I'm far more interested in the OS and Apps, that's the thing that's going to make this a success or a flop. Hardware (Apple will almost certainly get this right) is important, but the actual user experience and use cases that Apple present are what will be the deciding factor.<p>Outside of gaming and industry use AR/VR have felt a little like a solution in search of a problem. I do believe though that the people who work at Apple are capable of solving that problem, finding the use cases that an every day person wants it for.<p>My benchmark for this is my family, they are all different, with different level of interest in tech. If I can see the majority of them having a use for it, being inspired by the UX and marketing, then it will be successful.<p>Until now none of them have any sort of VR kit, but they all have iPhones and Macs.<p>As a slight aside though, new hardware products are very hard for Apple to keep completely under wraps, too many people in the supply chain, too many factories. Software on the other hand they can lock down incredibly well (pun intended). I am somewhat suspicious that they may supprise us at WWDC with their take on generative AI. Now that could be part of the headset, but it's more likely to be part of iOS/macOS and a feature that aims to help them sell more of their existing hardware ranges.
It's a classic Apple move to leak rumors of extremely high prices and then announcing only medium high prices that make people feel like it's cheap.<p>The original iPad was rumored to cost $1500 to $1800. So when they finally announced it "only" cost $500 people couldn't believe how cheap it was in comparison.
I am really struggling to see how this can succeed. Maybe it will be like Apple Pay, lackluster adoption for a time and then years down the line starts to gain marketshare. Even for me a geek who works in the apple ecosystem with a relatively high paying job who would love to mess with this thing it would be hard for me to justify spending 3k+ on a headset like this. Combine that with the fact that building compelling virtual reality experiences is just difficult, where are the apps going to come from? Maybe I will be totally wrong, I am excited to see it though.
Here is an automated English translation of what seems to be the original source, with a lot more details on the hardware:<p><a href="https://i.postimg.cc/gm6ZNFYw/File-20230521-171346.jpg" rel="nofollow">https://i.postimg.cc/gm6ZNFYw/File-20230521-171346.jpg</a><p>By far the most expensive part are the two 1.3 inch Sony OLED screens at 700 USD (350 each). A "special-shaped flexible OLED" external screen by LG is only listed as 30 USD, which seems quite low. Its purpose may be to see the eyes of the wearer (reverse passthrough).<p>Here the Chinese original: <a href="https://twitter.com/SadlyItsBradley/status/1659091168376807425/photo/1" rel="nofollow">https://twitter.com/SadlyItsBradley/status/16590911683768074...</a>
This reminds me a lot of the lead up to the iPad announcement. A lot of buzz about a super high price and limited functionality (it’s just a big iPhone!) and the the actual price is significantly lower (though this “leak” is already about half of what the other “leaks” have been estimating).<p>I wouldn’t be surprised if this is Apple marketing or Wall Street traders inserting information into the news cycle. For Apple, the benefit is obviously to exceed expectations when they release an $800 headset (still expensive, but so much cheaper to someone who had mentally allocated $1,600). For Wall Street, anything to get the stock price to move one way or the other is valuable.
I love this thread, everyone is sharing their expert opinion on something that is right down the corner.
It would be a great exercise to review this thread 6 months after the headset is on the market, and see the true quality of hn on forecasting.
I am wondering when Apple will start putting a second camera onto iPhones with proper pupil distance, so people can start taking 3D photos and videos in landscape format. That would be a real "whole family" use case...<p>Some years ago I made 3D photos of a wedding with a physical dual camera setup. That was quite a pain to get exposure etc. synchronized and postprocessed. Still the pictures look amazing on a quest. Nowadays this could all be super easy.
BOMs do not have "positioning" remarks attached to them.<p>Marketing positioning information does not have a BOM attached.<p>This is fake. Or at least altered from the real information.
Looks expensive to me, $20 microphone? $40 PCB? $95 mid frame? $70 "heat dissipation module"? Are these prices normal for a mass produced item?
So the internet went from $3000 being the BOM cost and Apple not making any profits to $1.5K BOM cost? [1]<p>And for anyone who knew <i>something</i> about CE BOM cost. That list is just complete BS. At this point it is highly likely Apple will release an AR/VR Headset at $1999 and the internet will think it is a bargain. Given how PR had everyone set the expectation of its cost.<p>[1] <a href="https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/r36yKbcdmZKH0dtxlKAZ8w" rel="nofollow">https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/r36yKbcdmZKH0dtxlKAZ8w</a>
I believe in the potential of this product. Having a quest 1 that use still to this day, I believe very strongly that Apple will make this work.<p>People talk about use cases, but there are quite a few. VR/AR is going to be fantastic for home fitness and Apple already have a fitness subscription, pair that with a watch for stats etc and this really will be a great device for that. Also exactly what apple loves at the moment, requires two products and a subscription in the apple eco system, great to getting people locked in.<p>I think AR/VR as long as they can get it comfortable will replace screens and the TV, why have a TV in the house, when you can put on a headset and be at the cinema? Without it taking up the space of a TV and being something you can take with you anywhere, like a hotel etc. There were rumours for so long that Apple were working on an actual TV, I think what actually happened, is they will release the device that will replace it.<p>All that needs to be done, is for someone to make all this work together and you have got a killer product, so i wouldn't write Apple off just because Meta have done a bad job with trying to sell the metaverse vision to everyone. I don't think Meta were stupid for pursing this, the current products are just half baked and badly executed, but Apple is in the position to do this right. This was the talk of the tech world not too long ago, before AI came and took over everything, but I believe Apple is going to put it firmly back on the map in a few weeks when they drop this. What Apple does, the world listens.<p>This will be expensive and have a lot of flaws, but any generation shifting product that Apple has released has been like that, just wait a few years down the line and see where it goes.
I'm honestly kind of boggled by the HN comments so far, all seem to be various forms "I can't see how wearable displays can offer any value unless they're cheap". To me the use case is obvious: getting rid of the fucking screen. There is no inherent law of physics reason I can't have a full size desktop 10k 40" or whatever max is "display" for every single system I interact with, anywhere. The current paradigm of lots of different screens for different computers (desktop/notebook/tablet/phone/watch/appliances) is because nobody has yet been able to sufficiently directly project photons into retina via something good enough and wearable. Products like the RETISSA II demonstrate direct retinal projection working but without enough resolution, too clunky, etc. But the fundamentals work. The killer app IMO for a wearable display is replacing every other display. I can sit down at my desk or anywhere else and have whatever screen size/config I want, the only difference being how much local compute I have available and at what latency. No more need for "headless servers", just have the right display key pairs and you can pull up a screen/console just from what you're wearing. Same with anything from network switches to printers, can have augmented local display tech using a full size screen vs some tiny little LED thing at best. On a plane or a train and want to watch a movie, or pull up SSH sessions or whatever else? Full screen, and in total privacy. NV/FLIR, or digital [LMH]VPOs could all just feed into my worn display too. Which would be perfectly crisp even for those of us with bad eyes.<p>And on and on and on. It's so <i>obvious</i>. All the challenges involved are engineering/polish/politics (in terms of agreeing on some level of industry standards at least for a minimal level of universal interaction). Which doesn't mean it couldn't be mucked up but the promise is clear. I've spent many many thousands of dollars on displays of all sorts. When one wearable one can replace them all I'd cheerfully pay $5k let alone $3k. It'll also open up entire new realms of form factors for computers.<p>Apple may or may not manage it, and certainly probably not the first go around, but it's pretty clear why they'd want to be getting going on real experience with it even if it's mostly for devs and such to start. It's the definition of a looming disruption, a huge amount of their current visual product design is about "very nice screens, with stuff on them". Something that eventually obsoletes the "screens" bit would be one obvious way someone else could pull the rug out from under most of Apple's current offerings, and conversely is a big new opportunity for them too long term. It might take them 5-10 years, but if they think now is the time to get iterating I don't see why they shouldn't get going even if it's a touch aggressive.
A vr headset is just a really big screen. Imagine how much stuff you can leave on your desktop if it’s a perfect sphere and you can sit in your office chair spinning round with it all whirling past you…
Is "rear view mirror" a joke, or maybe just a lower res cheaper camera pointing backwards, or maybe this leak isn't legit?
Either way, looking forward to seeing the headset!
Surprise no else is making the screen lighter by separating the battery and processor as a necklace or fanny pack or mini backpack.<p>Would have been better if the screen attached to an iPhone thereby reducing the cost of a separate processor/battery.
I struggle to imagine which document would have all these details in one place within Apple.<p>Instead, it looks like someone has reverse engineered one of the devices and guessed at all these figures/details.
I have a VR game I've been working on for 3 years. I planned to have it ready by whenever Apple had a headset ready, but if this thing costs $3000 Idk.<p>I wish they could offer a subsidized devkit or something
$1600, wow! I should confess that despite I am now using my Oculus Quest 2 only for Beat Saber once a month, buying it for $300 two years ago was a real bargain.
Someone mentioned a rumor about "Apple has achieved 1:1 3d video chat where there avatars are almost completely photo realistic"<p><a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35995072" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35995072</a><p>Anyone know a source link?