Apple's Tim Cook calls VR 'cool' and not a niche
Asked about the technology during a call on the company's Q1 results, Apple CEO Tim Cook called virtual reality "cool" and something with interesting applications, though he didn't tease any plans Apple might have.
"I don't think it's a niche," Cook told Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster. Munster didn't inquire into any specific Apple efforts, as the company normally refuses to comment on future products or even whether it's exploring a concept.
Though it had a false start in the 1990s, owing mostly to poor graphics technology, virtual reality is finally poised to become big in the next few years. Sony, HTC, Samsung, and Facebook's Oculus are among the companies with headsets already out or set to launch later this year, while firms like Google and Microsoft have been exploring VR and the related concept of AR, or augmented reality.
Various developments have hinted at Apple's exploration of the field, such as the recent hire of a VR expert. In May 2015 Apple bought AR firm Metaio, and back in 2013 it picked up PrimeSense, responsible for Microsoft's original Kinect motion sensor for the Xbox 360.
The greatest challenge for Apple may be graphics performance. While many mid- to high-end PCs can handle full-fidelity VR, the only Mac powerful enough to support it is the Mac Pro, which starts at $2,999. AR and more modest forms of VR -- like Samsung's phone-based Gear VR -- may be an easier route.
"I don't think it's a niche," Cook told Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster. Munster didn't inquire into any specific Apple efforts, as the company normally refuses to comment on future products or even whether it's exploring a concept.
Though it had a false start in the 1990s, owing mostly to poor graphics technology, virtual reality is finally poised to become big in the next few years. Sony, HTC, Samsung, and Facebook's Oculus are among the companies with headsets already out or set to launch later this year, while firms like Google and Microsoft have been exploring VR and the related concept of AR, or augmented reality.
Various developments have hinted at Apple's exploration of the field, such as the recent hire of a VR expert. In May 2015 Apple bought AR firm Metaio, and back in 2013 it picked up PrimeSense, responsible for Microsoft's original Kinect motion sensor for the Xbox 360.
The greatest challenge for Apple may be graphics performance. While many mid- to high-end PCs can handle full-fidelity VR, the only Mac powerful enough to support it is the Mac Pro, which starts at $2,999. AR and more modest forms of VR -- like Samsung's phone-based Gear VR -- may be an easier route.
Comments
Do you recall criticisms of the Samsung S6 because it had such a high resolution screen and therefore would waste power driving it? Those pixels were necessary when an S6 is used for VR with the Gear headset because each eye only sees half the screen so each half has to have a lot of pixels. Doesn't seem so silly now considering Samsung are the only Player to have a working and shipped VR product.
Given the iPhone is Apple's mainstay and they seem to be putting a lot of grunt into the A processors and GPUs, and taking account of the OLED screen rumours, it wouldn't surprise me if Apple pursued the same route Samsung have with the iP7 having a very high pixel count/density OLED screen and serious GPU power in the A10 to drive it for VR purposes when used in a Gear-like accessory.
Mostly people just want the fantastical fictional versions of these technologies seen in techno-fantasy tv and film: they want free-standing "holographs" (not physically possible, despite people repeatedly being told they are by fiction) and the ability to "jack in" to "cyberspace" with a direct link between the brain and a computer generated environment (currently also technically impossible but maybe not ultimately physically impossible if people figure out how to send and receive sensory data directly to and from the brain while locking out the actual data coming from the body to the brain- we're talking way more than "20 years away" here, since the best integration between electronics and human nervous system is blunt and stupid reaction to simple nerve impulses to drive very simple actions; NOT "thought control" so much as it's peripheral nerve control over devices connected with electrodes to sense nerve impulses).
The only two vendors that can do VR is AMD and then Nvidia. No one else comes close.
Most people haven’t read the fiction that @dysamoria talks about (I have and love the ideas, but we are in the minority), and few want direct brain interfaces because how fearful most people are of tech they don’t understand. So, while it might one day be possible, it will take a lot longer to catch on if at all. He is right though, 3D TV simply isn’t compelling enough to buy into considering its limited uses. But hey, it has made regular HDTVs a lot less expensive. So that’s about the best thing that’s happened for consumers with the glut of 3D HDTVs.
I agree with @cnocbui that VR needs a killer app, or at least one that inspires others to improve on their design. I think aside from gaming which is the most promising, the other use would be immersive 3D modeling where artists could sculpt models in 1:1 scale. But I think VR can be surpassed by 3D AR for some applications. AR also has a lot more useful applications outside of gaming. However they can complement each other (add an electronically controlled visor on the outside that can turn opaque and an AR headset becomes a VR headset).
While the phones and initial headsets are a good start, the technology will have to become a lot higher res, cheaper and lighter by removing the guts of the phones and simply making the headsets an AV combo w/graphics card, battery, optional camera & essential parts (actually not much less tech, but simply rearranged for balance and aesthetics. Who knows perhaps high speed 802.11ad or its successor will be fast enough to make them as convenient as decent bluetooth audio headsets are now. But at this point this sort of tech is probably something that’ll come out in the 2020s and not the 2010s. I’m basing this guess on current tech in lab and early versions in the wild. I could be completely off, but if I were implementing AR/VR it, this is probably what I would go for.
So, whether or not people think its cool or everyone has their own idea of where it might go (or not go), people will still hammer away at it. Now, consider Cooks comments remind me of his comments about Google Glass a bit. When asked about it, he said Apple was interested in wearables but alluded to other places to wear them. Now we see what he meant.
So, while I am guessing here, I think Apple will do what it has done the last 15 years: let other trail blaze the portable sector and learn from their shortcomings. Then Apple will develop their own device that surpasses everyone else, just like they did with the iPod, the iPhone, the iPad and Apple Watch. I’m only drawing from history though, so take it for what that’s worth.
Oh, I think he would notice it then.