Why Apple's VR headset could succeed where every similar product has failed
On Monday, Apple is expected to announce its first new major product line since it unveiled the Apple Watch in 2014.
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.
Why Apple’s headset could succeed where every similar product has failed
- Thread starter vegetassj4
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I swear history is repeating itself just like it did with the iPhone, iPad, and Apple Watch. Watch, Apple Reality is gonna get revealed, there's gonna be a bunch of "It's gonna flop, no one is gonna buy it comments" and then it exceeds expectations despite it's high price tag, because it's a new Apple Product category. This always happens. Then a year or two later we get gen 2 that makes it considerably cheaper and that's when we hear all the naysayers disappear and get one.
Indeed, that is just the Apple community in general. As I always say, you don't need the Apple haters to hate on Apple any more as the existing Apple customers hating on Apple grows yoy.
That said:
For the first time, I am not so sure. VR is not something we lack today, there are decent examples out there and the market is reasonably good. The Meta Quest as an example has done pretty well.
With a niche product like this in their line-up that will appeal more within the existing Apple customer base than outside, they will have to pull something outstanding out of the hat. At the suggested price of no less than $1,999 that is a lot if it looks like it won't deliver what people want right out of the starting gate. We will find out next week.
I laugh at rumours the headset will focus on Gaming, media consumption and communication. Gaming will be a popular one, but Apple is not great at gaming (Arcade), attracting developers, good ones to a new product without strong sales is going to be even tougher than trying to convince developers to port games to ARM, hint, they are not really biting yet.
Media consumption, on a headset? Can't see it. Communications, I read a suggestion it will change the way you use Facetime. Not it won't, people are not going to put headsets on to Facetime..
I am on the fence about it. We will find out next week. I suspect though the event thread on here to be one of the worst in terms of product negativity whatever they announce on VR.
That's what people said about the iPhone. The smartphone was popularized by Blackberry and REM was considered the defacto smartphone brand. Then Apple came with the iPhone which at the time was the most expensive cell phone on the planet retailing at $500 (or $700 nowadays adjusting for inflation.) Not only that, but the first gen iPhone was exclusive to AT&T, and you had to be locked into an AT&T plan to even buy one. So it was the most expensive phone in the world and many laughed at the price tag, most notably then Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer, an interview that to this day is still mocked.
Then once the iPhone came out, it exceeded expectations despite it's high price tag, and it's unusual controls being just one touch screen. And where's REM now? The Blackberry was no more, as people stopped buying it and just bought iPhones instead, as if you had the money for a Blackberry you had the money for an iPhone. REM laughed at the iPhone and said "no one's gonna buy it we'll be fine" and now they're out of the smartphone industry entirely, becoming a security software vendor instead.
Microsoft also laughed at the iPhone, and now their Windows Phone operating systems are gone.
The only company that took the iPhone seriously was Google, as when they saw it, they had to restart all their plan and design Android, which is why they now comfortably share a duopoly with Apple in the mobile industry since they're the only ones who saw the writing on the wall.
The same will be with Meta. Yeah, they're the dominant player in the XR industry, but they're loaded with problems. From a bad CEO with Mark Zuckerberg, to terrible marketing, to a lack of software, to pissing off customers with bad decisions like killing popular multiplayer VR games like Echo VR, to focusing on "the metaverse" instead of delivering what customers wanted, which was good software experiences for the headset they bought and paid for. So if they don't adapt in the wake of Apple Reality, they're gonna end up like REM did.
There will probably be games on Apple Reality, but not the traditional VR ones we expect. The iPhone brought with it new games never possible before that utilize the touch screen. With Apple Reality we can see new games and experiences that utilize just your hands with no touch controls. With that, that opens up new possibilities since you're no longer confined to set controllers.
This is where you're wrong, as VR has proven to work for media consumption through the company Bigscreen. Bigscreen is the defacto platform for media consumption in VR, as you can watch all your streaming services from it, watch live TV from it, and even watch movies via Roku. Hell, a lot of movies even debut through Bigscreen, where you can pay a movie ticket price to watch a movie from your headset, in 3D no less. The experience of IMAX, all through a headset
The problem with media consumption through an HMD, is wearing the HMD. For long periods some people may get uncomfortable as they start to feel the weight of the headset. Bigscreen realized this which is why they made their own VR headset the Bigscreen Beyond, currently the lightest VR headset until Apple Reality comes out. The only downside is Bigscreen Beyond requires base stations, which requires a roomscale playspace, so that greatly increases the barrier to entry. It's why the VR community is very excited for Apple Reality as that headset would provide them the light VR media consumption experience they want with the only barrier to entry being the initial high price tag.
You should've seen the reaction to the iPad from people on MacRumors. When the iPad was unveiled people hated it, and thought it was unnecessary. "It just looks like a giant iPod Touch, that's twice the price of an iPod Touch. So why would I buy this over an iPod Touch?" In reality the larger screen made media consumption so much better, and there was so much you could do with more screen real estate in terms of apps.
People will hate the Apple Reality no matter what comes of it on Monday. It's what you do with that product that will change opinion. If you want to change opinions, exceed expectations.
That's what everyone starts with when there is any criticism of anything.
And there's a reason for that because time is a flat circle when it comes to Apple product reveals. This always happens
The dexterity of your hands doesn't matter as much when you aren't making direct physical contact with something. I would say that using hand tracking instead of motion controllers closes more options than it opens. In many of the best VR games, the controller becomes a grip for a club, racquet, gun, brush, sword, etc. Pretending to hold one of those items without holding anything does not work as well as holding a cylindrical controller in your hand(s) that you can directly manipulate.
There are some interesting games that take advantage of multitouch screens to do stuff that couldn't be done with gamepads or mouse and keyboard (here's a fun one I recently found http://cs.uwaterloo/~csk/slide/ ), but the majority of games I play would work as well or better with traditional controllers.
Sorry, but I'm not seeing the connection between the iPhone launch and the Headset launch as the same thing.
Putting price to the side for now.
Irrespective of anything else, Normal people going about their normal days, as they normally do.
Carrying a small device that you can contact others on, see the news, watch some short video's on, and pop in your pocket, it naturally a convenient and naturally functional device for billions all around the globe.
Wearing a device on the front of your face, held on with elastic straps isn't.
Will I wear something like that. 100% yes (indoors!)
Do I have a VR headset right now? Yes, Do I totally love the experience of being immersed in 3D yes.
May I also love the idea of pass thru to place virtual items in the real world? yes that also.
But I'm not your average consumer.
Other than for some gaming fun. I can't think of anyone I know who would want such a device to such an extent that they would pay anything like high end iPhone money for something.
Tech nerds sure, Some companies Sure, Apple Lovers sure but normal iPhone users........ Nope.
Note: I'm not saying never.
But to get normal people to wear this and for it to be a part of everyday life, it's going to need to develop into something that's not THAT far away from typical glasses. A little more bulky perhaps, but not crazy looking.
Putting price to the side for now.
Irrespective of anything else, Normal people going about their normal days, as they normally do.
Carrying a small device that you can contact others on, see the news, watch some short video's on, and pop in your pocket, it naturally a convenient and naturally functional device for billions all around the globe.
Wearing a device on the front of your face, held on with elastic straps isn't.
Will I wear something like that. 100% yes (indoors!)
Do I have a VR headset right now? Yes, Do I totally love the experience of being immersed in 3D yes.
May I also love the idea of pass thru to place virtual items in the real world? yes that also.
But I'm not your average consumer.
Other than for some gaming fun. I can't think of anyone I know who would want such a device to such an extent that they would pay anything like high end iPhone money for something.
Tech nerds sure, Some companies Sure, Apple Lovers sure but normal iPhone users........ Nope.
Note: I'm not saying never.
But to get normal people to wear this and for it to be a part of everyday life, it's going to need to develop into something that's not THAT far away from typical glasses. A little more bulky perhaps, but not crazy looking.
They will succeed because they play the long game, they have the capital to deploy, and they have an existing rich ecosystem of products and services.
The current crop of 5000 nit microOLED display glasses are a decent proposition and people seem to like them. There's only 500 nits by the time it is reflected back at your eyes though. They weigh 70-90 grams ( 2-3 ounces) and give you a 200-220 inch screen at 5 meters (16 feet).
They don't have a battery, so rely on a cord going to the iPhone or Mac. Some have a cord that goes to a battery pack. They do neat things like let you pin your Mac display in the room so it stays in the one spot.
They can be used in reasonably bright light, yet they don't obscure vision so you can still walk around seeing your surroundings a bit dimmer. Some work with shortsightedness without additional lenses. They are also not too expensive, about $450.
People seem to like them, and you don't look too bizarre wearing them. Ones like the Rokid Max, even the older nreal and newer Xreal ones. They all still have the accommodation-vergence problem, and I can't see how that's going to be solved by Apple.
https://global.rokid.com/products/rokid-max
https://www.xreal.com/air/
They don't have a battery, so rely on a cord going to the iPhone or Mac. Some have a cord that goes to a battery pack. They do neat things like let you pin your Mac display in the room so it stays in the one spot.
They can be used in reasonably bright light, yet they don't obscure vision so you can still walk around seeing your surroundings a bit dimmer. Some work with shortsightedness without additional lenses. They are also not too expensive, about $450.
People seem to like them, and you don't look too bizarre wearing them. Ones like the Rokid Max, even the older nreal and newer Xreal ones. They all still have the accommodation-vergence problem, and I can't see how that's going to be solved by Apple.
https://global.rokid.com/products/rokid-max
https://www.xreal.com/air/
Last edited:
Here's a simple question that needs an answer 
Apple of course would love, in time for AR/VR Glasses/Headset to be a mass consumer item.
Not as big as the iPhone, but still appealing to hundreds of millions of consumers.
Given that people will still probably want to own an iPhone as well, even if the headset could do everything, as it's just more practical to carry a phone all the time than wear something on your face all the time.
How much do we feel the headset needs to be in the future to gain mass adoption?
I feel for the hardware Apple seems to want to put into it that it would struggle to drop below $1000
Yet I also feel $1000 whilst affordable by many would still be too high a price for your typical consumer to justify along with their other products they currently own.
You thoughts?
Apple of course would love, in time for AR/VR Glasses/Headset to be a mass consumer item.
Not as big as the iPhone, but still appealing to hundreds of millions of consumers.
Given that people will still probably want to own an iPhone as well, even if the headset could do everything, as it's just more practical to carry a phone all the time than wear something on your face all the time.
How much do we feel the headset needs to be in the future to gain mass adoption?
I feel for the hardware Apple seems to want to put into it that it would struggle to drop below $1000
Yet I also feel $1000 whilst affordable by many would still be too high a price for your typical consumer to justify along with their other products they currently own.
You thoughts?
Lol no one said the iPhone would fail other than companies like Microsoft and RIM that were scared ******** of it. When iPad came out everyone assumed it would be $1k it was $500 and for every detractor there were plenty praising it. I suspect (hope) this device will be much cheaper than $3k and consumer focused. VR/AR is still an incredibly niche market. So were smart phones, tablets, and smart watches. In order for this to work this has to appeal the consumer first, developer later. In less Apple has completely lost their minds and way, this will likely completely change the game.
I think part of that $1000 thing may have been because people were initially expecting a Mac with a tablet form factor, and not a big iPod Touch. I think tablet computers of that era primarily ran the full version of Windows, not a mobile OS.
Sorry but I hate using controllers to point at every single letters to type something or clicking things or grabbing something or moving something... basically anything besides holding something. 9 out 10 hand tracking is much more convenient.
Sure, hand tracking is more convenient.
But if you want to draw a picture on an iPad, a Pencil gives you more control than a finger. VR controllers are like a stylus.
Using laser pointers for typing is not a great experience...
...but is better than using the touchpad Apple TV remote for choosing each letter from a single line.
Everything about that remote makes me lower my confidence that Apple is good at UI.
I do believe that they will succeed in showing off something that will change the perception fo AR/VR, mainly thanks to a visual experience that will be perceived as "new" just as the first touch iPhone was "new" in the way it used touch.
But, i also do believe that within 2-3 years the real killer app of ANY device we use will be AI, as it will be the underlying "OS" that once experienced you won't be able to not have it.
If Apple lags on this, i guess in a relatively short time they risk becoming an hardware producer, or in any case having to pay so much money in licenses that it will change their business model.
But, i also do believe that within 2-3 years the real killer app of ANY device we use will be AI, as it will be the underlying "OS" that once experienced you won't be able to not have it.
If Apple lags on this, i guess in a relatively short time they risk becoming an hardware producer, or in any case having to pay so much money in licenses that it will change their business model.
Literally zero people thought this was useful in 2007. Then the iPhone came out. Then a few years later you could actually install apps on it. And a few years AFTER that, most of those activities came into existence and people started thinking a smartphone was a pretty useful idea.
Then the idea of what we COULD even do, what we would WANT to even do, radically shifted in the 5ish years after the iPhone came out in 2007
Try to be aware of one important thing:
You are one of the legion of people who are applying 2022 mindset to this new interface mechanism.
Just like the legion of people who tried to apply 2006 mindset to the new 'phone' interface mechanism.
In 2006, everybody was trying to see what apple could even do to improve on the nokia candybar or the motorolla flipphone. All the rumours, all the speculation were embedded firmly in that 'dumbphone' conceptual reality.
The smartphone was a NEW thing. Only tangentially related to the old phones.
In 2007 even after the iPhone 1.0 released (it was only really a tech-demo), everybody still looked at the smartphone and applied what they knew a phone was to it. Why would they want to pull something out of their pocket and use a tiny screen with tiny software keyboard to send an email or browse a website when they could just wait until they got to their home computer and do it?
I don't know if you're old enough to remember, but we didn't really do much on the internet, and what we did we wanted the big computer for. We didn't do much, because we HAD TO WAIT for the big computer to do it.
It wasn't for a few years when the idea of what and how you could do with the connected/tech world changed.
The INTERFACE to the connected/tech world changed with the smartphone. And that new interface radically changed the CONTENT of the connected/tech world.
--
Yesterday this new XR device is being conceptulized in the reality of VR devices. This is as wrong (but as expected) as people thinking the iPhone would be an iPod crossed with a nokia candybar. It would have 9 buttons (and +, #) arranged in a sleek cool way.
AR/XR is a new product category a brand new INTERFACE.
It is not going to be VR, which is totally different and FAR more limited. It is not going to resemble in form or function the various VR offerings you see before it.
Even after v1.0 tech-demo is released today, we're still going to be in the 2007 iPhone thinking where everybody's doubting they'd ever want to use it, when they can just use their phone.
But in 4-5 years, everybody's going to want one when the tech gets better, the capability grows, and our imaginations of what we CAN do with this new interface catch up to the revolution the XR interface provides.
In 10 years, we're going to laugh that we thought we'd always want to have to think about an app, pull a device out of our pocket, hold it in front of our face the whole time we use it, and poke at little buttons with our fingers.
Just the way we laugh now at the people in 2007 who thought we'd always prefer going home to our computer to browse a website.
The fundamental CONTENT of the connected/tech world is going to be radically changed by this new INTERFACE mechanism.
Exactly the way it happened with the smartphone.
Except the part where people actually wanted phones, tablets, and watches, you mean.
No one wants a giant headset strapped to their head with waist mounted battery packs.
Exactly this. And people bring up the watch. Which I can wear 98% of the time (minus every couple days for an hour or two to charge) and not really feel it and even some days, just look at it a handful of times. And when I do look at it on those days, its a 1-2 second to check time and next meeting details.
I think you drastically over estimate the appeal of a giant freaking headset. You don't need to sell anyone on the experience of an AR/VR user interface...that sells itself. The problem is the hardware, and its a BIG problem. Literally. Apple should have waited until this could have shipped as a pair of glasses. That might be 10 more years. But they should have waited. Because that's the product that could be what you think it is.
If Apple were shipping a pair of glasses today that ran this software, you would be right.
The key difference with using iPhone as an example though is that is was an evolution of a CELL PHONE, something I can just put in my pocket. Did not cause any physical overhead other than my hands when I want to view it. A headset is entirely different.