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.
You missed my point, so skippit. No one in 1963 thought we'd be landing on the moon in 5-6 years - until we decided to make it a priority and did so. "Of course" is hindsight, something that is always 20:50.
I fixed the typo so it was clearer for you to figure out. I was just trying to type a ducking word.
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.
You missed my point, so skippit. No one in 1963 thought we'd be landing on the moon in 5-6 years - until we decided to make it a priority and did so. "Of course" is hindsight, something that is always 20:50.
I fixed the typo so it was clearer for you to figure out. I was just trying to type a ducking word.
The goal to get to the moon before the end of the decade was well documented and planned. It was a "space race", after all. We didn't just end up there by accident. This wasn't Colombus "discovering" the Americas. Armstrong's first words weren't, "we just wanted to get into orbit around Earth but we landed on the moon by accident."
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?
I too am worried about the power cable to the battery.
Connection to the headset itself is proprietary, a form of MagSafe. I don’t mind that.
But that the already proprietary cable is permanently attached to the battery pack means that if there becomes any cable issues you have to replace the whole thing. And then it also means an additional port in the battery pack is needed, instead of the one port for both charging and for connecting to the headset.
This is not good design, dictated by margin chasing accountants, not engineers.
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?
To give software developers time to, well, develop before launch.
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.
You missed my point, so skippit. No one in 1963 thought we'd be landing on the moon in 5-6 years - until we decided to make it a priority and did so. "Of course" is hindsight, something that is always 20:50.
I fixed the typo so it was clearer for you to figure out. I was just trying to type a ducking word.
It’s not hard to type a word. Just fucking type 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.
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.
You missed my point, so skippit. No one in 1963 thought we'd be landing on the moon in 5-6 years - until we decided to make it a priority and did so. "Of course" is hindsight, something that is always 20:50.
I fixed the typo so it was clearer for you to figure out. I was just trying to type a ducking word.
The goal to get to the moon before the end of the decade was well documented and planned. It was a "space race", after all. We didn't just end up there by accident....
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.
I wonder if they thought that using MagSafe or a usb-c connection might make the unit prone to too many unwanted disconnects, since the cord could easily be snagged on something if the user was moving around. Or maybe placing a magnetic coil right where your brain is located wasn’t a good idea.
I’m mostly looking forward to seeing / helping to develop assistive tech for people with disabilities on this platform. Eye-gaze controls and selection activation can be a godsend for people with motor control problems (please find a way to finalize a selection with something other than a hand gesture).
Selections-to-speech will be easy. Selections-to environmental controls will be a cinch, and much more.
I’m mostly looking forward to seeing / helping to develop assistive tech for people with disabilities on this platform. Eye-gaze controls and selection activation can be a godsend for people with motor control problems (please find a way to finalize a selection with something other than a hand gesture).
Selections-to-speech will be easy. Selections-to environmental controls will be a cinch, and much more.
Hopefully, a third party will be able to provide a hot swappable, dual battery configuration so that there is essentially limitless power with multiple batteries.
Apparently the Vision Pro is already hot swappable. There’s presumably a small battery in the headset itself.
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).
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.
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.
I don't begrudge Apple or Tim Cook for unveiling this now. It is an impressive piece of technology and seems baked enough for consumption. I am looking forward to using it.
Also, a shout-out to AppleInsider. Their render more or less nailed the look of this device!
I think people overlook a simple function on this machine: 3D movie making. Just look at iPhone which function everyone uses everyday: taking pictures and making videos. You don’t need a killer apps, Apple just need to create a YouTube like website to host all the homemade 3D movies so people can watch and feel immersed into other lives. Remember this old movie from 1995: Strange Days? That’s all Apple needs to make everyone wants 1. Example: roller coaster ride in First person view. Like all the reviewers said they watched a demo movie and they feel like they are in the movie with them. That’s the KILLER app.
I think people overlook a simple function on this machine: 3D movie making. Just look at iPhone which function everyone uses everyday: taking pictures and making videos. You don’t need a killer apps, Apple just need to create a YouTube like website to host all the homemade 3D movies so people can watch and feel immersed into other lives. Remember this old movie from 1995: Strange Days? That’s all Apple needs to make everyone wants 1. Example: roller coaster ride in First person view. Like all the reviewers said they watched a demo movie and they feel like they are in the movie with them. That’s the KILLER app.
Someone else can be the first person to ride on a rollercoaster with a $3500 hat on.
Comments
I fixed the typo so it was clearer for you to figure out. I was just trying to type a ducking word.
https://www.jfklibrary.org/learn/about-jfk/historic-speeches/address-to-joint-session-of-congress-may-25-1961
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.
I am looking forward to using it.
Also, a shout-out to AppleInsider. Their render more or less nailed the look of this device!
how easy will the front glass break?