Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Apple Hardware Technology

Apple Rumored To Announce 'Game-Changer' AR/VR Headset In January 2023 (macrumors.com) 51

Posted by BeauHD from the what-to-expect dept.
Apple is "likely" to announce its long-rumored mixed-reality headset as soon as January 2023, Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo has reiterated. MacRumors reports: In a detailed post on Medium, Kuo explained that Apple's headset will be a "game-changer" for the augmented-reality and virtual-reality market. Describing some of the headset's functionality, Kuo said that while Apple has repeatedly touted its focus on AR, the headset will "offer an excellent immersive experience" and a "video see-thru" mode. The headset is expected to boost demand for immersive gaming and multimedia entertainment experiences.

Kuo said that the device is "the most complicated product Apple has ever designed," leading Apple to use components from many of its existing suppliers. Kuo also believes that Apple will be an industry leader in the headset space, has "significant competitive advantages," and does not need to join the Metaverse Standards Forum. Notably, Kuo thinks that rivals will race to imitate Apple's headset once it launches, "leading the headset hardware industry to the next stage of rapid growth."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Rumored To Announce 'Game-Changer' AR/VR Headset In January 2023 More

Apple Rumored To Announce 'Game-Changer' AR/VR Headset In January 2023

Comments Filter:

    • Badum bumpâ¦

      Have they courageously made the ASCII exclamation mark more beautiful, too?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by ls671 ( 1122017 )

        Badum bumpâ¦

        Have they courageously made the ASCII exclamation mark more beautiful, too?

        It looks like it⦠I can confirm it now after trying itâ¦

        They left the question mark alone although...

        You should try it, I find it kind of coolâ¦

  • People will pay MORE for an average VR headset than you ever thought possible! It's a game changer!

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by fermion ( 181285 )
      I was accepted in the lottery to buy Google glasses. I suspect because no one was to pay the thousands of dollars. I certainly didnâ(TM)t. And as often is the case, Google not being a consumer facing firm killed it off soon after. Apple, despite reputation, does sell products at reasonable costs and with good service. The original iPod mini was sold at the retail cost of the hard drive. But this will be a uphill effort unless they can charge only a few hundred dollars.

      • Apple, despite reputation, does sell products at reasonable costs and with good service.

        Ha ha no. Tell that to someone who never owned a Revision 1 B&W G3, they might believe you. Only the ignorant think Apple has good service.

  • It will be a 'game-changer' headset with no games. AR is just a gimmick that sounds neat until you try it for 2 minutes and then put the headset down. VR can at least be enjoyed for an hour or so in a good game, but what developer is willing to spend the time to port their games to Apple for a headset no one is going to afford?

    • $1,000 monitor STAND comes to mind.

    • Im prepared to accept it might be a good headset. Apple have good form when it comes to screens, and they may well have the only chipset on the planet (The M1/M2 which is an absolute beast as far as ARM chipsets go.) that can take the Occulus quest concept and make it compete with PC based VR (Although the OQ works just fine with a pc).

      But its going to fail for the same reason the rest of VR is failing, because nobody can afford the damn things, or at least justify spending that much money on something tha

      • You forgot: either its glued together and only Apple can take it apart, or the screws will be some weird proprietary junk nobody else will be able to undo. It will also be impossible to recycle any part of it, and it will only last two years.

        • You forgot: either its glued together and only Apple can take it apart, or the screws will be some weird proprietary junk nobody else will be able to undo. It will also be impossible to recycle any part of it, and it will only last two years.

          Name one Apple Product (and I'll even give you the AirPods) that cannot be taken apart.

          Name one Apple fastener you can't buy a tool for.

          Many Apple Products are actually made from Recycled Apple Products.

          So, IOW: You were saying?

        • You're so full of shit, you have no clue what you're talking about. My iPhone is going on six 6 years old and is running the latest version of iOS.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by dgatwood ( 11270 )

        But its going to fail for the same reason the rest of VR is failing, because nobody can afford the damn things, or at least justify spending that much money on something that might well prove to be more of a gimmick than something we'd want to spend a lot of time with.

        If it is almost entirely designed for VR gaming, then it is doomed. But if I can go out for a walk and keep it on my face, it has a chance of being useful for things like watching Netflix with a virtual TV off to one side while I get some exercise, providing easy access to information without pulling out my phone, maybe providing avatar-based video chat using facial shape detection....

        It could be really amazing if they build it right. Or it could be a total flop if they don't.

        • But its going to fail for the same reason the rest of VR is failing, because nobody can afford the damn things, or at least justify spending that much money on something that might well prove to be more of a gimmick than something we'd want to spend a lot of time with.

          If it is almost entirely designed for VR gaming, then it is doomed. But if I can go out for a walk and keep it on my face, it has a chance of being useful for things like watching Netflix with a virtual TV off to one side while I get some exercise, providing easy access to information without pulling out my phone, maybe providing avatar-based video chat using facial shape detection....

          It could be really amazing if they build it right. Or it could be a total flop if they don't.

          They've been poking around with the pieces-parts for this for nearly as long as the Duke Nukem-Timescale Apple Car Project; so they have had such a very long time to develop a broad application envelope, and several plausible use-case examples, that I doubt it will be a complete flop.

          But will it be an iPhone-sized "hit"? That is the question. . .

    • It will be a 'game-changer' headset with no games. AR is just a gimmick that sounds neat until you try it for 2 minutes and then put the headset down. VR can at least be enjoyed for an hour or so in a good game, but what developer is willing to spend the time to port their games to Apple for a headset no one is going to afford?

      AR is only one Composite Layer away from VR.

  • I like turtles. Remember the turtle in Apple Logo?

  • Video see through (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Immerman ( 2627577 )

    I have a hard time seeing how any "video see through" system is going to be a game changer for AR.

    It's a nice to have for VR, and lets it overlap into some AR use cases - but I suspect very few people are going to want to stare at nothing except a screen a fixed effective distance in front of their face showing them a subtly-wrong view of the world around them.

    Game-changing Augmented Reality needs to first and foremost deliver what's in the name: reality, augmented. Reality has real stereoscopic and focal

    • Yeah I had to google this distinction, now I am disappointed in this announcement

      Video-see through systems present video feeds from cameras inside head-mounted devices. This is the standard method that phones for example use AR with

      Optical see-through systems combine computer-generated imagery with "through the glasses" image of the real world

      Optical is the only Augmented Reality I am waiting for.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by dgatwood ( 11270 )

        Yeah I had to google this distinction, now I am disappointed in this announcement

        Video-see through systems present video feeds from cameras inside head-mounted devices. This is the standard method that phones for example use AR with

        Optical see-through systems combine computer-generated imagery with "through the glasses" image of the real world

        Optical is the only Augmented Reality I am waiting for.

        It would be vastly preferable. That said, if they can use enough cameras to get a good enough view of the world to produce a realistic enough 3D model of the world in real-time and make the 3D image adjust instantly using eye tracking, complete with adjusting for the slight parallax differences as your eyes move around (because the lens moves), it might be possible to make something that's good enough using cameras. Maybe.

        I'm torn between wanting to be really excited based on Apple's tendency to release p

    • It doesn't matter how you do it, if you're overlaying real elements with fake ones it's still AR. I personally won't be satisfied with anything less than an eyetap, but that doesn't change the fact.

      • >if you're overlaying real elements with fake ones it's still AR

        I agree, but that's not what they're doing. Instead they're overlaying fake elements with *video* of real elements. They're chopping reality off at the knees (arguably closer to the neck), and then compositing virtual elements into it. Calling it augmented reality is like soaking mushrooms in beef broth and calling them "augmented beef".

        That may be suitable for intermittent use, and certainly lets the software side of the equation mature

        • Optical see-through AR in contrast lets you see real reality in all its glory, while overlaying synthetic imagery onto your view. That will allow you to use "holographic" displays all day without screwing up your eyes, which is where the real game-changer for AR begins.

          Perhaps the stories a year or so ago about Apple planning Prescription AR Glasses might hint at an Optical AR Embodiment of the Invention.

          https://www.ubergizmo.com/2020... [ubergizmo.com]

          . . .and more recently:

          https://lutravision.com/apple-... [lutravision.com]

          • They may eventually do such a thing, I certainly hope so, but that's not what *this* product is.

            • They may eventually do such a thing, I certainly hope so, but that's not what *this* product is.

              Oh, so you're on Apple's Board? You saw the Prototype?

              I don't think we know.

              I just can't see (no pun) Apple releasing a product that looks like the Voit Swim Mask I had as a kid.

              https://i.pinimg.com/originals... [pinimg.com]

    • I suspect very few people are going to want to stare at nothing except a screen a fixed effective distance in front of their face showing them a subtly-wrong view of the world around them.

      I suspect you are very wrong about this.

      You are only thinking about things as they are, not as they could be.

      If the screen quality is really good, the head tracking perfect and the cameras good - you can get basically perfect representation of the world around you, only one that is augmented by processing of that video to

      • First off, let's consider use cases, because I'm not sure you're really appreciating the distinction between VR and AR.

        Oculus Quest [...] is very easy to see the world around you when needed

        Absolutely - and there's lots of applications where having some awareness of the surrounding world while in VR is incredibly useful. But the key point to keep in mind is that for VR the main focus is the virtual world, and having a "window" into the real world augments that.

        For AR though, the main focus is the real world, with virtual elements overlayed when and where desired. It's a ver

        • First off, let's consider use cases, because I'm not sure you're really appreciating the distinction between VR and AR.

          I am absolutely and totally aware of, and thinking about this distinction. In fact I think it's the other way around, I don't think you are fully thinking through both use cases.

          or AR though, the main focus is the real world, with virtual elements overlayed when and where desired.

          But that is mostly what I am talking about - we already know existing older hardware can provide an excellent,

          • Tell you what - do eight hours of on-paper paperwork while wearing the Occulus, and then do it again for the next several days, and then tell me it's "good enough" for real AR applications.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by dgatwood ( 11270 )

          That means your brain's depth perception "circuitry" will always be mis-firing in VR as focal and stereoscopic depth cues disagree. Which probably means your brain begins rewiring itself to ignore focal depth information, which will harm your real-world depth perception. And of course we know that not regularly flexing your eyes to change their focal depth results in declining eye health - we get that even from staring at screens all day, even with all the exercise they get from looking away.

          Well, yes and no. If you have proper eye tracking, you can put things that are at the wrong distance out of focus. So the focal cues and stereoscopic depth cues don't *entirely* disagree — just the motor part of the focal cues.

          And there are experimental lenses that can adjust their focus based on where you're looking. In theory, it could be possible to do that sort of thing inside of an AR headset, though maybe not in practice. :-)

          If you want to provide the full field of view for each eye (like they have in normal un-augmented reality) that requires a roughly 154*x150* FOV (with 114* degrees of horizontal binocular overlap) That's 9800x9500 pixels, or almost three 8K screens worth per eye. And that's just the FOV when staring straight ahead - you'll need to add another 40* or so (and some crazy optics) to handle looking sideways at something.

          From a hardware perspective, that is true. But from a software pers

          • If you have proper eye tracking, you can put things that are at the wrong distance out of focus. So the focal cues and stereoscopic depth cues don't *entirely* disagree

            No, you really can't.

            With gaze tracking you could blur out everything at a depth your gaze isn't currently converging to - but doing so is mostly pointless other than as a performance hack. Most of the time anything you're not focused on is already outside your fovea (the tiny high-resolution spot at the center of your vision) and thus extremely blurred out anyway.

            The real problem is that things aren't in focus when should be. The headset screen is at a optical distance of... let's say 3 feet. If your ey

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      There are a lot of engineering challenges to overcome here.

      It needs to be lightweight, and work with prescription lenses. Battery life has to be great, difficult when you want something light and sleek. The display needs to be highly transparent, full colour and high dynamic range to cope with a variety of lighting conditions. The screens need to be big, to give a decent field of view. The head tracking needs to be incredible. High frame rate for both the screens and the tracking, with extremely low latency

      • >There are a lot of engineering challenges to overcome here.

        To reach good "real" AR, yes, absolutely.

        Not so much here though - these are explicitly VR goggles with video pass-though for low-quality "psuedo-AR". Transparency, etc. doesn't apply.

        For killer apps for real AR - think "holographic" displays as seen in practically every SF movie. Nobody else will be able to see them (unless you share), but to you AR provides "holograms" to order. Want a half-dozen big-screen monitors floating around your wor

  • Putting AR in a pair of regular-looking eyeglasses will be a game changer. Anything else will always be a niche. This sounds like a half-way there solution that won't please anybody.

  • Apple is going to do VR? That means in another 10 years or so everyone on the planet will be expected to own, use, and love one or more regardless if they want or need one.

  • Long time Mac user, Apple hasn't supported games in the past. Major gaming companies are dropping Macs from their new AAA games. Activsion Blizzard is a prime example ! All Diablo games were made for Macs thru D3. After that no Mac support in the new Diablo games and is NOT supported in upcoming Diablo 4 ! Confirmed on their website for Diablo 4 as PC only = Windows only !
    • To be fair Apple isn't using x86_64 anymore. They are using their own ARM based A chips.

      Not that a gaming company couldn't produce ARM binaries, they do for Nintendo products, but there's a huge difference in platform support from the various vendors versus platform support from Apple. Apple could careless if it has games on it's platform. They've always been a second-class citizen on Apple hardware going as far back as the 68k based Macintoshes. Virtually everything from lack of support for industry stan

      • The iPhone disproves your statement. iOS is one of the most prolific gaming platforms around.

        • Did you even read my comment?

          The only recent difference is the Mobile market, but that's tailored to a completely different gaming audience and has a very different market share.

          FYI, the Mobile Gaming market is not the same as the traditional gaming market. The average play times are completely different: Minutes / Seconds VS. Hours / Days. The methods of monetization are completely different: Gatcha / Free-to-play VS. DLC / $60.00 - $80.00 up front barrier to entry. The hardware requirements are completely different: Limited input method (touchscreen), need to minimize audible distractions, Battery powered, low heat dissipation, low compute + rare hi

  • It puts you in an AR/VR call center and it has you provide product support for their new AR/VR headset.
    Very convincing!

  • I just want a virtual monitor and chording keyboard for when I need to do work on the go. A phone is fine as a cpu for most work.

  • Kuo also believes that Apple will be an industry leader in the headset space, has "significant competitive advantages," and does not need to join the Metaverse Standards Forum.

    Yeah, no kidding. Why bother? They were on the board of the USB-IF and didn't bother to bring their lightning connector to the party. If they were to join the standards forum it would only be for purposes of fuckery.

  • AH so like everything else were they just collate existing stuff into one product they have justt invented AR\AVR,

  • Apple will disrupt the VR market and turn it on it’s head. In relatively short time, Apple will be the dominant player and the competitors left in the dust will complain about Apple’s “unfair” business model (aka business model they wish they had). The usual “freedom loving” folks who don’t even use Apple products will complain about how Apple’s business model “eliminates choice” and will ironically advocate for the government to step in and elimin

  • Game changing = has yet another nonstandard connector.

    The soyboys & pseuds will camp out overnight for them.

Slashdot Top Deals

Real Programmers don't eat quiche. They eat Twinkies and Szechwan food.

Close