Apple VR (rumour, 2022)

[Asura]

https://www.roadtovr.com/report-apple-ar-vr-headset-n301/

Could Apple be the next big company to make something similar to the Quest?

[Lebowski]

The appeal of the quest was that it offered vr on a budget wire free. i doubt Apple vr will come in anywhere near what quest was sold at as they have a bad habit of inflating prices, they will have seen the lucrative marketplace on quest and want in on that no doubt.

[wakka]

I really struggle to see where this product fits for Apple personally. A dedicated gaming device just doesn't feel at all in their DNA. And I'm unsure of the applications it could have outside of that (I know that they exist, but I think they tend to be extremely niche).

Mark Gurman at Bloomberg is super reliable on Apple rumours, so I've no doubt the info is accurate, but I can't help but wonder if this ever sees the light of day. A Google Glass type device, effectively a pair of specs with Apple Watch style info built in as a HUD, feels much more likely and viable. That's supposedly the separate device coming in 2023.

Still, who knows? The new Apple TV that's meant to drop this year is supposedly more gaming-focused - which makes sense, since I have no idea honestly where else they could really go with that device, and they've got super powerful ARM SOCs coming out of their ears - so maybe they really are going for dedicated gaming products in the next few years.

[Asura]

I really struggle to see where this product fits for Apple personally. A dedicated gaming device just doesn't feel at all in their DNA. And I'm unsure of the applications it could have outside of that (I know that they exist, but I think they tend to be extremely niche).

Honestly, I think that's why they might do it, as opposed to why not.

It's similar to why FB bought Oculus, and all goes back to (believe it or not) stuff like Playstation Home.

When Home was shown off and released, people ridiculed it, and it's true, it only made back a fraction of the cost Sony put into it in raw sales of the crap that existed in Home (outfits, furniture, etc.) - but, it did something very clever. PSHome was built like a virtual world you could explore, with shops, billboard adverts on the streets, cinemas...

... but they were shops that only sold Sony products, billboard ads that shilled Sony products, and cinemas that only showed trailers for Sony TriStar movies, in a virtual world that was entirely peopled by Sony customers.

When Second Life took off (financially), it did so because Linden Labs managed to convince Coca-Cola to spend hundreds of thousands on in-world locations to help push their brand.

The point, I guess, is that VR is only tangentially related to videogaming, and certainly games are an important aspect of it - but it's more of a media frontier. It's a totally new form of entertainment. Every media and tech company is going to want an "in" somewhere, and, right now, they're all going to have to do so via Facebook's terms, because they're the only company that has managed to really crack it to any significant degree (the Quest 2 recently surpassed sales of the Quest 1, despite being out for far shorter time).

It doesn't fit, at all; like there's no slot for it. It forms a totally new space.

[wakka]

Honestly, I think that's why they might do it, as opposed to why not.

It's similar to why FB bought Oculus, and all goes back to (believe it or not) stuff like Playstation Home.

When Home was shown off and released, people ridiculed it, and it's true, it only made back a fraction of the cost Sony put into it in raw sales of the crap that existed in Home (outfits, furniture, etc.) - but, it did something very clever. PSHome was built like a virtual world you could explore, with shops, billboard adverts on the streets, cinemas...

... but they were shops that only sold Sony products, billboard ads that shilled Sony products, and cinemas that only showed trailers for Sony TriStar movies, in a virtual world that was entirely peopled by Sony customers.

When Second Life took off (financially), it did so because Linden Labs managed to convince Coca-Cola to spend hundreds of thousands on in-world locations to help push their brand.

The point, I guess, is that VR is only tangentially related to videogaming, and certainly games are an important aspect of it - but it's more of a media frontier. It's a totally new form of entertainment. Every media and tech company is going to want an "in" somewhere, and, right now, they're all going to have to do so via Facebook's terms, because they're the only company that has managed to really crack it to any significant degree (the Quest 2 recently surpassed sales of the Quest 1, despite being out for far shorter time).

It doesn't fit, at all; like there's no slot for it. It forms a totally new space.

Yeah, that's a fair point. I guess I've kind of scaled back my expectations of what VR will be after the mega hype of a few years ago kinda fizzled into it being fairly niche. It's still so nascent, though. There is a ton of potential, and Apple will want a foot in the door as you suggest.

The appeal of the quest was that it offered vr on a budget wire free. i doubt Apple vr will come in anywhere near what quest was sold at as they have a bad habit of inflating prices, they will have seen the lucrative marketplace on quest and want in on that no doubt.

Apple gear is generally expensive, yeah, some of it to the point of being a complete piss take (£700 for some wheels for the Mac Pro, etc). But they can be aggressive when they want to be. You can get an Apple Watch for £199 now, which is a category killer to be honest. And the original Airpods launched at £159 and stuck there - not cheap, but far from ridiculous considering how popular £300+ headphones from Bose and Sony are.

[Asura]

I would say also, to shore up [MENTION=5490]wakka[/MENTION]'s point - I'm not an Apple fan, generally. I don't like Mac OS and I've never been a fan of their desktops etc., but while they command a high price, I've found their mobile devices to be solid as a rock. I had my iPhone 4 for ~5 years, and iPhone 5 for ~3 years. I only upgraded due to external factors; I still own both devices and they look like they did the day I bought them.

Conversely, I've never found an Android phone of similar quality. I use a Razer 2 right now, which I got for other reasons, but I've already had to replace it once in less than 18 months.

Part of the reason an Apple headset excites me is that I think it would be really well-designed. It would command a high price, but it'd be worth it.

[MartyG]

The appeal of the quest was that it offered vr on a budget wire free. i doubt Apple vr will come in anywhere near what quest was sold at as they have a bad habit of inflating prices, they will have seen the lucrative marketplace on quest and want in on that no doubt.

It'll also require an AppleID in the same way Quest requires Facebook login - I'd agree it's likely to the Apple tax, but it'll probably look nice and certainly have a good display (I do like Apple's screens).

Wouldn't hold my breath for SteamVR compatibility tho.

[huxley]

I`d rather have an AppleID than have to bow down to Faceaches shady crap

[MartyG]

Seems like a distinction without a difference to me - they're all shady as each other.

[fishbowlhead]

Im going to make a really out there prediction for there. You’ll need a second mortgage to afford it.

[huxley]

Seems like a distinction without a difference to me - they're all shady as each other.

I have no doubt Apple arent the privacy angels they make them selves out to be. Facebooks track record for privacy infringements, data manipulation to trick people into giving up those privacies, add tracking etc are a nightmare.

I would take Apple any day of the week over Facebook.

[importaku]

I`d rather have an AppleID than have to bow down to Faceaches shady crap

I'd rather have neither, quest already totally put me off due to that and i damn well know apple would pull something similar. I'm not prepared to dive into upgraded vr if it means jumping through those hoops i'll stick to psvr if that's the case.

[Neon Ignition]

It immediately feels like a horse leaving the gates late to a race already nearly over. Like they've had it in development so long they feel obliged to release it, dead on arrival and will pass as a footnote on their balance sheets.

[Lebowski]

It immediately feels like a horse leaving the gates late to a race already nearly over. Like they've had it in development so long they feel obliged to release it, dead on arrival and will pass as a footnote on their balance sheets.

You just have to look at their alexa/google smart speakers rival the homepod its failed to make any real dent on the smart speaker market and i think its because of things like the Sonos one coming in at under half the price of homepod, late to the game and overpriced didn't work for them their.

[saif]

Apple can release lots of things that are not that good for what they are yet the mainstream press will go on about it and so there will interest/demand.

Any VR they release will probably be quite good but will largely be reviewed by people that have never tried VR before. They will then gush about how great Apple are for inventing VR and people will go and buy it. This seems to be the way.

Also, it is a gaming device now (VR) but it is really simple to include into other "design" processes an Apple will sell to that kind of "professional" too. Architecture in VR is a very neat idea, for example.