. Look at HomePod. It failed out of the gate and Apple has been playing catch-up with it ever since.
We’ll see…