Apple hires Meta AR comms chief for headset launch

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited December 2021
Apple is making preparations ahead of a launch of its long-rumored AR and VR headset, by allegedly hiring Meta AR communications chief Andrea Schubert for a similar role.




Apple has long been rumored to be working on a VR or AR headset as part of a mixed-reality product line. While there is speculation surrounding a 2022 launch, it seems that Apple is slowly gearing up for the inevitable promotion of the hardware.

According to the Bloomberg "Power On" newsletter by Mark Gurman, Apple is building out parts of its team that will handle the launch and subsequent marketing efforts of the hardware. Part of this is the alleged hiring of Andrea Schubert, the communications and public relations head for AR at Meta.

While it is quite plausible Apple could have poached the Meta employee for its own product, there doesn't seem to be any external signs confirming the hiring took place. For example, Schubert's LinkedIn page currently states she is still working for Meta full-time as "Director of Communications, Augmented Reality & Research at Reality Labs," Meta's consumer hardware division.

Given the competitive market and Apple's secretive nature, it seems reasonable that such employment changes would be hidden from public view pre-launch.

Previously, Schubert was known as the communications manager of Oculus, the VR headset producer bought by Facebook, now Meta. There was also a five-year stint as a director for The OutCast Agency handling PR for major clients including Facebook and Oculus, as well as time as a senior account executive at Shift Communications.

Apple VR is thought to be a mixed-reality standalone headset, with the use of cameras to provide the mixed-reality experience. Thought to have an Apple Watch-like glass enclosure and AirPods Max-style padding, the headset is speculated to have a LiDAR sensor system to track a user's hands for a controller-less experience.

Pricing rumors put it at between $1,000 and $3,000 when it ships sometime in 2022.

Read on AppleInsider

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 12
    hexclockhexclock Posts: 1,243member
    The rumored price range seems rather high. It had better blow away everything else on the market to justify the cost, and be useful for more than some silly games. It’s rather like buying an 8K tv when there is zero 8K content available. We’ll see. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 12
    danoxdanox Posts: 2,804member
    Apple Servers with the M-Series CPU would be better…..
    MichaelT11watto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 12
    I had my eyes lasered zo I don’t have to wear glasses. I don’t see why people would want to wear something in their face that is non-essential.
    edited December 2021 williamlondonmattinoz
  • Reply 4 of 12
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,557member
    I had my eyes lasered zo I don’t have to wear glasses. I don’t see why people would want to wear something in their face that is non-essential.
    If Apple wants people to wear these glasses in public every day then they won’t look anything like the monstrosity depicted in this article. 
    williamlondongeekmeewatto_cobrabyronl
  • Reply 5 of 12
    hexclock said:
    The rumored price range seems rather high. It had better blow away everything else on the market to justify the cost, and be useful for more than some silly games. It’s rather like buying an 8K tv when there is zero 8K content available. We’ll see. 
    It's nonsense -- nobody knows the price. Certainly no supply chain leakers. This is the sort of info Apple keeps close to its chest and only a few people know until launch, everybody else is just making things up. We saw this w/ the iPad too.
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 12
    I had my eyes lasered zo I don’t have to wear glasses. I don’t see why people would want to wear something in their face that is non-essential.
    It's very likely a recreational device. People wear cycling helmets not because they want to wear a helmet, but because it's a recreational aide. Same with hiking boots, etc. If the rec activity is fun and worth the compromise, you do it. 

    Personally as a gamer I'd have little problem with it for gaming sessions.
    williamlondonwatto_cobrabyronl
  • Reply 7 of 12
    hexclockhexclock Posts: 1,243member
    hexclock said:
    The rumored price range seems rather high. It had better blow away everything else on the market to justify the cost, and be useful for more than some silly games. It’s rather like buying an 8K tv when there is zero 8K content available. We’ll see. 
    It's nonsense -- nobody knows the price. Certainly no supply chain leakers. This is the sort of info Apple keeps close to its chest and only a few people know until launch, everybody else is just making things up. We saw this w/ the iPad too.
    I agree, but it will probably have to cost more than an iPhone 13 Pro Max, considering the processing power and dual hi-res screens it will need. 
    I imagine it will have its own, new OS as well. Should be interesting. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 12
    lkrupp said:
    I had my eyes lasered zo I don’t have to wear glasses. I don’t see why people would want to wear something in their face that is non-essential.
    If Apple wants people to wear these glasses in public every day then they won’t look anything like the monstrosity depicted in this article. 
    VR headsets are not meant to be worn in public. AR glasses, yes. Two very different products if you’d be paying attention. 
    watto_cobrabyronl
  • Reply 9 of 12
    I had my eyes lasered zo I don’t have to wear glasses. I don’t see why people would want to wear something in their face that is non-essential.
    LOL. That’s like saying you had access to a library, why would you need an Internet? 
    StrangeDayswilliamlondonwatto_cobrabyronl
  • Reply 10 of 12
    It will interesting to see how Apple handles this VR launch, since it doesn’t introduce technology for technologies sake, but only when it can make daily tasks easier.
    watto_cobrabyronl
  • Reply 11 of 12
    lkrupp said:
    I had my eyes lasered zo I don’t have to wear glasses. I don’t see why people would want to wear something in their face that is non-essential.
    If Apple wants people to wear these glasses in public every day then they won’t look anything like the monstrosity depicted in this article. 
    VR headsets are not meant to be worn in public. AR glasses, yes. Two very different products if you’d be paying attention. 
    I was indeed referring to AR use-cases as Apple isn’t interested in VR. 
    They don’t intent this to be solely a recreation device but something you’d use on a daily basis. You can deduce that strategy from several of Cook’s comments on VR versus AR. 
    For context, I’m an entrepeneur in the VR industry, so yes, I’ve been paying attention.
  • Reply 12 of 12
    lkrupp said:
    I had my eyes lasered zo I don’t have to wear glasses. I don’t see why people would want to wear something in their face that is non-essential.
    If Apple wants people to wear these glasses in public every day then they won’t look anything like the monstrosity depicted in this article. 
    VR headsets are not meant to be worn in public. AR glasses, yes. Two very different products if you’d be paying attention. 
    I was indeed referring to AR use-cases as Apple isn’t interested in VR. 
    They don’t intent this to be solely a recreation device but something you’d use on a daily basis. You can deduce that strategy from several of Cook’s comments on VR versus AR. 
    For context, I’m an entrepeneur in the VR industry, so yes, I’ve been paying attention.
    It doesn’t seem like you have been. It’s been extremely clear for a while now that they’re doing a full VR  HMD with some possible AR pass through capabilities first, and the AR glasses second. There are numerous patents and supply chain rumors to support this.
    watto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.