roake

The IR sensors could be inward or lateral facing and monitor health parameters such as temperature and pulse.  Temperature would likely be more accurate here than at the wrist on a watch.  They would only need to assess periodically, not continuously.  So energy usage could be very low.  I don’t know if there is a role for them to assess the ear canal when the head is turned (prompted by the gyroscopes) to obtain more detailed info.  Perhaps they could help to monitor posture in this fashion (again, I’m unsure if this applies).

While all of this is speculation on my part, I could see the following:

I see Apple keeping the Apple Vision Pro as a premium device without removing any current features, and continue to add features, while maintaining the existing pricing.

I see the addition of a lower end Apple Vision with certain features removed (such as eyesight) to trim costs.

Hardware and associated changes that I see coming include:

Size and Weight: Vision Pro size and weight will be reduced due to ongoing miniaturization of components, continued redesign and improved efficiency of hardware, and ongoing innovation allowing overall reduction of components.  This will be for both units (Vision and. Vision Pro).

Processing Power: Overall, this will continue significantly with every iteration.  Apple Vision will trail behind Vision Pro in terms of on-device processing capabilities.  Vision Pro will start to keep parity with current M-series processors.  I believe gaining support for full Apple Intelligence will play an initial role in this move, but improved efficiency and the overall potential utilization of this processing power will keep this parity ongoing.  The Apple Vision will trail behind the AVP, staying in parity overall with A-chips or less current M-chips.  Both units have some chance of obtaining shared wireless processing with an iPhone or iPad, and potentially MacOS devices.  The Apple Vision Pro may get the ability to have a Thunderbolt connection to MacOS which would add significant shared processing, very fast data transfer, and would allow much more virtual screen real-estate to be shared from a Mac or MacBook than a single UW monitor.  Some of these features will be limited to the Pro version, and will be geared more for developers or high-end business use.  Wireless shared processing would benefit both.

Cameras: These player a critical role in the Vision Pro and will continue to do so.  Low-light sensitivity will dramatically improve, as will overall quality.  Spatial photo and video capture will be improved with every iteration.  Incidentally, Spacial capture will be improved in iPhones as well with each iteration; this will be a strong focus.

Battery: Both devices will gain on-device battery although this may initially have a small capacity and be designed as a buffer to allow battery packs to be switched out without the device powering down.  They may move more battery capacity than expected to the headset with the tether becoming optional, maintaining 2 hours of expected battery life with wireless shared processing or 5 hours with the tethered battery attached with shared wireless processing.  The goal will be to eventually eliminate the tethered battery completely (possibly in around 3 iterations).  

I just want to be able to eat popcorn while I’m watching a movie!

Right now it’s impossible because with every time I pick up a piece to put in my mouth, the AVP thinks I’m trying to do tap gestures, constantly scrubbing to a different spot in the video, closing the window, “clicking” on other videos, other annoying crap.  Pisses me off!  Why can’t I just “lock” tap commands until the video is over (or until I unlock)?

Other than that, I love it!  It’s increasingly part of my workflow.

globby said:

gatorguy said:

What would Apple say if you asked them?

Apple made a nearly identical rights claim change in its Terms of Service at the end of March, worded in much the same way but far more vaguely. But no one noticed. Perhaps that's why Apple has never clarified what it means, either. My guess is the same as Adobe's, but like them, Apple ( and everyone else) needs to be clearer on it.

"Except to the extent prohibited by law, you hereby grant Apple a worldwide, royalty-free, perpetual, nonexclusive license to use the materials you submit within the Services and related marketing as well as to use the materials you submit for Apple internal purposes. Apple may monitor and decide to remove or edit any submitted material, including via automated content filters and/or human review." 

There are too many questions surrounding how our data is being used across all LLM training and delivered AI services. Companies try to avoid discussing it unless the questions become too public. For Adobe they did.

Er ... except that the context for those Apple terms is totally different: "Our Services may allow you to submit or post materials such as comments, ratings and reviews, pictures, videos, and podcasts (including associated metadata and artwork)." That's totally different from what we thought Adobe was claiming.

Anyone can read it here in context: 

K. YOUR SUBMISSIONS TO OUR SERVICES

Our Services may allow you to submit or post materials such as comments, ratings and reviews, pictures, videos, and podcasts (including associated metadata and artwork). Your use of such features must comply with the Submissions Guidelines below, which may be updated from time to time, and if we become aware of materials that violate our Submission Guidelines we will remove them. If you see materials that do not comply with the Submissions Guidelines, including any offensive, abusive, or illegal content, please let us know at reportaproblem.apple.com or by contacting Apple Support. Except to the extent prohibited by law, you hereby grant Apple a worldwide, royalty-free, perpetual, nonexclusive license to use the materials you submit within the Services and related marketing as well as to use the materials you submit for Apple internal purposes. Apple may monitor and decide to remove or edit any submitted material, including via automated content filters and/or human review. 

GatorGuy would make an excellent CNN reporter.  Enough said.

Xed said:

gatorguy said:

Xed said:

gatorguy said:

Xed said:

ralphie said:

Just get under screen Touch ID like everyone else.

No one has under screen Touch ID.

Under-screen Touch ID is common. What they don't have is under-screen Face ID, which is what this article is about. 

The biometrically secure feature should be coming to Android phones next year, not impossible for late this year, courtesy of Trinamix and Qualcomm. Apple integrating the same feature in at least their 2025 iPhone Pro line would not be any shock to me (and yes I understand that the phone design is already locked in place), with 2026 a sure thing if some Android phones already have it.  

No, it's not. There have been rumors of Apple coming out with under screen Touch ID for many years but it still hasn't happened.

If you disagree then by all means show me evidence of a single iPhone or iPad on the market that has it and I'll gladly acknowledge that I'm wrong.

Geez dude. You go from saying "No one has under screen TouchID", and when I point out that it's common outside of iPhones you pipe up saying I'm wrong because Apple doesn't have it. 

Some sleep will do you well. 

Touch ID is an Apple trademark. As far as I know Apple has never used an under the screen fingerprint identity sensor or licensed their technology to others to use under the Touch ID trademark. You claimed that Apple's Touch ID was in use. I gave you the benefit of the doubt andI asked you to prove it by showing me one — just one — shipping product that utilized Touch ID. You've failed to do that at every turn.

If your argument is that other vendors have used an under-display fingerprinted sensor then you should've stated that. I'm sure you understand my basic query but choose to ignore it because you know full well that not all fingerprint sensors offer the same level of security or performance.

I think it's highly likely that Apple never released an under-display Touch ID sensor after so many years of patents, rumors, and what I assume was exhaustive research because it wasn't offering enough security to make it a worthwhile inclusion. Maybe they will in the future when the tech has finally become secure enough or maybe they won't because Face ID is more than sufficient, costs are too high, and/or some other reason. What I doubt will ever happen is Apple licensing Touch ID to Pixel, Huawei, and others.

https://www.apple.com/legal/intellectual-property/trademark/appletmlist.html

Dude, you are a moving target mess.  Come back after you sober up.