What do you think about Apple's new headset?

I'm excited. It's definitely a v1 considering how early their app ecosystem is and how limited the battery life is (2 hours IIRC), but it's a promising look into the future of AR/VR/spatial computing. The price, of course, is steep. Although as someone tweeted yesterday: It might be wise to buy one unopened as an investment. 😊

I think it looks incredible. If it is as good as it looks, who needs a computer? How can you say the ship has sailed when there’s nothing like it on the market? I have the quest2, and it does not do anything like that. Ya I’m dying to try it.

@aaronoleary How the hell can you say just $3500? I'm from India, $3500 in Indian Rupees is 2,89,207.45 Indian Rupee. No one in India would be interested in buying this. Instead of this, people in India can afford Meta Oculus Quest 2, which is just ₹46,979.00 or $568.44, and it is a excellent headset in the VR space in this price point.

It looks pretty, but to be expected from Apple. Personally, I am not a fan of this level of wearable tech. I think I will wait for holographic displays to become a reality...

I'm excited about Apple's new headset. Its advanced features, sleek design, and seamless integration with Apple's ecosystem make it a compelling choice for an immersive audio experience. I look forward to trying it out.

I believe that AR displays will need to have the form-factor of sunglasses to be an all-day, every-day device. This is still too bulky and expensive to be an market device, however it is still groundbreaking as a potential entertainment and productivity tool. The brightness and resolution are unmatched and the gesture/eye tracking is supposedly solid. Does anyone know for certain technology is behind the "postage sized displays elements" in the display and if it is microLED? Apple has been investing in microLED since buying LuxVue 9 years ago and it has long been speculated that this AR display would be the target release. https://www.pcgamer.com/apple-ow...

I think it will be very hard to adapt these headsets because of the size and mobility. I believe, at some point, seeing digital things in real life will probably cause new mental and physical problems. It looks cool and exciting, I would love to try once but I don't think I would use it consistently.

From my experience as a wearable developer, this product form factor will not work for the mass market or any regular casual/professional applications, or even high end engineering applications where you need to see products in 3D in space. People don't like to wear VR helmets for a variety of ergonomic, fashion and functionality reasons, and that's why it's failed as a concept for all but gaming and X-rated applications. So one inherent problem with the product, price aside, is that Apple has historically been soft on gaming, lacking the key AAA game developers that develop for Microsoft and Sony platforms. If this had been suggested to be primarily a gaming device, and they showed someone playing immersive Grand Theft Auto or similar popular title, I think it would have been received better and there would be some slim market for it among well-heeled gamers, techies and streamers. For entertainment, well that's out too, because you're limited to movies that are exactly 120 min or less, and unless you're alone you'll want to communicate with or touch the people you're watching with, which becomes a lot harder when you're both wearing helmets. People also like to be comfortable during their leisure time, so wearing a few pounds of tech on your head is not ideal. For work applications, the first generation of this product at least will not have the control schema necessary to be able to work even half as rapidly as you can on a computer, because the spatial controls will most likely not be precise enough to match the fine control of a mouse, and as you may know a keyboard is not so easily replaced with voice control in all scenarios. Also it looks like it's based on ipad OS not Mac OS, so you'll lack the functionality of a desktop computer. That might be OK for certain people, like for example I went through college using an iPad as my primary device. But why use this over an iPad that you can carry with you anywhere, that has a battery that lasts 5-10x longer, and costs 1/10th of this? Many consumers don't even like to wear headphones in their ears, they tell me that all the time, which is why they like our audio glasses. So I think that as a platform, bulky head mounted displays are a non-starter for like 97% of the population. In my view based on my experience working in smartglasses, for an AR/MR smart eyewear product to justify this price tag and/or achieve mass market adoption, it needs to meet the following criteria: -A form factor that is similar to traditional eyeglasses, that can be worn anywhere without undue attention -A battery life that can power smart features for all or most of the day. -Weigh around 1-2 ounces to be comfortable enough to wear all day and not cause neck strain. -Any virtual displays need to be binocular and extensively tested for eye strain and macular degeneration -Prescription adaptation at a reasonable price is a must since 2/3 of the US needs vision correction -Functionality that nearly perfectly matches or surpasses the abilities of a smartphone -Sufficient MR features that the interaction of virtual objects and the environment is exciting or useful enough to attract the user away from the 2D devices they are accustomed to and make the "magic leap" into an HMD user. We were genuinely concerned that we would be competing with Apple to popularize smartglasses, but this is a very unexciting and uninspired product, out of financial reach for almost all consumers. Sadly for the Apple fans out there, this will not be an evolved replacement for your eyeglasses, which is what a great smartglass should be.

Looking forward to see how Meta will slash the price of it.

We've already pivoted. https://ruumio.vision/