When it’s indoor/outdoor sunglasses, that may possibly change.
I see "just wait until they are sunglasses" line mentioned all the time for the future of VisionPro. But can someone please tell me how you do immersive VR with a pair of wayfarers?
The killer app for headsets is entertainment - gaming and media.
I agree, as I would have bought one immediately if there was a Vision Pro version of either of my favourite games - Civ and Wow.
Blizzard has always been highly supportive of the Mac platform, so I can't ever be upset with them. Firaxis said this week that CIV VII releases in six months and will be available on every platform (including every console, so they say.) They probably don't mean to include Vision Pro in that statement, (or Apple TV) but who knows?
Civ VI for iPad works on the Vision Pro, and it's about as good as it is on iPad; hard to see what a Vision Pro specific release could add without a massive overhaul of the game. Fundamentally the pinchy control system is junk compared to a mouse and keyboard though, takes ages to do anything and erroneous inputs are commonplace, at least for me.
When it’s indoor/outdoor sunglasses, that may possibly change.
I see "just wait until they are sunglasses" line mentioned all the time for the future of VisionPro. But can someone please tell me how you do immersive VR with a pair of wayfarers?
They can block light out the same as a headset, they just have a smaller form factor:
There are already small VR headsets:
and there are AR glasses:
Somewhere between the last two is a product that can do high quality AR/VR in a comfortable form factor. These have the computing separate from the product.
If the bandwidth and latency can be worked out across the connection, this can potentially bring the cost down considerably. People would connect the $1000 iPhone they already own to the headset that is now at least $1000 less. According to the estimated BOM of the Vision Pro, this would allow for a $1600-1700 product with 40% margin.
I've been reading some form of this statement for 20 years now.
I really don't think people want to strap something to their face until it's the same form factor as a pair of glasses.
This is why I think a visor form factor would help, it takes away the pressure and weight from the face and straps from messing up people's hair and it would remove the need for a fitting procedure so people can buy online and use them out of the box.
It could be a version of Airpods Max like a swivel on the outside of the ear cups that allows the user to push it up on top of the head and use the Airpods for audio only.
People can use the Airpods for music as normal. If they want a relaxing environment, move the visor down and dial in an immersive environment. Similarly with a movie. Then there's no need for Eyesight because you can tilt the display up to talk to someone.
If people don't use the visor much, worst-case they paid $1600-1700 for a pair of Airpods Max instead of $550 but they'll use them regularly.
And last but not least another Apple competitor in tech has blown $50 billion dollars down the drain, Apple would be considered doomed if they had wasted so much money. (largest Apple acquisition to date $3 billion dollars). Apple game changers, Apple Silicon and Apple OS.
Whoa, you really hit on something with the very last sentence of your post. "Apple OS." Apple seems to be on a path of convergence with their silicon, i.e., Apple Silicon. I don't think it would be a big stretch to say that Apple Silicon is already Apple's device agnostic foundation for the majority of their hardware products. Of course there are additional hardware components that need to get mated with the foundational Apple Silicon core to fully form all of the unique hardware platforms.
I don't think Apple's operating system software is quite as close to being Apple's device agnostic foundation for the majority of their software products as Apple Silicon is on the hardware side. They are close to this at the core/kernel level but Apple is still actively differentiating iOS, iPadOS, macOS, tvOS, etc., from each other. Maybe it's time for Apple modify their approach (which they may already be doing) and their messaging to move away from iOS, iPadOS, macOS, etc., and take the same approach they've taken with Apple Silicon to move to "Apple OS" as the software equivalent to "Apple Silicon."
I'm not talking about simply putting a new label on the existing operating system platforms, but rather to extend the common core of the OS beyond the kernel level. Just like Apple Silicon there are additional software components that need to get mated with the foundational Apple OS core to fully form all of the unique software platforms. If these components outside of the Apple OS core are primarily there to accommodate the needs of the hardware platforms, e.g., touch screen vs mouse, big screen vs small screen, big memory and storage vs small memory and storage, etc., the possibility for greater convergence on the software side seems possible. Some products like the Mac and iPad may be virtually identical at the Apple OS level and user interface level.
I believe a lot of the things I've mentioned are well along their way or planned for the future. We probably wouldn't be constantly arguing about whether the iPad should be running macOS. Both the Mac and the iPad would be running Apple OS. Both hardware platforms could also have the same adaptation layers for user interaction, i.e., both the Mac and iPad would be touch enabled as well as being mouse, keyboard, trackpad, multiple-display, multi-processing, etc., enabled. The iPad is virtually there already. The Mac side is a different story. However, the stigma of saying that future Macs will be running what is essentially iPadOS goes, or future iPads will be running macOS, goes away when you say that future Macs and iPads will be running Apple OS, which will be something distinctly different from what iPadOS and macOS are today. Of course there will be issues with legacy apps on both platforms, but moving from Intel to Apple Silicon also entailed giving up on a number of legacy considerations, like BootCamp and native x86 support.
And last but not least another Apple competitor in tech has blown $50 billion dollars down the drain, Apple would be considered doomed if they had wasted so much money. (largest Apple acquisition to date $3 billion dollars). Apple game changers, Apple Silicon and Apple OS.
Whoa, you really hit on something with the very last sentence of your post. "Apple OS." Apple seems to be on a path of convergence with their silicon, i.e., Apple Silicon. I don't think it would be a big stretch to say that Apple Silicon is already Apple's device agnostic foundation for the majority of their hardware products. Of course there are additional hardware components that need to get mated with the foundational Apple Silicon core to fully form all of the unique hardware platforms.
I don't think Apple's operating system software is quite as close to being Apple's device agnostic foundation for the majority of their software products as Apple Silicon is on the hardware side. They are close to this at the core/kernel level but Apple is still actively differentiating iOS, iPadOS, macOS, tvOS, etc., from each other. Maybe it's time for Apple modify their approach (which they may already be doing) and their messaging to move away from iOS, iPadOS, macOS, etc., and take the same approach they've taken with Apple Silicon to move to "Apple OS" as the software equivalent to "Apple Silicon."
I'm not talking about simply putting a new label on the existing operating system platforms, but rather to extend the common core of the OS beyond the kernel level. Just like Apple Silicon there are additional software components that need to get mated with the foundational Apple OS core to fully form all of the unique software platforms. If these components outside of the Apple OS core are primarily there to accommodate the needs of the hardware platforms, e.g., touch screen vs mouse, big screen vs small screen, big memory and storage vs small memory and storage, etc., the possibility for greater convergence on the software side seems possible. Some products like the Mac and iPad may be virtually identical at the Apple OS level and user interface level.
I believe a lot of the things I've mentioned are well along their way or planned for the future. We probably wouldn't be constantly arguing about whether the iPad should be running macOS. Both the Mac and the iPad would be running Apple OS. Both hardware platforms could also have the same adaptation layers for user interaction, i.e., both the Mac and iPad would be touch enabled as well as being mouse, keyboard, trackpad, multiple-display, multi-processing, etc., enabled. The iPad is virtually there already. The Mac side is a different story. However, the stigma of saying that future Macs will be running what is essentially iPadOS goes, or future iPads will be running macOS, goes away when you say that future Macs and iPads will be running Apple OS, which will be something distinctly different from what iPadOS and macOS are today. Of course there will be issues with legacy apps on both platforms, but moving from Intel to Apple Silicon also entailed giving up on a number of legacy considerations, like BootCamp and native x86 support.
What you are describing is what HarmonyOS was designed for.
Formerly announced back in 2019 at HDC, they specifically described the state of mobile operating systems as being 'siloed' and unable to fully interoperate due to inherent design limitations.
It was clear to most people that that description was referring to Apple and its multiple OS variants.
HarmonyOS is designed to tackle modern day concepts relating to converged hardware/software IoT etc, and later this year will take another step forward by jettisoning Android app compatibility from phones and tablets.
Since that HDC announcement, basically every Apple WWDC has seen system design elements/ideas from HarmonyOS come to iDevices.
The big question is whether all the underlying elements are being changed to pull it off, or if these elements are being implemented by simply channelling holes into each of those siloes. I have no idea but achieving a universal converged goal would be a major undertaking.
Here are some (old) official notes on the system design overview of HarmonyOS for comparison:
...
Hardware Collaboration and Resource Sharing
Hardware collaboration and resource sharing can be implemented between multiple devices. The key technologies include DSoftBus, distributed device virtualization, distributed data management, and Distributed Scheduler.
DSoftBus
DSoftBus is a communication base for interconnecting devices, such as phones, tablets, wearables, smart TVs, and head units. It powers devices with distributed communication capabilities, allowing for auto discovery and zero-wait transmission among devices.
Distributed Device Virtualization
The distributed device virtualization platform enables cross-device resource convergence, device management, and data processing so that multiple devices jointly function as a super virtual device. This platform virtualizes devices and fully utilizes their advantages by assigning the most appropriate hardware to execute particular user tasks. This ensures that services are continuously transferred between different devices. This way, the capability advantages, such as those regarding display, camera, audio, interaction, and sensors, can be fully unleashed for specific devices.
Distributed Data Management
Distributed data management leverages DSoftBus to manage application data and user data distributed on different devices. Under such management, user data is no longer bound to a single physical device, and service logic is separated from data storage. In this case, cross-device data processing is as fast and easy as local data processing. This facilitates multi-device data storage, sharing, and access in all scenarios, therefore creating a foundation for consistent and smooth user experience
Distributed Scheduler
Distributed Scheduler is designed based on technical features such as DSoftBus, distributed data management, and distributed profile. It builds a unified distributed service management mechanism (including service discovery, synchronization, registration, and invocation), and supports remote startup, remote invocation, remote connection, and migration of applications across devices. This way, applications can select a suitable device to perform distributed tasks based on the capabilities, locations, running status, and resource usage of different devices, as well as user habits and intentions.
Distributed Connectivity
The distributed connectivity capability bridges the bottom layer and application layer of a smart device so that different devices can share their hardware and software resources through USB. By drawing from the distributed connectivity capability, you can enrich the connection experience of your products
One-Time Development for Multi-Device Deployment
HarmonyOS provides the application, ability, and UI frameworks, which allow you to reuse service and UI logic during application development. This way, you can develop your applications once, and then deploy them across a broad range of devices, improving your development efficiency.
To be specific, the UI framework supports ArkTS, JS, and Java programming languages and provides extensive polymorphic components to achieve different UI effects on phones, tablets, wearables, smart TVs, and head units. Also, the UI framework complies with the mainstream design concepts in the industry and provides multiple responsive layout solutions, including grid layouts, to make GUIs adaptive to different screens.
Unified OS for Flexible Deployment
HarmonyOS leverages component-based and miniaturized-oriented designs to allow on-demand deployment for diversified devices, adapting to different hardware resources and business characteristics. Specifically, component dependencies are automatically generated based on the cross-compilation toolchain to form a tree diagram illustrating component dependencies, facilitating convenient development and making development available for various devices, regardless of their hardware capabilities.
Security
HarmonyOS-powered distributed devices ensure that the right person uses the right data through the right device.
Ensure the right person by performing distributed collaborative identity authentication.
Ensure the right device by building a trusted operating environment on the distributed device.
Ensure the right data by implementing classified and hierarchical management of data transmitted across devices.
Right Person
In the distributed scenario, the right person refers to an authenticated user who accesses the data or uses the service. The right person is the prerequisite for preventing illegal data access or user privacy breach. HarmonyOS implements distributed collaborative identity authentication in the following ways:
Zero-trust model: Implements user authentication and data access control. When a user attempts to access data across devices or perform a service operation with a high security level (for example, operating a security protection device), HarmonyOS authenticates the user to ensure that the user is authorized to perform the operation.
Multi-factor authentication: Associates authentication credentials that identify the same user on different devices to improve authentication accuracy.
Collaborative authentication: Decouples identity authentication from hardware so that identity authentication and data collection can be done on different devices to implement resource pooling as well as capability collaboration and sharing. This allows the right device to do the right thing and makes it possible for devices with a high security level to assist devices with a low security level in authenticating users.
Right Device
In the distributed scenario, the right person using the right device is the prerequisite to safeguard effective user data security on virtual devices and prevent user privacy breach.
Right Data
To ensure that the right data is used by the right person, HarmonyOS protects data security and privacy throughout the entire lifecycle, from data generation and storage to data use, transmission, and destruction. This ensures that personal data and privacy as well as confidential data (such as keys) are strictly protected against disclosure."
...
Obviously I've omited a lot of information from the overview to condense things but the system design is completely 'silo-free' and basically everything is distributed (or can be) to allow for a completely seamless and collaborative environment.
It seems clear to me that Apple sees the path plotted by HarmonyOS as the one to take and as such, agree with your broader point of a largely unified OS for mobile (and desktop).
I can definitely see something like the Vision Pro being able to take advantage of the concept. Especially things like Huawei's 'Super Device' management or broader system configuration options, network traffic on mesh systems etc. Seeing a '3D' representation of certain configuration elements would be a nice option.
Currently I'm rearranging a lot of files on my home NAS using the NAS, a tablet and an external SSD connected to the tablet. It's all very 'modal' and repetitive. It's exactly the kind of situation that a VR headset (AVP or any other) could be used for for the management side with a unified OS providing the backbone for everything and allowing the user(s) to have a visual representation of everything.
And another good reason for Apple to get into the NAS/home network storage field.
The open source branch of HarmonyOS, Open Harmony is also being leveraged for many new systems focused on the domestic and industrial IoT era.
When it’s indoor/outdoor sunglasses, that may possibly change.
I see "just wait until they are sunglasses" line mentioned all the time for the future of VisionPro. But can someone please tell me how you do immersive VR with a pair of wayfarers?
Currently It’s just a put down talking point in short another way of saying, I can’t afford it. I would also say that there probably will be two types of AR/VR glasses (your choice up front when you buy like buying an iPad Pro or a Mac computer) one you wear around indoors (in a controlled environment) and one you use on the road outside, guess what they still ain’t gonna be cheap and that is what most people are crying about. Also, how does any of that happen until Qualcomm is out of the picture.
Bill material Apple Vision lots of line items over $100 and most of which are not the cheap Sony optical is one of the best. In fact they just had a breakthrough in competition with that Dutch company ASML it’s not ready for market yet but when you’re dealing with those two companies you are working with the best and it ain’t cheap, but the main point is it will never be cheap just a little lower price in the future……
Yep gonna cost $500-$1000 near you (Meta was in over its head and never in the game at the beginning and sometime within the next six months they will cancel everything they’re working on quietly, of course)
When it’s indoor/outdoor sunglasses, that may possibly change.
I see "just wait until they are sunglasses" line mentioned all the time for the future of VisionPro. But can someone please tell me how you do immersive VR with a pair of wayfarers?
Currently It’s just a put down talking point in short another way of saying, I can’t afford it. I would also say that there probably will be two types of AR/VR glasses (your choice up front when you buy like buying an iPad Pro or a Mac computer) one you wear around indoors (in a controlled environment) and one you use on the road outside, guess what they still ain’t gonna be cheap and that is what most people are crying about. Also, how does any of that happen until Qualcomm is out of the picture.
Bill material Apple Vision lots of line items over $100 and most of which are not the cheap Sony optical is one of the best. In fact they just had a breakthrough in competition with that Dutch company ASML it’s not ready for market yet but when you’re dealing with those two companies you are working with the best and it ain’t cheap, but the main point is it will never be cheap just a little lower price in the future……
Yep gonna cost $500-$1000 near you (Meta was in over its head and never in the game at the beginning and sometime within the next six months they will cancel everything they’re working on quietly, of course)
Still a very long ways to go for an eye based wearable that can be ubiquitous. I think the sunglasses criticism or eyeglass form factor criticism is basically saying the product needs to be as light, convenient and wearable as a pair of eye glasses. The VR headset form factor, as exemplified by AVP or Quest, takes "work" to put on, "work" to wear, and work to transport.
So, the number one thing Apple has to do with upcoming AVP models is to make it more comfortable to wear, easier to put on and take off, and be pocketable. That's a very long term process. In the meanwhile, there are a lot of things they should be doing to update the AVP. It needs an M4 processor, 32 GB of RAM, a 4500 PPI pair of displays, 12 MP cameras, etc.
Something wearable like a pair of around-the-ear headphones, like the AirPods Max, is interesting. When the user wants to take the headset off, they take it off and hang it around their neck like a pair of headphones. All of 1 second or less. Having it hang around the user's neck is important. If the user has to hold it with a hand or leave it at the table, plus battery, it makes the device less available to use.
When it’s indoor/outdoor sunglasses, that may possibly change.
I see "just wait until they are sunglasses" line mentioned all the time for the future of VisionPro. But can someone please tell me how you do immersive VR with a pair of wayfarers?
Currently It’s just a put down talking point in short another way of saying, I can’t afford it. I would also say that there probably will be two types of AR/VR glasses (your choice up front when you buy like buying an iPad Pro or a Mac computer) one you wear around indoors (in a controlled environment) and one you use on the road outside, guess what they still ain’t gonna be cheap and that is what most people are crying about. Also, how does any of that happen until Qualcomm is out of the picture.
Bill material Apple Vision lots of line items over $100 and most of which are not the cheap Sony optical is one of the best. In fact they just had a breakthrough in competition with that Dutch company ASML it’s not ready for market yet but when you’re dealing with those two companies you are working with the best and it ain’t cheap, but the main point is it will never be cheap just a little lower price in the future……
Yep gonna cost $500-$1000 near you (Meta was in over its head and never in the game at the beginning and sometime within the next six months they will cancel everything they’re working on quietly, of course)
Still a very long ways to go for an eye based wearable that can be ubiquitous. I think the sunglasses criticism or eyeglass form factor criticism is basically saying the product needs to be as light, convenient and wearable as a pair of eye glasses. The VR headset form factor, as exemplified by AVP or Quest, takes "work" to put on, "work" to wear, and work to transport.
So, the number one thing Apple has to do with upcoming AVP models is to make it more comfortable to wear, easier to put on and take off, and be pocketable. That's a very long term process. In the meanwhile, there are a lot of things they should be doing to update the AVP. It needs an M4 processor, 32 GB of RAM, a 4500 PPI pair of displays, 12 MP cameras, etc.
Something wearable like a pair of around-the-ear headphones, like the AirPods Max, is interesting. When the user wants to take the headset off, they take it off and hang it around their neck like a pair of headphones. All of 1 second or less. Having it hang around the user's neck is important. If the user has to hold it with a hand or leave it at the table, plus battery, it makes the device less available to use.
In short more iteration, which means Apples in house hardware and software chops will probably carry the day.
Isolation headsets have never sold well, and based on what we read nothing really changed with Apple joining the fray. So Facebook is reportedly taking a different route, which might be partially why this full headset is paused or cancelled.
There may be news about the mixed-reality "Puffin" later...
Comments
I see "just wait until they are sunglasses" line mentioned all the time for the future of VisionPro. But can someone please tell me how you do immersive VR with a pair of wayfarers?
WoW would be awful.
I really don't think people want to strap something to their face until it's the same form factor as a pair of glasses.
There are already small VR headsets:
and there are AR glasses:
Somewhere between the last two is a product that can do high quality AR/VR in a comfortable form factor. These have the computing separate from the product.
If the bandwidth and latency can be worked out across the connection, this can potentially bring the cost down considerably. People would connect the $1000 iPhone they already own to the headset that is now at least $1000 less. According to the estimated BOM of the Vision Pro, this would allow for a $1600-1700 product with 40% margin.
It could be a version of Airpods Max like a swivel on the outside of the ear cups that allows the user to push it up on top of the head and use the Airpods for audio only.
People can use the Airpods for music as normal. If they want a relaxing environment, move the visor down and dial in an immersive environment. Similarly with a movie. Then there's no need for Eyesight because you can tilt the display up to talk to someone.
If people don't use the visor much, worst-case they paid $1600-1700 for a pair of Airpods Max instead of $550 but they'll use them regularly.
I don't think Apple's operating system software is quite as close to being Apple's device agnostic foundation for the majority of their software products as Apple Silicon is on the hardware side. They are close to this at the core/kernel level but Apple is still actively differentiating iOS, iPadOS, macOS, tvOS, etc., from each other. Maybe it's time for Apple modify their approach (which they may already be doing) and their messaging to move away from iOS, iPadOS, macOS, etc., and take the same approach they've taken with Apple Silicon to move to "Apple OS" as the software equivalent to "Apple Silicon."
I'm not talking about simply putting a new label on the existing operating system platforms, but rather to extend the common core of the OS beyond the kernel level. Just like Apple Silicon there are additional software components that need to get mated with the foundational Apple OS core to fully form all of the unique software platforms. If these components outside of the Apple OS core are primarily there to accommodate the needs of the hardware platforms, e.g., touch screen vs mouse, big screen vs small screen, big memory and storage vs small memory and storage, etc., the possibility for greater convergence on the software side seems possible. Some products like the Mac and iPad may be virtually identical at the Apple OS level and user interface level.
I believe a lot of the things I've mentioned are well along their way or planned for the future. We probably wouldn't be constantly arguing about whether the iPad should be running macOS. Both the Mac and the iPad would be running Apple OS. Both hardware platforms could also have the same adaptation layers for user interaction, i.e., both the Mac and iPad would be touch enabled as well as being mouse, keyboard, trackpad, multiple-display, multi-processing, etc., enabled. The iPad is virtually there already. The Mac side is a different story. However, the stigma of saying that future Macs will be running what is essentially iPadOS goes, or future iPads will be running macOS, goes away when you say that future Macs and iPads will be running Apple OS, which will be something distinctly different from what iPadOS and macOS are today. Of course there will be issues with legacy apps on both platforms, but moving from Intel to Apple Silicon also entailed giving up on a number of legacy considerations, like BootCamp and native x86 support.
Formerly announced back in 2019 at HDC, they specifically described the state of mobile operating systems as being 'siloed' and unable to fully interoperate due to inherent design limitations.
It was clear to most people that that description was referring to Apple and its multiple OS variants.
HarmonyOS is designed to tackle modern day concepts relating to converged hardware/software IoT etc, and later this year will take another step forward by jettisoning Android app compatibility from phones and tablets.
Since that HDC announcement, basically every Apple WWDC has seen system design elements/ideas from HarmonyOS come to iDevices.
The big question is whether all the underlying elements are being changed to pull it off, or if these elements are being implemented by simply channelling holes into each of those siloes. I have no idea but achieving a universal converged goal would be a major undertaking.
Here are some (old) official notes on the system design overview of HarmonyOS for comparison:
...
Hardware Collaboration and Resource Sharing
Hardware collaboration and resource sharing can be implemented between multiple devices. The key technologies include DSoftBus, distributed device virtualization, distributed data management, and Distributed Scheduler.
DSoftBus
DSoftBus is a communication base for interconnecting devices, such as phones, tablets, wearables, smart TVs, and head units. It powers devices with distributed communication capabilities, allowing for auto discovery and zero-wait transmission among devices.
Distributed Device Virtualization
The distributed device virtualization platform enables cross-device resource convergence, device management, and data processing so that multiple devices jointly function as a super virtual device. This platform virtualizes devices and fully utilizes their advantages by assigning the most appropriate hardware to execute particular user tasks. This ensures that services are continuously transferred between different devices. This way, the capability advantages, such as those regarding display, camera, audio, interaction, and sensors, can be fully unleashed for specific devices.
Distributed Data Management
Distributed data management leverages DSoftBus to manage application data and user data distributed on different devices. Under such management, user data is no longer bound to a single physical device, and service logic is separated from data storage. In this case, cross-device data processing is as fast and easy as local data processing. This facilitates multi-device data storage, sharing, and access in all scenarios, therefore creating a foundation for consistent and smooth user experience
Distributed Scheduler
Distributed Scheduler is designed based on technical features such as DSoftBus, distributed data management, and distributed profile. It builds a unified distributed service management mechanism (including service discovery, synchronization, registration, and invocation), and supports remote startup, remote invocation, remote connection, and migration of applications across devices. This way, applications can select a suitable device to perform distributed tasks based on the capabilities, locations, running status, and resource usage of different devices, as well as user habits and intentions.
Distributed Connectivity
The distributed connectivity capability bridges the bottom layer and application layer of a smart device so that different devices can share their hardware and software resources through USB. By drawing from the distributed connectivity capability, you can enrich the connection experience of your products
One-Time Development for Multi-Device Deployment
HarmonyOS provides the application, ability, and UI frameworks, which allow you to reuse service and UI logic during application development. This way, you can develop your applications once, and then deploy them across a broad range of devices, improving your development efficiency.
To be specific, the UI framework supports ArkTS, JS, and Java programming languages and provides extensive polymorphic components to achieve different UI effects on phones, tablets, wearables, smart TVs, and head units. Also, the UI framework complies with the mainstream design concepts in the industry and provides multiple responsive layout solutions, including grid layouts, to make GUIs adaptive to different screens.
Unified OS for Flexible Deployment
HarmonyOS leverages component-based and miniaturized-oriented designs to allow on-demand deployment for diversified devices, adapting to different hardware resources and business characteristics. Specifically, component dependencies are automatically generated based on the cross-compilation toolchain to form a tree diagram illustrating component dependencies, facilitating convenient development and making development available for various devices, regardless of their hardware capabilities.
Security
HarmonyOS-powered distributed devices ensure that the right person uses the right data through the right device.
Right Person
In the distributed scenario, the right person refers to an authenticated user who accesses the data or uses the service. The right person is the prerequisite for preventing illegal data access or user privacy breach. HarmonyOS implements distributed collaborative identity authentication in the following ways:
Right Device
In the distributed scenario, the right person using the right device is the prerequisite to safeguard effective user data security on virtual devices and prevent user privacy breach.
Right Data
To ensure that the right data is used by the right person, HarmonyOS protects data security and privacy throughout the entire lifecycle, from data generation and storage to data use, transmission, and destruction. This ensures that personal data and privacy as well as confidential data (such as keys) are strictly protected against disclosure."
...
Obviously I've omited a lot of information from the overview to condense things but the system design is completely 'silo-free' and basically everything is distributed (or can be) to allow for a completely seamless and collaborative environment.
It seems clear to me that Apple sees the path plotted by HarmonyOS as the one to take and as such, agree with your broader point of a largely unified OS for mobile (and desktop).
I can definitely see something like the Vision Pro being able to take advantage of the concept. Especially things like Huawei's 'Super Device' management or broader system configuration options, network traffic on mesh systems etc. Seeing a '3D' representation of certain configuration elements would be a nice option.
Currently I'm rearranging a lot of files on my home NAS using the NAS, a tablet and an external SSD connected to the tablet. It's all very 'modal' and repetitive. It's exactly the kind of situation that a VR headset (AVP or any other) could be used for for the management side with a unified OS providing the backbone for everything and allowing the user(s) to have a visual representation of everything.
And another good reason for Apple to get into the NAS/home network storage field.
The open source branch of HarmonyOS, Open Harmony is also being leveraged for many new systems focused on the domestic and industrial IoT era.
For example:
https://oniroproject.org/
Bill material Apple Vision lots of line items over $100 and most of which are not the cheap Sony optical is one of the best. In fact they just had a breakthrough in competition with that Dutch company ASML it’s not ready for market yet but when you’re dealing with those two companies you are working with the best and it ain’t cheap, but the main point is it will never be cheap just a little lower price in the future……
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/02/apple-vision-pros-components-cost-1542-but-thats-not-the-full-story/
Yep gonna cost $500-$1000 near you (Meta was in over its head and never in the game at the beginning and sometime within the next six months they will cancel everything they’re working on quietly, of course)
So, the number one thing Apple has to do with upcoming AVP models is to make it more comfortable to wear, easier to put on and take off, and be pocketable. That's a very long term process. In the meanwhile, there are a lot of things they should be doing to update the AVP. It needs an M4 processor, 32 GB of RAM, a 4500 PPI pair of displays, 12 MP cameras, etc.
Something wearable like a pair of around-the-ear headphones, like the AirPods Max, is interesting. When the user wants to take the headset off, they take it off and hang it around their neck like a pair of headphones. All of 1 second or less. Having it hang around the user's neck is important. If the user has to hold it with a hand or leave it at the table, plus battery, it makes the device less available to use.
There may be news about the mixed-reality "Puffin" later...