Looks like YouTube will make an Apple Vision Pro app after all

AppleInsider

YouTube has walked back its stance on not having a native support on the Apple Vision Pro, saying now that a dedicated app is "on the roadmap."

YouTube working on dedicated Apple Vision Pro app

In January, YouTube announced it would not be building any specialized apps for the Apple Vision Pro, Apple's new spatial computing headset. It also announced that it would not allow its iPad apps to run on the hardware.

However, it didn't take very long for the company to walk back that statement.

"We're excited to see Vision Pro launch and we're supporting it by ensuring YouTube users have a great experience in Safari." YouTube spokesperson Jessica Gibby told The Verge in a statement.

"We do not have any specific plans to share at this time, but can confirm that a Vision Pro app is on our roadmap," Gibby added.

There's no dedicated timeframe for the release of such an app. Currently, YouTube recommends that Apple Vision Pro users visit YouTube via Safari for the time being.

As The Verge points out, neither Apple nor YouTube have figured out how to support current 360 and VR videos active on YouTube. Allegedly, the content may never work on the Apple Vision Pro, as Apple spokesperson Jackie Roy has stated that the content isn't high-quality, and could cause motion discomfort.



Read on AppleInsider

MplsP

Pretty typical - they (i.e. any company) won't make an app....until it makes sense for them to do so. If Vision Pro really catches on you can be sure many other companies will follow YouTube's lead.

cpsro

Perhaps quite a few Googlers bought VPs and are pushing the project.

roundaboutnow

Given the volume of AVP sales so far, I get not wanting to produce a native AVP app right away, but considering Youtube (and Netflix) can be used in AVP Safari, it seemed strange to me that both those companies didn't at least allow the iPad app to run out of the gate.

Speaking of Youtube, I've looked at a few of the AVP reviews there (in particular Marques Brownlee), and I have to say I am way more impressed with AVP than I thought I'd be. (What really helps is the fact that one can screen record the AVP visuals, so you get a pretty good idea of what the wearer sees).

hmlongco

roundaboutnow said:

Given the volume of AVP sales so far, I get not wanting to produce a native AVP app right away, but considering Youtube (and Netflix) can be used in AVP Safari, it seemed strange to me that both those companies didn't at least allow the iPad app to run out of the gate.

Speaking of Youtube, I've looked at a few of the AVP reviews there (in particular Marques Brownlee), and I have to say I am way more impressed with AVP than I thought I'd be. (What really helps is the fact that one can screen record the AVP visuals, so you get a pretty good idea of what the wearer sees).

One thing to remember what watching those screen recordings is that AVP foveates the display, spending extra cycles to make sure the area of the screen you're looking at is razor sharp and such, not spending extra cycles on the parts of the screen you're NOT looking at.

So some screenshots and recordings can look blurry, unless you're looking at the same area where the wearer was looking.

roundaboutnow

hmlongco said:

roundaboutnow said:

Given the volume of AVP sales so far, I get not wanting to produce a native AVP app right away, but considering Youtube (and Netflix) can be used in AVP Safari, it seemed strange to me that both those companies didn't at least allow the iPad app to run out of the gate.

Speaking of Youtube, I've looked at a few of the AVP reviews there (in particular Marques Brownlee), and I have to say I am way more impressed with AVP than I thought I'd be. (What really helps is the fact that one can screen record the AVP visuals, so you get a pretty good idea of what the wearer sees).

One thing to remember what watching those screen recordings is that AVP foveates the display, spending extra cycles to make sure the area of the screen you're looking at is razor sharp and such, not spending extra cycles on the parts of the screen you're NOT looking at.

So some screenshots and recordings can look blurry, unless you're looking at the same area where the wearer was looking.

Yes, I noticed the foveated rendering. It was actually pointed out by Brownlee too. (I had actually anticipated a few years back when rumors of Apples AR/VR interests started surfacing that foveated rendering would be helpful--if not required--to reduce demands on the processing system).

jdw

True support on YouTube should ultimately include SPATIAL VIDEO.  

If they can support HDR, 8K 60 and all that fancy stuff, it's no stretch for them to support Spatial Video as a special format.  Because if indeed these VR headsets are the future, as some contend.  It's the logical extension of YouTube, to make you feel immersed in the video you're watching.

MikeJB

I read that a third party Apple Vision Pro app was created to allow YouTube videos in an independent AVP window. I suspect that since one was created, the powers-that-be over at YouTube figured it would be in their own interests to release an AVP app themselves (as reported on Apple Insider recently).

sflocal

Considering all the moronic behavior that YouTubers are doing with the AVP, it comes to no surprise that YouTube wants to get into the game.  It is certainly making quite a bit of revenue from all those engagements.

It's pathetic that we live in a society where reckless behavior is what drives revenue for social media companies.

thadec

MikeJB said:

I read that a third party Apple Vision Pro app was created to allow YouTube videos in an independent AVP window. I suspect that since one was created, the powers-that-be over at YouTube figured it would be in their own interests to release an AVP app themselves (as reported on Apple Insider recently).

Google can shut that off if they want to, just as they shut off repeated attempts to bring YouTube to Windows Phone and also shut off third party apps to Amazon Echo Show devices back when the two companies were (more overtly) feuding. Two things going on here.
1. Google is waiting to see if Vision Pro succeeds without being one of the reasons that it succeeds. If Vision Pro sells 5 million units in 2025, they don't want any part of that 5 million people to buy it in order to look at YouTube. 
2. Speaking of the 2025 thing, yes Google, Samsung and Qualcomm are working together on their own device. They have been ambivalent about whether to actually release it. I have read that it can be out as early as 4Q this year if Samsung wants to badly enough. Samsung will release the Galaxy 6 Fold and Flip, Galaxy 7 Watch and Galaxy Ring in 3Q, so 4Q would be when the Galaxy S23 FE and the Galaxy Fold FE are going to be released (Samsung times the Galaxy FE releases to steal the thunder from the Google Pixel, which releases in October). Despite the legendary capacity of the Apple fandom to convince itself otherwise, it would be stupid for YouTube to be on the Vision Pro before it is on Google's device. But if Samsung decides not to push for a release this year, Google will move forward with Vision Pro apps for YouTube and Google TV, though do not expect them to go all out - at least not initially - like Disney did for Disney+.

People who have a problem with 2., well when did Apple approve Stadia again? Over 5 years and there is still no Android app for Apple TV+ (other than the Android TV one) ... you have to use the browser. And no, there is no Safari browser on Android either, and wasn't even when there was still a Safari browser on Windows. No iTunes or Apple Movies and TV on Android either. So the people who believe that Google has some obligation to provide day one support for every single Apple product and platform, I say it is perfectly fine for Google to wait awhile. And now that YouTube Premium/YouTube Music has surpassed the 100 million subscribers threshold - and YouTube TV is doing well also - they can afford to wait. Or at least wait until NFL Sunday Ticket on YouTube TV is an exclusive on Google's own competing headset for awhile first.  

Anilu_777

MikeJB said:

I read that a third party Apple Vision Pro app was created to allow YouTube videos in an independent AVP window. I suspect that since one was created, the powers-that-be over at YouTube figured it would be in their own interests to release an AVP app themselves (as reported on Apple Insider recently).

Yes, that’s Christian Selig - the creator of Apollo. More power to him. 

dewme

Not surprising at all. I also won’t be surprised when Netflix joins the party too. 

danox

That didn't take long I don't care if Google ever makes anything for Apple Vision and that applies to Meta, Spotify, or Netflix why? Because some talented group of very smart people (companies) will design something to take their place.

The Apple Vision is well beyond a Android tablet Google, Samsung, and Qualcomm can come up with a facsimile but the execution of software/hardware and a ecosystem to together as one is where they will fall down and they won't be able to pull off the R1 SOC and LiDAR on short notice, that and the fact that Qualcomm the troll is going to want half of the revenue for any device made.

https://www.reddit.com/r/VisionPro/comments/1ahhdnj/vision_pros_spatial_understanding_is_insane/ LiDAR

https://www.reddit.com/r/VisionPro/comments/1ajf3tg/the_future_is_here/ Geeks on the walk...

beowulfschmidt

Given that the original report of YouTube's "non-participation"came from Bloomberg, I'm skeptical that YouTube ever actually made any statement of denial. It's more likely that YT said something along the lines of, "not right now, but we'll see" and Bloomberg ran with "they ain't gonna do it!"

Anytime I see Bloomberg cited for a story, I pretty much automatically discount it unless there are confirming sources unconnected to Bloomberg.  Remember, this is the same Bloomberg that ran the story about chips being hijacked by China, and when confronted with evidence to the contrary, they shrugged and said they still believed their sources that no one else could find.

9secondkox2

It’s like I said: not launching with an app isn’t hostile. It’s business. Once the he vp gains traction, the big video players will develop an app. YouTube isn’t promising anything right away but it’s on their roadmap, no doubt with conditions. They’ll see how it goes and if it makes sense they’ll roll it out. I expect the same with Netflix etc. it’s just a matter of time until the install base gets to an ROI point. 

13485

jdw said:

True support on YouTube should ultimately include SPATIAL VIDEO.  

If they can support HDR, 8K 60 and all that fancy stuff, it's no stretch for them to support Spatial Video as a special format.  Because if indeed these VR headsets are the future, as some contend.  It's the logical extension of YouTube, to make you feel immersed in the video you're watching.

Yeah, I'm pretty certain you're right. 

danox

Bend the Knee Google only took three days? The other Aristocrats will follow......

am8449

This is great news for the Prosumers that bought or will buy Vision Pro to watch videos. 

YouTube is essential for me, so being able to watch YT content natively (and maybe even with a few exclusive features) would be a big incentive to buy a Vision Pro.