Someone needs to create a Vision Pro arcade(s). Would be located in high foot traffic areas (impulse & curiosity). May have 25 Vision Pro's to rent in the beginning and then scalng as appropriate . Businesses could rent out a whole facility for training, individuals for fun or whatever. Then they might have different rooms/studios in the arcade with different themes. Don't think I would pigeon hole the concept by calling it an "arcade".
Is Apple Vision Pro a see through glasses or is it a solid goggles with 2 4K displays? I cannot tell if the front is actually a display or a see through. Or is it transparent OLED?
They are not see-through. If it is off, you won’t see anything.
It has 6 outward looking video cameras: 2 front looking, 2 down looking and 2 side looking. It has LiDAR and IR flood illuminators to help construct the spatial world you are in. It looks like it takes those 6 camera views, combines them, distorts them for your eyeballs, and blits that image to the 2 4K+ microOLED displays in front of the users eyes. The testimony seem to say it is 98% like reality. You could walk around with them.
The front is likely a lower density OLED display with a lenticular layer in front of them. It seems to take the camera views from the inward facing cameras, melds that eye data into a 3D model of your eyes, and displays it in this outward facing OLED. The lenticular lens makes it appear 3D to people looking at. The direction, shapes of your eyes are all relayed in “real-time”. You blink, the display will have you blinking.
Yup. Based on the testimony so far, Apple has nailed the UI design. That is, how a user interacts with objects being displayed. That is really the single most important thing to get right. Everything follows from that.
I’d like to see a demo of the virtual keyboard. The videos had one floating in the air, and that’s crazy. It has to be on a table, and I’m assuming the hand recognition is good enough to determine text input at 100+ wpm.
You can use a hardware keyboard, so, it’s probably moot, but if the VP can determine what the user is typing on a virtual keyboard at a very high wpm, it’s a very good sign.
I find it interesting that they announced a product that won’t be available for nine months at least. More importantly it won’t be released until after the Fall product announcements. Why didn’t they wait until then to announce it? Was it all the buzz going around? Or just wanting to get people excited so they won’t look at what others come up with between now and then?
It gives the porn and sex cam industry time to plan and prototype.
From 8mm projectors to VCR and on… ‘twas ever thus.
At first I thought, good, I only use glasses for reading, not distance. So I shouldn’t need the Zeiss add-ons. Then I thought, wait, you’re not REALLY looking in the distance—just virtually. You’re really looking at something (a tiny screen) about an inch away from your eye. How can anybody focus on that? Guess I’ll have to wait for a try-on/fitting session at my local Apple Store next year to find out whether I’ll need the lenses or not. Wondering how much they’ll add to the cost.
I have the same problem, and it probably is going to cost the same as getting a new pair of glasses, however, I did notice some of the You Tubers, who got a chance to use the Vision pro wore glasses and had to take them off to test out the system.
There are companies now that make prescription inserts for every major headset, and a few of the minor ones. They almost all cost less than $100. If Apple's cost significantly more than that, it will be because Apple has made it technically or legally hard to duplicate, so they don't have to worry about competition. Unless there is something about such an insert that is patentable (I honestly don't know), I fully expect one of the existing companies to be producing inserts even before the device is released.
I find it interesting that they announced a product that won’t be available for nine months at least. More importantly it won’t be released until after the Fall product announcements. Why didn’t they wait until then to announce it? Was it all the buzz going around? Or just wanting to get people excited so they won’t look at what others come up with between now and then?
It gives the porn and sex cam industry time to plan and prototype.
From 8mm projectors to VCR and on… ‘twas ever thus.
Finally - someone said the sleazy part out loud.....
Wish the cord used a USB-C interface to connect to the battery. Then third-party batteries or multiple Apple batteries could be use.
Or perhaps that's the point, maybe the battery has to meet certain specs?
Either way seems strange to have a fixed cord length...yeah it may reach my pocket but can I put it on the desk? Actually, the more I think about it this would be a good use case for the magsafe charging connector on the battery side.
MagSafe was my first thought, too. But the more I think about it (both connecting to the band and the battery pack), I think MagSafe is too easily separated with the amount of movement and stress that the headset connection, and especially having a battery in your pocket, would put on it.
Remember folks, this is just an early prototype of the eventual "Apple iGlasses". This one built for programmers and developers to get their hands on something that works before they roll out the final product, which will look more like a pair of Ray-Ban's and you will wear all day! Maybe in five or six years.
1) They've moved away from i-naming scheme. 2) We are not 5 or 6 years away from getting an M-series chip (or any of the other HW) into something the size and weight of a pay of Ray-Bans.
I think it's more likely to have two different devices. The Vision Pro (fully immersive, VR-capable) with all the computing done on the device. The second device will be Glasses that contain the necessary sensors (cameras, LiDAR, etc) that can transfer the data wirelessly to whatever is processing it (like iPhone) once wireless transfer technology gets to the point where this becomes feasible. It won't be fully immersive; much more AR than VR. But handles a different use case than the full goggles.
Honestly, I just don't see how Apple could ever get everything that's in the Vision Pro (M2 chip, screens, AND battery) to ever fit in a form that would be acceptable as Glasses.
FacehuggerLobotomyPro - renders all previous smartphone dumbdowns obsolete!
It's just what a self-absorbed, obsessive-compulsive, pron-addicted society requires for this moment in human evolution.
No longer will bloggers, twittlers, tik-tok-wits and Instagram influencers require that their cellphones be attached to selfie sticks when sharing recordings of urban beatdowns, automobile accidents, skateboard park mishaps, retail theft incidents, mostly peaceful protests, self-defense documentation and other events of prurient misery.
While I am impressed by the technical and see its practicality, it’s still a niche market at the present. Give it a few years and maybe it will be come more mainstream, but even then, it won’t be an iPhone or even an iPad. The biggest benefiters of this product as I see it as of now will be businesses, especially amusement parks and arcades (like Dave and Busters).
The Apple Vision Pro is a Mac computer, the smallest and most powerful that Apple has made to date (for its size), it’s just in a different form factor.
I think this is an important point. Pricing aside. I think this is exactly right. They even said it this way: "Spatial Computing."
In recent history, Apple has been building out things that represent more of an "ambient devices" model where these things just exist around (or on) you but in unobtrusive ways. The UI (sort of) getting out of the way and disappearing. That was a kind of "augmented reality" just not in the way that term is commonly used today.
But this...this is something else altogether. This inverts that idea 180°. It immerses you into a computing experience world...letting some of the real world in. It's more TRON than Jetsons.
So, it's a new Mac. It's a new computer (in the classic sense...things like iPhone and Watch...heck even HomePod and TV...are "computers" but in a less classic sense).
The biggest question is whether people want a computer like this.
Personally, I prefer the "ambient devices" model. I want my "computers" to fade more into the background and be there for me as needed. I want the UI to "disappear." Granted this doesn't work for all use cases, but it likely works for more than I ever previously imagined.
Apple, of course, can pursue both. That said, the pursuit of the "ambient devices" model will require a massive overhaul of Siri (not to mention serious investment in HomeKit) to start with. Increasingly more intelligence in edge devices like HomePod, TV, Watch, and more. And the creation of new devices like a wall-mountable "home command panel" that maybe displays photos, information like weather, home automation stuff, etc. Maybe a new generation of TV that can be always on and used as some kind of wall-mounted (if that's how you have your TV) display of art, photos, information, etc. I don't know...stream of consciousness here. The real point is that these are really two completely different visions. Can Apple do both successfully? Maybe. Will they? Who knows. Part of the issue is things like attention, focus, opportunity cost, investment priorities, etc. We'll see.
P.S. The "ambient devices" model appears to be the playing out of a strategy that someone (allegedly...I wish I had a link to the article about this) proposed to Steve Jobs nearly 25 years ago: Instead of selling thousands of devices for thousands of dollars each (i.e., computers), why not sell millions of devices for only a few hundred dollars apiece. Ever since I read about this (alleged) proposal to Jobs, Apple has done things like iPod, iPad, iPhone, Watch, HomePod, AirPods, etc. That's what turned Apple into a nearly $3T company. Maybe the next phase will demand a different strategy. I'm not sure Apple Vision (the product) is it though.
Remember folks, this is just an early prototype of the eventual "Apple iGlasses". This one built for programmers and developers to get their hands on something that works before they roll out the final product, which will look more like a pair of Ray-Ban's and you will wear all day! Maybe in five or six years.
1) They've moved away from i-naming scheme. 2) We are not 5 or 6 years away from getting an M-series chip (or any of the other HW) into something the size and weight of a pay of Ray-Bans.
In 1963 we were not 5-6 years away from landing on the moon.
Of course we were. Untess you're a conspiracy theorist, we landed there in 1969.
In 2017 we were not 5-6 from this device or a Mac Pro like they showed yesterday.
Clearly we were, and it was obvious since we already had the same SoC in a much smaller Mac Studio. All they did was effectively get PCIe slots in the chassis from the previous Mac Pro.
Or a camera like what it on the iPhone 14.
Sure it was as it's just a iteration.
Come to think about it, Apple does still seem to see a lot of iMacs, iPhones, and iCloud services these days.
Huh? Was that sentence suppose to say something?
Outside of your beyond ridiculous comparisons the bottom line is that your suggestions that VR goggles could be the size and weight of a pair of Ray-Bans in half a decade without anything to back up that projection is not just silly, but downright stupid. These aren't stand-alone AR glasses like Google Glass, but offer a fully immersive VR experience. Even if the tech could reasonably shrink to fit everything inside of a pair of lightweight sunglasses in a handful of years (again, it can't), you're still missing the fundamental issue with making a VR headset that is open around the sides, top and bottom as is the case with a pair of Ray-Bans.
Type "define irony" in your search box right this very minute!
At first I thought, good, I only use glasses for reading, not distance. So I shouldn’t need the Zeiss add-ons. Then I thought, wait, you’re not REALLY looking in the distance—just virtually. You’re really looking at something (a tiny screen) about an inch away from your eye. How can anybody focus on that? Guess I’ll have to wait for a try-on/fitting session at my local Apple Store next year to find out whether I’ll need the lenses or not. Wondering how much they’ll add to the cost.
I have the same problem, and it probably is going to cost the same as getting a new pair of glasses, however, I did notice some of the You Tubers, who got a chance to use the Vision pro wore glasses and had to take them off to test out the system.
There are companies now that make prescription inserts for every major headset, and a few of the minor ones. They almost all cost less than $100. If Apple's cost significantly more than that, it will be because Apple has made it technically or legally hard to duplicate, so they don't have to worry about competition. Unless there is something about such an insert that is patentable (I honestly don't know), I fully expect one of the existing companies to be producing inserts even before the device is released.
And for Apple that company's name is Zeiss. Apple announced that partnership in the keynote.
This is another Apple buying opportunity, just that simple. Most people are still in the dark about the Apple Vision Pro……. But Zuckerberg isn’t he is slowly coming to the realization that the Quest is over.
This is another Apple buying opportunity, just that simple. Most people are still in the dark about the Apple Vision Pro……. But Zuckerberg isn’t he is slowly coming to the realization that the Quest is over.
I don’t think Quest is over. Just as cheap Android phones and cheap Windows PCs have a place in the market, so will cheap VR solutions.
Neither the Meta nor Quest branding will be what buyers look to for state of the art VR solutions, and Meta will now (likely) never be able to corner the market ifor high-end VR or AR, bo matter how much money they throw at it while Apple gets a healthy profit from their investment and likely the only company making it a viable product, which will just further more advancements for Apple.
if anything, Quest will get a sales boost BECAUSE of Apple Vision Pro as it puts a spotlight on VR. The same happened to the Blackberry. It was clearly the beginning of the end for them, but they had they had their best sales AFTER the iPhone was on the market. Partially because they were pushing their clearly inferior products to carriers almost nothing, but also because it put a spotlight on the smartphone market.
Remember folks, this is just an early prototype of the eventual "Apple iGlasses". This one built for programmers and developers to get their hands on something that works before they roll out the final product, which will look more like a pair of Ray-Ban's and you will wear all day! Maybe in five or six years.
1) They've moved away from i-naming scheme. 2) We are not 5 or 6 years away from getting an M-series chip (or any of the other HW) into something the size and weight of a pay of Ray-Bans.
I think it's more likely to have two different devices. The Vision Pro (fully immersive, VR-capable) with all the computing done on the device. The second device will be Glasses that contain the necessary sensors (cameras, LiDAR, etc) that can transfer the data wirelessly to whatever is processing it (like iPhone) once wireless transfer technology gets to the point where this becomes feasible. It won't be fully immersive; much more AR than VR. But handles a different use case than the full goggles.
Honestly, I just don't see how Apple could ever get everything that's in the Vision Pro (M2 chip, screens, AND battery) to ever fit in a form that would be acceptable as Glasses.
The technology to put it all into a pair of glasses, obviously isn’t here yet, but if there is a company that will do it, Apple is probably the company, because you can’t do that type of stuff and not have control over the whole widget, in short, you have to be a vertical computer company to make that happen, the Vision Pro could not exist if Apple was still tied to those outside chip companies like Intel, AMD, Nvidia, IBM, and the late Motorola. Going forward only a vertical computer company can get to that future.
Microsoft, Google, Meta, Qualcomm, AMD, and Nvidia, by noon Pacific time Monday, learned that when Apple said Neural Engine/Machine learning over the years. It really wasn’t just a marketing buzzword. Apple was quietly working in the background on something big.
With Apple’s release of the Vision Pro, you can see why Apple was actively eliminating Qualcomm, AMD, and Nvidia out of their products. If Apple is actively working on getting to that miniature computer glasses future eventually, those companies can’t be on board, and to think this is all because Intel, Motorola and IBM said no.
This is another Apple buying opportunity, just that simple. Most people are still in the dark about the Apple Vision Pro……. But Zuckerberg isn’t he is slowly coming to the realization that the Quest is over.
I don’t think Quest is over. Just as cheap Android phones and cheap Windows PCs have a place in the market, so will cheap VR solutions.
Neither the Meta nor Quest branding will be what buyers look to for state of the art VR solutions, and Meta will now (likely) never be able to corner the market ifor high-end VR or AR, bo matter how much money they throw at it while Apple gets a healthy profit from their investment and likely the only company making it a viable product, which will just further more advancements for Apple.
if anything, Quest will get a sales boost BECAUSE of Apple Vision Pro as it puts a spotlight on VR. The same happened to the Blackberry. It was clearly the beginning of the end for them, but they had they had their best sales AFTER the iPhone was on the market. Partially because they were pushing their clearly inferior products to carriers almost nothing, but also because it put a spotlight on the smartphone market.
Comments
Don't think I would pigeon hole the concept by calling it an "arcade".
The front is likely a lower density OLED display with a lenticular layer in front of them. It seems to take the camera views from the inward facing cameras, melds that eye data into a 3D model of your eyes, and displays it in this outward facing OLED. The lenticular lens makes it appear 3D to people looking at. The direction, shapes of your eyes are all relayed in “real-time”. You blink, the display will have you blinking.
https://daringfireball.net/2023/06/first_impressions_of_vision_pro_and_visionos
I’d like to see a demo of the virtual keyboard. The videos had one floating in the air, and that’s crazy. It has to be on a table, and I’m assuming the hand recognition is good enough to determine text input at 100+ wpm.
You can use a hardware keyboard, so, it’s probably moot, but if the VP can determine what the user is typing on a virtual keyboard at a very high wpm, it’s a very good sign.
From 8mm projectors to VCR and on… ‘twas ever thus.
There are companies now that make prescription inserts for every major headset, and a few of the minor ones. They almost all cost less than $100. If Apple's cost significantly more than that, it will be because Apple has made it technically or legally hard to duplicate, so they don't have to worry about competition. Unless there is something about such an insert that is patentable (I honestly don't know), I fully expect one of the existing companies to be producing inserts even before the device is released.
In recent history, Apple has been building out things that represent more of an "ambient devices" model where these things just exist around (or on) you but in unobtrusive ways. The UI (sort of) getting out of the way and disappearing. That was a kind of "augmented reality" just not in the way that term is commonly used today.
But this...this is something else altogether. This inverts that idea 180°. It immerses you into a computing experience world...letting some of the real world in. It's more TRON than Jetsons.
So, it's a new Mac. It's a new computer (in the classic sense...things like iPhone and Watch...heck even HomePod and TV...are "computers" but in a less classic sense).
The biggest question is whether people want a computer like this.
Personally, I prefer the "ambient devices" model. I want my "computers" to fade more into the background and be there for me as needed. I want the UI to "disappear." Granted this doesn't work for all use cases, but it likely works for more than I ever previously imagined.
Apple, of course, can pursue both. That said, the pursuit of the "ambient devices" model will require a massive overhaul of Siri (not to mention serious investment in HomeKit) to start with. Increasingly more intelligence in edge devices like HomePod, TV, Watch, and more. And the creation of new devices like a wall-mountable "home command panel" that maybe displays photos, information like weather, home automation stuff, etc. Maybe a new generation of TV that can be always on and used as some kind of wall-mounted (if that's how you have your TV) display of art, photos, information, etc. I don't know...stream of consciousness here. The real point is that these are really two completely different visions. Can Apple do both successfully? Maybe. Will they? Who knows. Part of the issue is things like attention, focus, opportunity cost, investment priorities, etc. We'll see.
P.S. The "ambient devices" model appears to be the playing out of a strategy that someone (allegedly...I wish I had a link to the article about this) proposed to Steve Jobs nearly 25 years ago: Instead of selling thousands of devices for thousands of dollars each (i.e., computers), why not sell millions of devices for only a few hundred dollars apiece. Ever since I read about this (alleged) proposal to Jobs, Apple has done things like iPod, iPad, iPhone, Watch, HomePod, AirPods, etc. That's what turned Apple into a nearly $3T company. Maybe the next phase will demand a different strategy. I'm not sure Apple Vision (the product) is it though.
Neither the Meta nor Quest branding will be what buyers look to for state of the art VR solutions, and Meta will now (likely) never be able to corner the market ifor high-end VR or AR, bo matter how much money they throw at it while Apple gets a healthy profit from their investment and likely the only company making it a viable product, which will just further more advancements for Apple.
if anything, Quest will get a sales boost BECAUSE of Apple Vision Pro as it puts a spotlight on VR. The same happened to the Blackberry. It was clearly the beginning of the end for them, but they had they had their best sales AFTER the iPhone was on the market. Partially because they were pushing their clearly inferior products to carriers almost nothing, but also because it put a spotlight on the smartphone market.
Microsoft, Google, Meta, Qualcomm, AMD, and Nvidia, by noon Pacific time Monday, learned that when Apple said Neural Engine/Machine learning over the years. It really wasn’t just a marketing buzzword. Apple was quietly working in the background on something big.
With Apple’s release of the Vision Pro, you can see why Apple was actively eliminating Qualcomm, AMD, and Nvidia out of their products. If Apple is actively working on getting to that miniature computer glasses future eventually, those companies can’t be on board, and to think this is all because Intel, Motorola and IBM said no.
It’s really over see attached the Quest is dead.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjoE-6LdViQ