Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The saga of Apple’s troubled mixed reality headset

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 201 posts

Re: The saga of Apple’s troubled mixed reality headset

#11

Post by Bud »

xoa wrote: post #6

I was most surprised to find out that wearable displays haven't been a top front and center strategic priority from day 1, and instead they were thinking about the stupid ass car thing: > Apple CEO Tim Cook has been relatively hands-off from the product compared to others like the iPhone... The Information's sources say that Apple's mixed reality efforts began almost accidentally when the company purchased a German A…

64% of US adults wear eyeglasses.

Heat exists.

We're already basically at the limits of physics for making CPUs faster and heat dissipation is a huge issue even for products that you don't have pressed against your face and eyes all the time.

Humans interact chiefly via sight.

But it has still been "obvious for ages" that wearable displays are going to be some big inevitable hit? No it hasn't.

And why on earth would Apple have made this tech a priority ten years before it was viable as a consumer product?

P.S. No, Apple's desktop computer operation has not been "neglected" lately; they actually have been giving the Mac a lot of care and feeding, as evidenced by the really nice new MacBook Pro re-design, and the Mac Studio. The opposite of what you said is true.

Re: The saga of Apple’s troubled mixed reality headset

#12

Post by HellDunkel »

xoa wrote: post #6

I was most surprised to find out that wearable displays haven't been a top front and center strategic priority from day 1, and instead they were thinking about the stupid ass car thing: > Apple CEO Tim Cook has been relatively hands-off from the product compared to others like the iPhone... The Information's sources say that Apple's mixed reality efforts began almost accidentally when the company purchased a German A…

I see the main problem with wearables in the type of media we like to consume. Text and images are almost always rectangular and 2D. It makes a lot more sense to present that on rectangular devices which you can touch (key to the success of the iphone). Wearable glasses have advantanges for 3d media but those really just make up for a fraction of the media consumed.

Re: The saga of Apple’s troubled mixed reality headset

#13

Post by jitl »

drcode wrote: post #4

The correct solution to the vr isolation problem is to have passthrough AR, then digitally remove the helmets of the other people in the same room. That way, as long as everyone is wearing a helmet, it looks like no one is wearing a helmet.

> as long as everyone is wearing a helmet

Sounds like a good solution for a low probability situation. Eye visibility for normal humans is much more practical than issuing every human a VR system and requiring they wear it at all times to maintain the illusion.

Re: The saga of Apple’s troubled mixed reality headset

#14

Post by jitl »

Jemm wrote: post #2

Designers, like Ive, should not be left unchecked. As part of an overall team they have value, but they should never be given carte-blanche as Ive had.

On the other hand, no one has released a VR system with mass market appeal. I have and enjoy a Valve Index, but it’s stayed in the box for more than a year because I can’t figure out a socially viable spot for it in my new house. Maybe Ive’s influence on this product will make a big difference.

Re: The saga of Apple’s troubled mixed reality headset

#15

Post by pveierland »

nagsaki wrote: post #10
aaron695 wrote: post #5

AR simply has no known value to users, the best SciFi has to offer is sex ads while walking down the street. AR is technically impossible with current and near future tech. All these companies are lying and faking and delaying to collect $ while people like HN are stupid enough to believe in them. Zuckerberg's latest video blanked out the "AR" glasses. Google also lied and used fake demos glasses in theirs. Magic Lea…

The only real application I can see of AR is to have face recognition that would show a person's real name and other information about them as you see them. Privacy aside, I don't think that would really take off either as I just don't think most people are that interested in people they don't know.

One seemingly good use-case for AR seems to be live translation, as shown here: https://www.theverge.com/2022/5/11/23067426/google-ar-glasse...

Text, as opposed to audio, doesn't really change the personality of the person you are speaking to, plus using your ears to listen directly to the person might create better immersion.

Re: The saga of Apple’s troubled mixed reality headset

#16

Post by jeromegv »

Angostura wrote: post #3

"A partial indication of the probable issues involved in the saga". Not quite as snappy a headline, I agree.

Even the saga term is a strong term. At the end of the day Apple did the right call so far, not launch a crappy product. They didn't go the Google way of having to launch and then discontinue it. I'd rather have them spend years figuring it out instead of launching a product with no clear goal without any problem to solve.

Re: The saga of Apple’s troubled mixed reality headset

#17

Post by fsloth »

aaron695 wrote: post #5

AR simply has no known value to users, the best SciFi has to offer is sex ads while walking down the street. AR is technically impossible with current and near future tech. All these companies are lying and faking and delaying to collect $ while people like HN are stupid enough to believe in them. Zuckerberg's latest video blanked out the "AR" glasses. Google also lied and used fake demos glasses in theirs. Magic Lea…

Nonsense.

AR is already proven tech in industry. I don't know what entertainment purposes it might serve but real world use is already benefitting from it.

Building and construction has tons of AR offerings in production. See for example Trimble's SiteVision.

Re: The saga of Apple’s troubled mixed reality headset

#18

Post by xoa »

HellDunkel wrote: post #12
xoa wrote: post #6

I was most surprised to find out that wearable displays haven't been a top front and center strategic priority from day 1, and instead they were thinking about the stupid ass car thing: > Apple CEO Tim Cook has been relatively hands-off from the product compared to others like the iPhone... The Information's sources say that Apple's mixed reality efforts began almost accidentally when the company purchased a German A…

I see the main problem with wearables in the type of media we like to consume. Text and images are almost always rectangular and 2D. It makes a lot more sense to present that on rectangular devices which you can touch (key to the success of the iphone). Wearable glasses have advantanges for 3d media but those really just make up for a fraction of the media consumed.

What? A wearable display with a basic liquid crystal as well to control opacity can trivially do a normal rectangle too, anywhere you want. It's a complete superset of all current displays, that's the most basic use of it. Doing 3D stuff or whatever if anything strikes me as by far the least important, at least for quite a while after intro most of its use would be simple HUD or just using what we've got except wherever. Right now as I type this I'm sitting at a desk in front of a 5k 27" rectangle. With refined retinal scanning display glasses, I could be sitting on a couch or somewhere else, and still have a 27" 5k equivalent rectangle to pull up (or 36" 8k or whatever I wanted) rather then a 6-7" display (phone) or 14-16" (notebook) at much lower resolution. Decent wireless keyboards and mice exist and could be further improved on.

Can you explain why people think "3D" is an important aspect of these? AR/VR would already pay for itself just by being able to bring up my desktop (or smaller individual windows or anything) anywhere, more efficiently.

Re: The saga of Apple’s troubled mixed reality headset

#19

Post by puranjay »

jitl wrote: post #14
Jemm wrote: post #2

Designers, like Ive, should not be left unchecked. As part of an overall team they have value, but they should never be given carte-blanche as Ive had.

On the other hand, no one has released a VR system with mass market appeal. I have and enjoy a Valve Index, but it’s stayed in the box for more than a year because I can’t figure out a socially viable spot for it in my new house. Maybe Ive’s influence on this product will make a big difference.

VR seems to have an insurmountable motion sickness problem. I tried the Quest with a dozen friends and half of them felt sick enough within minutes to never try it again.

Re: The saga of Apple’s troubled mixed reality headset

#20

Post by smoldesu »

jeromegv wrote: post #16
Angostura wrote: post #3

"A partial indication of the probable issues involved in the saga". Not quite as snappy a headline, I agree.

Even the saga term is a strong term. At the end of the day Apple did the right call so far, not launch a crappy product. They didn't go the Google way of having to launch and then discontinue it. I'd rather have them spend years figuring it out instead of launching a product with no clear goal without any problem to solve.

How can we say "Apple did the right call" without knowing what their call was, knowing if this article is true, knowing what the product even looks like, or even knowing how successful the product was relative to the rest of their lineup? For all we know, this project is scrapped and dead.
Post reply on HN