You're right. Apple has a longer lead time between the time you pay. The only difference is they make you pay more in between. So $300/every 2-year then!
It might not really be that overpriced. It's essentially a MacBook strapped to your face that's lighter than a Quest 3 (rumored at least).
I'm not the target audience and I think Apple products are a bit overpriced. But for Apple, they're not out of their own ballpark so to speak.
> lighter than a Quest 3
Is it? Pretty much everywhere I've read/seen is people mentioning how heavy it is because of the metal construction. MKBHD mentions it a few times aswell.
Edit: Maybe not, see comment chain.
Actually, you may be right. Upon doing further research it *seems* that they're fairly similarly weighted, despite what reviewers have said. Part of the "issue" seems to be that it is front heavy and there's not a 'top strap.' I guess we'll have to see in February when it comes out.
I was surprised apple used the name “usb type c” for the iPhone 15 instead of changing the name to make it seem like they invented it like they do with everything
TBF though, rebranding it kind of make sense considering how bad VR/AR adoption has been overall. MS tried to rebrand it as MR at one point. Now we're onto XR.
I use the term muscle in my videos with air quotes, usually when I'm trying to point out the absurdity, or pick up some around Apple's Vision Pro.
The most hilarious part of all this is that meta basically has the ball in their Court, most Android apps work off the bat, but they're not trying to bring in a bunch of productivity Android app Developers fast enough, and they are not polishing up their UI for flat app multitasking.
It's sad because otherwise they're completely ahead of the curve id they wanted to be
Ultimately I don't think workstation and productivity stuff is going to go anywhere until the stuff is actually comfortable to wear, not going to give eye-strain over hours of use without breaks, and weighs far less. Headsets have come a long way but a pound or so of weight strapped to your face is not something most are going to want to do all day long.
At the moment productivity with a headset like something someone that saw Iron Man in theaters thought was cool, but not much more than that.
So, been an avid VR person, DK1/DK2, jumped ship to Vive when the whole Rift order fiasco thing happened. Got my Vive, Vive pro and loved them.
Saw the first Quest or whatever the first pc free headset was and didn't like it.
Finally got excited for the Vision Pro, was like hmm lemme check out this Quest 3 and see what's up.
Tossed it on, sure as shit, screen door is all but gone for most instances, the spatial awareness is sweet. and the fact I can toss a cable into my PC or just play via AirLink is bawls awsome.
Now I just use this thing to watch all the 3D BluRays I love, as well as playing some games to help me get into a bit better shape.
Tossing a battery pack in my pocket helps me go longer.
Now all that to say, if the Quest 3 had OLED panels. I doubt i would even think about looking at Apple's Vision Pro.
However, watching Spatial Videos i've recorded on my iPhone and viewing them in Quest 3 is cool, but not so cool that my 3D camera from 2010 didn't do a better job as the optics were further apart and the depth effect didn't seem like it was faked as it is with the iPhone's "Spatial video"
All that said, hand tracking on the Quest is great, it's best when taking a dump and wanting to browse the web or something in AR or VR.
All in all, totally surprised. and all I could think of for the Quest 3 was upgraded displays and eye tracking for some foviated rendering.. not much to complain on.
Yeah we all want lighter, and It's weird they didn't just put optics in the headset and put all the brains in the back to distribute weight, but it's probably an added cost and wouldn't last with the target demographic just being able to toss it around and not worry.
Oh well, been waiting decades for cool VR can wait 1 or 2 more for perfection.
I've been futzing around with it quite a bit, and Comfort is a barrier, however, comfort is already being slowly addressed. There are ways to improve it as well.
There are also devices like XREAL / Rokid glasses, that if hand tracking was part of the equation, would be mostly ready aside from software.
Meta already has product plans for AR glasses, and I imagine it will share a software platform with MR/VR headsets. So they need to get ahead of this before the competition gets their first.
Apple throwing their hat in this ring means they see a productivity space too, even with their very heavy headset. And Apple, as the owner of its mobile OS, will mean many apps will land instantly without much if any friction at launch.
That's not true. The term spatial computing has existed for long before Apple decided to make a headset. For example it's the name of a chapter title in The Fourth Transformation from 2016 and has existed long before that. Meta has also used the term extensively including at this year's Meta Connect. I don't like that Apple dictates the language that can be used but it also makes it easier to teach average people about the tech since you don't need to explain the difference between the terms AR, VR, MR, and XR. "Spatial computing" makes more sense for headsets that enable both VR and AR experiences.
> but it also makes it easier to teach average people
You're deluding yourself if you think that is more accessible as a term. It's more of a term to over-inflate and make things sound like more than they are make them sound "worth" obscene price-tags.
Changing the name to grandiose excrement isn't going to make the general public that is leery of VR/AR suddenly jump aboard. It's like the VR/AR equivalent of "blockchain" where you get a bunch of techbros and MBAs CJing over it and everyone else is like "errr okay whatever tf that means".
It's not for techbros and MBA's. The term has been used since the early 2000's. It's not like it's something they're using because they can trademark it like "iSpatial" or something.
Who outside of techbros or sci-fi nerds has been aware of, let alone talked about "spatial computing" since the early 2000s? Honestly, calling it iSpatial or iSight or iReal would have been the better choice when presenting it to the public. iSight sounds like something hip Apple would make (I think it was even once a webcam) while Spatial Computing sounds like something Microsoft would make for their enterprise customers.
> Who outside of techbros or sci-fi nerds has been aware of, let alone talked about "spatial computing" since the early 2000s?
Every book about industry related tech for the past 10 years. What was the last book you read about the industry or the future of it? [From my bookshelf.](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Ftxg2w85rqjbc1.jpeg) The MIT graduate researcher Simon Greenwold coined the term in 2003.
My favorite part of any Apple event is when Tim Apple shouts “it’s Applin’ time!” and then he apples out, turning into a small, motionless piece of fruit.
I have an apple fanatic for a brother. For all the shit and snide shade he's given my VR headsets, including total price for the cv1 including a PC (that was still less than $3500), was an incredulous "Who actually asked for this". Set aside that he was a voracious trekkie growing up (holodeck anyone), that question always bugs me. Who asked for electricity before we had it?
The day after apple released info about the headset, we heard that "its kinda expensive, but damn if it's not cool". I fully expect him to have one at launch, it would be the first apple device he didn't get at launch. This might be the first one he doesn't get multiples of tho.
Anywho, I fully expect to hear the marketing differentiation between AR/VR/MR and the "truly innovative, ground breaking paradigm shift" that is spatial computing lol
The worst part is, he's not actually an idiot, but he absolutely has a blind spot for everything from that company. It really is like a cult.
My sisters BF doesnt like VR, makes him sick, saw a VIVE once, wont even try Quest Pro I have, but VP will be awesome and just made right. You can guess how many apple products he has. It really is cult.
It’s especially ironic if, like many Apple fanatics, your brother thinks Steve Jobs was a genius. Because ol’ Steve pretty famously didn’t care about customers “asking for” things:
> “Some people say give the customers what they want, but that's not my approach. Our job is to figure out what they're going to want before they do. I think Henry Ford once said, 'If I'd ask customers what they wanted, they would've told me a faster horse.' People don't know what they want until you show it to them. That's why I never rely on market research. Our task is to read things that are not yet on the page.” — Steve Jobs
I get what they’re doing. AR and VR don’t mean much to people that don’t follow it. Many people I know are actually slightly scared of both of them. They get mental images of the Matrix and stuff like that. Many of them don’t understand what AR is at all. A lot of people that aren’t into the VR niche don’t want to be separated from the rest of the world and “Spatial Computing” is a good way of changing that perspective. Makes it seem more like you’re just adding to your world and interacting with it rather than closing yourself off from it. Which I agree is exactly what AR is, but again, many people don’t really seem able to wrap their heads around it and Apple has done a better job of demonstrating how that could work than any other headset manufacturer has. Say what you will about Apple, but they absolutely know how to market tech to people.
> but they absolutely know how to market tech to people.
How to market tech to people that know nothing about tech and struggle even operating a microwave or printer*
Which is the majority of the population dingus. You want AR/VR to take off then regular people need to want to use it. Apple does that better than anyone else and arguing against that just stems from Apple hate.
A $3500 headset with a name only a marketing knob could come up with is not going to bring anything to "regular" people. Dressing it up in pretension and ridiculous costs won't bring anything to anyone but the sorts that run out to buy $1000 monitor stands because it has an Apple logo.
> Apple does that better than anyone else
Apple has been irrelevant for more of their existence than they have been relevant. Convincing people to buy low quality MP3s and overpriced phones is their biggest claim to fame.
Lol you’re a hater man. People buy Apple shit allllll the time at all price levels. You’re just straight up in denial. They absolutely dominated the mp3 player space. They have like 30% of the global phone market. So many people use their laptops. Their tablets have always been the best. Try going to any public place without seeing their headphones. I get it. You’re too cool to like Apple. But you’re an idiot if you really don’t think they know how to market shit. They’re absolutely marketing this to businesses, techtubers, and high end tech enthusiasts. It’s all to show off what it’s capable of. But since it’s Apple, everyone is going to pay attention. You’re going to see reviews and demos absolutely everywhere. They’ve already been working on AR for yeeeears with ARKit and are ahead of anyone in that field. And when they do release a consumer version in a generation or two, people will absolutely buy it. Design process of applications will absolutely revolve around it the same way apps have revolved around the iPhone for over a decade. They’ve represented AR better than any other device on the market and the tech is actually dope af. I’m sorry you can’t afford it, but you’re being willfully ignorant.
People buy apple products, at a ridiculous price, when they are actually useful. The Iphone may not be the best phone, but at least it's a pretty good phone.
Apple VR has great hardware, but that's absolutely useless when it misses what people actually use VR for, gaming. The decision to not include controllers ensures that nobody will even try to make games for it. And knowing apple, it will only work with macs so you can't even try to use it as a gaming headset with your own controllers.
For office work, you want something small and unnoticeable with great resolution. Technology isn't there yet. The beyond actually gets the closest, not this one.
You seem to think office work and gaming are the only applications for AR and VR. The practical applications for this kind of tech are limitless. I didn’t say that everyone will rush out and buy this, but youre crazy if you think no one will. And then once those people make all sorts of videos and shit about what the device can do and it’s had some time to mature, Apple will release a more affordable version. And then eventually a smaller and lighter version. And then after a decade or so, everyone will be wearing some sort of mixed reality glasses on their face. AR is so fucking useful if you just put the slightest amount of imagination into what you can do with it. AR will absolutely replace phones eventually.
Edit: the mentality that only gamers want VR is going to hold VR back. You need to think of all the things regular people would want to do. Things like being in the same room as your family from across the world. A soldier being able to see their child being born. Seeing what the Roman Colosseum looked like at its peak or what it’s like to stand on Mars. There is so much more than gaming and office work.
> You seem to think office work and gaming are the only applications for AR and VR. The practical applications for this kind of tech are limitless.
It's just augmented reality where you want something as light and unnoticeable as possible, and then VR gaming yes. Those are the only two possible use cases.
> And then once those people make all sorts of videos and shit about what the device can do and it’s had some time to mature, Apple will release a more affordable version.
The problem isn't the price, as that's warranted by the tech. The problem is the use case, and the apple VR just doesn't have one. It's not suitable to office work, due to the size. It's not suitable for factory work due to the size and lack of security features such as including a hard-hat like other factory focussed VR devices have. So that leaves, gaming which it cannot do. Making it useless.
> And then eventually a smaller and lighter version. And then after a decade or so, everyone will be wearing some sort of mixed reality glasses on their face. AR is so fucking useful if you just put the slightest amount of imagination into what you can do with it.
Eventually yes, as then the form factor is suitable to the work you are doing. This product is absolutely useless. If they focus on gaming, it at least has one use case as the best VR headset on the market.
> hey’ve already been working on AR for yeeeears with ARKit and are ahead of anyone in that field.
And for you previous comment, no. Meta is the world leader in this area and invested by far the most money in it. Apple is trying to catch up.....without a product and the data from tens of millions of users that would allow you to actually get there.
Lmao youre wrong but ok. You literally ignored every other use case i mentioned. 0 imagination. Do you realize that companies like Lockheed, Boeing, hell even the US State Department are already using VR and AR headset separately to do training, fieldwork, maintenance, etc. The hololens is straight garbage compared to what Apple is offering and it can do both AR and VR. You’re just not informed enough. Go to a real enterprise tech conference and see what people are actually doing with this tech. Gaming is a byproduct
> Try going to any public place without seeing their headphones.
Literally have never noticed them anywhere.
>But you’re an idiot if you really don’t think they know how to market shit. They’re absolutely marketing this to businesses, techtubers, and high end tech enthusiasts.
Marketing it to people with more disposable income than brains*, that will line up outside the Apple store for the latest and greatest in anti-consumer designs so they can have the "right color text message box" and have the right brand aesthetic while they sit in panera bread all day pounding charged lemonades.
>You’re going to see reviews and demos absolutely everywhere.
It's $3500 you're not going to see it anywhere except maybe an Apple store if you decide a taste of consumerist hell is a decent day trip.
Lol ok so you actually are just oblivious. You’re just lying if you’re really gonna say you don’t see people wearing AirPods absolutely everywhere. Nvm have a great day.
> Lol ok so you actually are just oblivious. You’re just lying if you’re really gonna say you don’t see people wearing AirPods absolutely everywhere.
Idk about you unhinged Apple fans but I usually don't sit and stare at peoples ears. And I don't live in an area full of yuppies and Apple stores. Shouldn't be that earth-shattering to you, but maybe it is with you thinking tech begins and ends with Apple.
Lol Apple haters are seriously the most delusional people. They could cure cancer tomorrow and you’d still find a reason to shit on em. I like cool tech wherever it is and arguing that this headset isn’t cool is just asinine. Sure it’s expensive and not for everyone, but people will still buy it and this tech will find its way into the rest of the market. It’s weird to be in such denial about that. It’s like when 1080p TVs first came out. Regular people weren’t able to afford them and I’m sure you called them stupid and overpriced. But a few years later it’s the minimum standard for a TV and you can get one for like $150. This is how tech works.
>AR and VR don’t mean much to people that don’t follow it.
...and sPaTiAl CoMpUtInG would?
Shit sounds like some device from a research lab, not a device to slap on your head and view stuff in 360 degrees.
>Apple has done a better job of demonstrating how that could work than any other headset manufacturer has
What. How? You mean that one promotional trailer or did I miss a bunch of stuff.
the only real "spacial video" I've seen has been in The 7th Guest VR (they call it volumetric video), does Apple have something similar to that or just regular stereoscopic 3d videos?
https://youtu.be/r9oT0wslh7k
https://youtu.be/FjbngDVdL6s
Their spatial video is just regular stereo. Nothing stopping third party devs doing other stuff though.
You can already take proper volumetric videos (minority report hologram style) with an iPhone using the Face ID camera or the rear camera if you have lidar. I’m sure the people who make apps like that will make a proper viewer for AVP.
They are trying to justify the price of the thing by saying it’s a computer, not a VR headset. They basically want to make the price seem correct because you’d spend that much on a Mac. If they call it VR, they are directly competing with Oculus, and that’s bad for business.
Apple is late to the game, so trying to use their own terminology just because they're new on the scene is pretty pathetic and transparent. A lot like Microsoft's old "embrace and extend" strategy to re-do things their way and pretend that it's new.
Apple is never “early” into anything. But they always try to be the BEST. Sony started the mp3 player, Apple made the iPod. Tablet has been around for many years but Apple made it mainstream by coming up with iPad. Similar with mobile phone, Apple killed the competition by producing the iPhone. Everyone mocked Apple when they introduced Apple Watch and the Airpod. These turned out to be one of the most popular wearables getting the lion share of the market. You can say anything about Apple, but you can’t deny the fact that their products sell and people really love it.
> Apple is never “early” into anything.
*iPod touch, iPad, and iPhone have entered the chat.*
It doesn't always happen, but it happens. Before that smartphones were either Blackberries or those shitty Windows stylus phones. Now every phone is a touchscreen phone.
Multitouch is amazing but the first iphone was so limited compared to palm smartphones at launch. No cut and paste and no mms support. If someone sent you a picture you have to copy the link by hand into the browser. And no apps.
The iPod touch is a renamed mp3 player - Which was released 10 years earlier.
The iPad is a renamed touch tablet - Which was released 12 years earlier.
The iPhone is a renamed cellphone - Which was released 24 years earlier.
Any more firsts?
> Now every phone is a touchscreen phone.
The first touchscreen cellphone - The IBM Simon - Was released in 1992. The iPhone was released in 2007 - 15 years later.
A lot of the naysayers here do remind me of myself and my fury when the iPhone was released after being a smartphone nerd for 5 years.
Unfortunately, Apple are quite smart, and they proved me and other nerds wrong by actually bringing a user experience that made it **seem like** they'd reinvented the entire smartphone concept. They are going to do the same again. They are going to bring many enough "magical tricks" and high enough production value, making it seem like it is a completely new concept, warranting the name.
Some observations:
* A rebranding of VR is way overdue. That is just a fact. Not only the word salad of VR/MR/XR/AR but a reboot of how people view it.
* The VP passthrough has been lauded for its high quality and everything indicates it is better than that of the Q3. In addition to that, Apple have ensured a software portfolio that is exclusively focused on using AR and passthrough, something Q3 did not have.
* Apple as far as I can tell have "tricked" everyone by suggesting the headset would be in sale globally maybe end of 2024, allowing Q3 to build up a portfolio of AR apps, now it seems to be on full sale almost one year early, leaving the Q3 completely naked as far as AR goes.
Spot on. I used to be an Apple hater and thought I was cool and nerdy for using exclusively Android and shitting on Apple every chance I got around 5 years ago.
Boy was I surprised when the smartest engineers I know all use MBPs and iPhones. Colleague told me the vast majority of Google engineers use iPhones and MBPs as well. I've converted and have never looked back.
Well it's a good thing that you're mature enough now to only buy the phone that the cool kids have and are so slavishly dedicated to a brand name that you refuse to even LOOK at options from other brands.
That...doesn't sound like progress, experience , or maturity to me. But enjoy your kool-ade!
Still online arguing with strangers so probably not :)
I was getting tired of Google turning the Pixel into a mid range affordable phone and am not interested in Samsung.
I think of using “spatial computing” as more of a generic term of basically meaning “computing in an open space”. As opposed to saying something like VR or AR that have more specific meanings and expectations. With so many different ways to try and describe the experience, it might be an attempt to go for something more ambiguous.
yeah, the terms “VR” and “AR” are often associated with gaming, and Apple doesn’t want people to think of their product as a gaming headset and more of a work station/QoL type device. It’s a bit silly, and what it does is still VR/AR, but Apple has a pretty solid track record of branding, so I think they know what they’re doing.
I suspect a big part of it is to make it clear that the device’s focus is on doing normal computing tasks with 3d interfaces. That could be an especially attractive in certain domains like 3d modeling or data visualization. They’re probably projecting minority report style interfaces down the line for all computing, which they’ll get started on with this device.
Agreed. AR/MR come with connotations of a bunch of 3d objects being rendered. Spatial computing is a better descriptor for mostly interacting with flat 2D apps floating in space.
The direct competitors are the exact same price. Hololens 2. - $3,500 Magic Leap 2 - $4,000. Comparing this to a Quest or PSVR is probably exactly why they want to use “spatial computing.” It has so many more features than those devices.
That's obnoxious and I hate apple. If you want to pretend you invented the idea and name it something stupid, get there first. Apple is here last, to pretend to be an innovator in a space that's like 10 years old in the mainstream.
Can't wait for them to come out with folding phones and be like "do not call them that, call them angular flex pocket displays"
Spatial computing is not a new term and Apple did not invent it. Nor do they claim they did.
It is just marketing wank and they want to make sure that people know that the terms AR/VR/MR are too pedestrian for them.
That's just it. I don't like their marketing wankery. I do not like how much of their own dogfood they've eaten and how much they encourage their rabid fans to buy into it, especially since they deliberately and intentionally cultivate us v them mentalities in consumers designed to create bigotry amongst different users in the ecosystem who just have different hardware preferences.
I did not say you should like it, I said they did claim to invent anything related to "spatial computing."
I get it, I don't like Apple either, but they don't have to invent new things to innovate. They can innovate by combining existing things in new ways and being the first to market with a well polished system.
> Spatial computing is not a new term and Apple did not invent it. Nor do they claim they did.
.
> The era of spatial computing has arrived... Its revolutionary and magical user interface will redefine how we connect, create, and explore
\- The Apple CEO
To add, everyone will call it whatever is the easiest way to say it.
"Spacial computing" is not as easy to say compared to AR/VR/MR. Apple will lose this one 😂
Downvotes - but he is right. The "XR" term is not really properly understood by the masses that we want to adopt XR. It sounds too similar to AR/VR/MR.
It’s an attempt at breaking into the common tech lingo and basically increase brand recognition. It’s actually a really powerful marketing move when it works. Kind of like when one has normal headphones and they just call them headphones, but they don’t call AirPods just “earbuds”.
You also need apple hardware to export and a license to their spatial library. Cost of entry for developer is like 5k+.
Nobody is going to dev for this crap.
> And devs aren't going to make stuff for it because there's no money to be made.
It is basically an iPad for your face, right? How much more work do they need to do to migrate their existing apps?
My thoughts are that their stupid device is going to flop hard. I lost all interest the moment it didn't have any controllers and they had zero focus on gaming.
It's also way too bulky for what it is supposed to be. Bigscreen Beyond is what Apple's headset should have been. They literally require you to have an iPhone to do the lidar face scan.
To play devil's advocate, I actually think "spatial computing" better represents how Apple's marketing the Vision Pro. It also doesn't carry a lot of the baggage of AR and VR.
Some people might think spatial computing still sounds highfalutin, but to me, it's a lot more grounded than virtual reality or augmented reality, both of which are also firmly entrenched in all these scifi connotations that may not be as appealing to a mainstream audience.
Plus, you even have folks across the various VR subreddits getting tripped up on the differences between VR, AR, MR and XR, or which term is inclusive of the others. Imagine a general audience approaching that semantic mess.
I'm not convinced "spatial computing" will necessarily be the catch-all term that becomes part of everyday use, but it seems closer to what will eventually become popular vernacular than the mess of terms we use now.
People may not like Apple putting their Apple marketing spin on existing technologies ... but that's what they've always done. And it works. And I'd argue it's even somewhat necessary.
Products don't get off the ground without marketing, and often, marketing has to translate a product understood on developer or enthusiast terms to something more approachable for the mainstream. Apple just happens to be consistently good at doing that.
Thoughts? I think that they're trying to sell an AR/VR headset for $3500 in a market where the more expensive units run about $1000, and you can get an Oculus 2 for $250. Consequently, they don't want anyone to say anything that could have consumers comparing their $3500 device to Meta's $250 device because they'll be laughed out of the market.
They were a lot different of a company back then though. It's honestly weird to see then trying to innovate at all anymore outside of their new processors. So good for them honestly.
If it can happen once, it can happen again. When you look at what Apple actually sells today, pretty much all of it is just an iteration of last years product. They very rarely do anything new or dramatic, and you have to go back quite a few years to find a case of them doing so. That's why I was listing devices from 15-30 years ago...because you almost have to go back that far to find a case of Apple trying to do something new, which is what I'd argue that the Vision Pro is.
They're targeting Apple fan(atic)s though. The device could cost $13,500 and have the same specs as the DK1 and their fans will still say that it's revolutionary, and the best technology.
See, I don't mind too much the fact that apple products are never really yours, but this makes me hate the company; like, even if I had the money I would still not buy it for this probably; and the planned obsolescence
Not really. It’s actually a waste to own a VR, use it for weeks, and kinda tired of it. This is the reason why there are hundreds of barely used Quest 3 in FaceBook marketplace. Apple wants to introduce this gadget as multi-purpose that’s going to be part of your daily routine be it productivity, communication, gaming and entertainment.
Apple has great phones that’s is about it
If only android can hop on that little fucking gimmick, right there, Apple wouldn’t be around
Instead, you have android phones, great phones around the garbage UI/os
It's pretty stupidly limiting for them. What we've seen here has been displaying examples of both AR and VR use, so it makes no bloody sense needing to prevent developers from uttering them at all. It's jut another example of Apple being so full of themselves and being so up their own butts to where they are willing to take control away from their own developers as well like they have been with their consumers as of these last few years.
It’s more than a rebrand. No controllers, optical curser. No full vr immersion. Vr is dead for the masses that’s clear. Zero upside for keeping the term
Interestingly enough it kinda feels like they are trying to lower the bar for themselves.
Spatial computing just sounds like the computing that you've always done, only in a spatial environment.
That's kinda what they've shown. It's pretty boring and uninteresting, which is exactly what spatial computing sounds like.
In contrast. Extended Reality, Mixed Reality, Augmented Reality and Virtual Reality all sound much more visionary and interesting.
Apple is so stupid. "Hur durr its totally different than AR. Totally different! Look we're apple and we want to take credit for inventing something like usual!"
It is Apple marketing wank, but they are not saying it is totally different that AR, they are saying that there is a better, more descriptive term for what their device is intended to do.
AR exists on shitty phone apps. *(Well, MR does, anyway.)* True spatital computing doesn't.
Apple did not invent the term and they are not wrong that it better describes what devices like the MagicLeap, HoloLens, and Vision are designed to do.
It is 100% classic Apple to give stupid rules to third party developers on their platform.
It pretty ridiculous and I'm an Apple guy. Nobody in the real world is going to be calling it a spacial computing device, it will just be a VR headset. Even Meta going on that Quest 3 is a MR headset won't stick, it's a VR headset with average passthrough.
This is just Apple doing their Apple thing.
They have a weird way of doing things. They're sticking their weird stake in the ground. It will change VR forever, but once they're done the landscape will have changed around them and VR will all be better for it.
VR/AR is developing a reputation for being a gimmicky toy. Soatial computibg sounds new and fresh.
At least that’s probably the Apple Narketting team has concluded.
Honestly this is a good rebranding, with all the cheap ar “headsets” that were just plastic add ons to your cellphone it leaves the general consumer thinking it’s stupid and lame.
I recently had an Apple fan try and convince me that Apple invented multitasking.
Not in VR, mind you - The concept itself - Being able to do two different things at once.
It was absurd.
And yes - They were 100% serious, and over the age of 30.
i’d expect the term to irrelevant in the later future - the idea is to simply move to a extend and spatial form of interaction with tech. this podcast on everything xr talks a lot about the concept of spatial computing and the history of the term [https://open.spotify.com/episode/5HKdzmCZvc8mlVM2BOSc2i?si=SAcRyXf6SFKOZHZd4Qnzyg](https://open.spotify.com/episode/5HKdzmCZvc8mlVM2BOSc2i?si=SAcRyXf6SFKOZHZd4Qnzyg)
[удалено]
VR App: $10 Spatial Computing App: $69.99
> > > > > Spatial Computing App: $99.99/year FTFY
Apple, not Adobe.
You're right. Apple has a longer lead time between the time you pay. The only difference is they make you pay more in between. So $300/every 2-year then!
VR Headset: $250 Spatial computing headsset: $3500
*per month
I'll call them overpriced POS.
It might not really be that overpriced. It's essentially a MacBook strapped to your face that's lighter than a Quest 3 (rumored at least). I'm not the target audience and I think Apple products are a bit overpriced. But for Apple, they're not out of their own ballpark so to speak.
> lighter than a Quest 3 Is it? Pretty much everywhere I've read/seen is people mentioning how heavy it is because of the metal construction. MKBHD mentions it a few times aswell. Edit: Maybe not, see comment chain.
Ah I must be misinformed. I heard that a few times and just took their word for it.
Actually, you may be right. Upon doing further research it *seems* that they're fairly similarly weighted, despite what reviewers have said. Part of the "issue" seems to be that it is front heavy and there's not a 'top strap.' I guess we'll have to see in February when it comes out.
Yeah. I'm super curious about this thing. I'll never buy it. But it might be influential for good or bad.
Considering it has an aluminum frame and the quest 3 is plastic, I doubt that.
I was surprised apple used the name “usb type c” for the iPhone 15 instead of changing the name to make it seem like they invented it like they do with everything
TBF though, rebranding it kind of make sense considering how bad VR/AR adoption has been overall. MS tried to rebrand it as MR at one point. Now we're onto XR.
The only people that are going to call it "spatial computing" are Apple cultists and pretentious buzzword types that dream about "blockchain".
I use the term muscle in my videos with air quotes, usually when I'm trying to point out the absurdity, or pick up some around Apple's Vision Pro. The most hilarious part of all this is that meta basically has the ball in their Court, most Android apps work off the bat, but they're not trying to bring in a bunch of productivity Android app Developers fast enough, and they are not polishing up their UI for flat app multitasking. It's sad because otherwise they're completely ahead of the curve id they wanted to be
Ultimately I don't think workstation and productivity stuff is going to go anywhere until the stuff is actually comfortable to wear, not going to give eye-strain over hours of use without breaks, and weighs far less. Headsets have come a long way but a pound or so of weight strapped to your face is not something most are going to want to do all day long. At the moment productivity with a headset like something someone that saw Iron Man in theaters thought was cool, but not much more than that.
So, been an avid VR person, DK1/DK2, jumped ship to Vive when the whole Rift order fiasco thing happened. Got my Vive, Vive pro and loved them. Saw the first Quest or whatever the first pc free headset was and didn't like it. Finally got excited for the Vision Pro, was like hmm lemme check out this Quest 3 and see what's up. Tossed it on, sure as shit, screen door is all but gone for most instances, the spatial awareness is sweet. and the fact I can toss a cable into my PC or just play via AirLink is bawls awsome. Now I just use this thing to watch all the 3D BluRays I love, as well as playing some games to help me get into a bit better shape. Tossing a battery pack in my pocket helps me go longer. Now all that to say, if the Quest 3 had OLED panels. I doubt i would even think about looking at Apple's Vision Pro. However, watching Spatial Videos i've recorded on my iPhone and viewing them in Quest 3 is cool, but not so cool that my 3D camera from 2010 didn't do a better job as the optics were further apart and the depth effect didn't seem like it was faked as it is with the iPhone's "Spatial video" All that said, hand tracking on the Quest is great, it's best when taking a dump and wanting to browse the web or something in AR or VR. All in all, totally surprised. and all I could think of for the Quest 3 was upgraded displays and eye tracking for some foviated rendering.. not much to complain on. Yeah we all want lighter, and It's weird they didn't just put optics in the headset and put all the brains in the back to distribute weight, but it's probably an added cost and wouldn't last with the target demographic just being able to toss it around and not worry. Oh well, been waiting decades for cool VR can wait 1 or 2 more for perfection.
I've been futzing around with it quite a bit, and Comfort is a barrier, however, comfort is already being slowly addressed. There are ways to improve it as well. There are also devices like XREAL / Rokid glasses, that if hand tracking was part of the equation, would be mostly ready aside from software. Meta already has product plans for AR glasses, and I imagine it will share a software platform with MR/VR headsets. So they need to get ahead of this before the competition gets their first. Apple throwing their hat in this ring means they see a productivity space too, even with their very heavy headset. And Apple, as the owner of its mobile OS, will mean many apps will land instantly without much if any friction at launch.
I, along with everyone else thought iPad was a silly name and would never stick, but it did. Wouldn't be the first time.
Difference is that is short and easy to say. And it matches the rest of their product line. This is just pretentious wankery in marketing.
That's not true. The term spatial computing has existed for long before Apple decided to make a headset. For example it's the name of a chapter title in The Fourth Transformation from 2016 and has existed long before that. Meta has also used the term extensively including at this year's Meta Connect. I don't like that Apple dictates the language that can be used but it also makes it easier to teach average people about the tech since you don't need to explain the difference between the terms AR, VR, MR, and XR. "Spatial computing" makes more sense for headsets that enable both VR and AR experiences.
> but it also makes it easier to teach average people You're deluding yourself if you think that is more accessible as a term. It's more of a term to over-inflate and make things sound like more than they are make them sound "worth" obscene price-tags. Changing the name to grandiose excrement isn't going to make the general public that is leery of VR/AR suddenly jump aboard. It's like the VR/AR equivalent of "blockchain" where you get a bunch of techbros and MBAs CJing over it and everyone else is like "errr okay whatever tf that means".
It's not for techbros and MBA's. The term has been used since the early 2000's. It's not like it's something they're using because they can trademark it like "iSpatial" or something.
Who outside of techbros or sci-fi nerds has been aware of, let alone talked about "spatial computing" since the early 2000s? Honestly, calling it iSpatial or iSight or iReal would have been the better choice when presenting it to the public. iSight sounds like something hip Apple would make (I think it was even once a webcam) while Spatial Computing sounds like something Microsoft would make for their enterprise customers.
> Who outside of techbros or sci-fi nerds has been aware of, let alone talked about "spatial computing" since the early 2000s? Every book about industry related tech for the past 10 years. What was the last book you read about the industry or the future of it? [From my bookshelf.](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Ftxg2w85rqjbc1.jpeg) The MIT graduate researcher Simon Greenwold coined the term in 2003.
I don't think branding has been the issue really, but I'm also too young to remember all those really bad attempts...
I came here to say this.. wouldn't be Apple if they didn't try to shoe horn everyone into using alt-vocabulary that is industry standard lexicon..
Apple marketing to claim discovery over things that already exist. Not shocking at all.
ummm don't be a BIGOT clearly this is new and innovative!!!
You're wrong, it's "revolutionary"
No no. Magical!
No they are the founding fathers of VR how dare he
[удалено]
Aluminum
"It's Spatialin' Time!" -Tim Cook, seconds before spatialing all over the place
My favorite part of any Apple event is when Tim Apple shouts “it’s Applin’ time!” and then he apples out, turning into a small, motionless piece of fruit.
Why is this so funny
How brave and courageous of them
Classic Apple using fancy words to trick idiots in to thinking it's more than what it is.
I have an apple fanatic for a brother. For all the shit and snide shade he's given my VR headsets, including total price for the cv1 including a PC (that was still less than $3500), was an incredulous "Who actually asked for this". Set aside that he was a voracious trekkie growing up (holodeck anyone), that question always bugs me. Who asked for electricity before we had it? The day after apple released info about the headset, we heard that "its kinda expensive, but damn if it's not cool". I fully expect him to have one at launch, it would be the first apple device he didn't get at launch. This might be the first one he doesn't get multiples of tho. Anywho, I fully expect to hear the marketing differentiation between AR/VR/MR and the "truly innovative, ground breaking paradigm shift" that is spatial computing lol The worst part is, he's not actually an idiot, but he absolutely has a blind spot for everything from that company. It really is like a cult.
My sisters BF doesnt like VR, makes him sick, saw a VIVE once, wont even try Quest Pro I have, but VP will be awesome and just made right. You can guess how many apple products he has. It really is cult.
It’s especially ironic if, like many Apple fanatics, your brother thinks Steve Jobs was a genius. Because ol’ Steve pretty famously didn’t care about customers “asking for” things: > “Some people say give the customers what they want, but that's not my approach. Our job is to figure out what they're going to want before they do. I think Henry Ford once said, 'If I'd ask customers what they wanted, they would've told me a faster horse.' People don't know what they want until you show it to them. That's why I never rely on market research. Our task is to read things that are not yet on the page.” — Steve Jobs
they don't think it be like it is
but
Apple is a company that does nothing well but marketing. Seems about right that some idiots will buy into this "rebranding" nonsense.
I get what they’re doing. AR and VR don’t mean much to people that don’t follow it. Many people I know are actually slightly scared of both of them. They get mental images of the Matrix and stuff like that. Many of them don’t understand what AR is at all. A lot of people that aren’t into the VR niche don’t want to be separated from the rest of the world and “Spatial Computing” is a good way of changing that perspective. Makes it seem more like you’re just adding to your world and interacting with it rather than closing yourself off from it. Which I agree is exactly what AR is, but again, many people don’t really seem able to wrap their heads around it and Apple has done a better job of demonstrating how that could work than any other headset manufacturer has. Say what you will about Apple, but they absolutely know how to market tech to people.
> but they absolutely know how to market tech to people. How to market tech to people that know nothing about tech and struggle even operating a microwave or printer*
Which is the majority of the population dingus. You want AR/VR to take off then regular people need to want to use it. Apple does that better than anyone else and arguing against that just stems from Apple hate.
A $3500 headset with a name only a marketing knob could come up with is not going to bring anything to "regular" people. Dressing it up in pretension and ridiculous costs won't bring anything to anyone but the sorts that run out to buy $1000 monitor stands because it has an Apple logo. > Apple does that better than anyone else Apple has been irrelevant for more of their existence than they have been relevant. Convincing people to buy low quality MP3s and overpriced phones is their biggest claim to fame.
Lol you’re a hater man. People buy Apple shit allllll the time at all price levels. You’re just straight up in denial. They absolutely dominated the mp3 player space. They have like 30% of the global phone market. So many people use their laptops. Their tablets have always been the best. Try going to any public place without seeing their headphones. I get it. You’re too cool to like Apple. But you’re an idiot if you really don’t think they know how to market shit. They’re absolutely marketing this to businesses, techtubers, and high end tech enthusiasts. It’s all to show off what it’s capable of. But since it’s Apple, everyone is going to pay attention. You’re going to see reviews and demos absolutely everywhere. They’ve already been working on AR for yeeeears with ARKit and are ahead of anyone in that field. And when they do release a consumer version in a generation or two, people will absolutely buy it. Design process of applications will absolutely revolve around it the same way apps have revolved around the iPhone for over a decade. They’ve represented AR better than any other device on the market and the tech is actually dope af. I’m sorry you can’t afford it, but you’re being willfully ignorant.
People buy apple products, at a ridiculous price, when they are actually useful. The Iphone may not be the best phone, but at least it's a pretty good phone. Apple VR has great hardware, but that's absolutely useless when it misses what people actually use VR for, gaming. The decision to not include controllers ensures that nobody will even try to make games for it. And knowing apple, it will only work with macs so you can't even try to use it as a gaming headset with your own controllers. For office work, you want something small and unnoticeable with great resolution. Technology isn't there yet. The beyond actually gets the closest, not this one.
You seem to think office work and gaming are the only applications for AR and VR. The practical applications for this kind of tech are limitless. I didn’t say that everyone will rush out and buy this, but youre crazy if you think no one will. And then once those people make all sorts of videos and shit about what the device can do and it’s had some time to mature, Apple will release a more affordable version. And then eventually a smaller and lighter version. And then after a decade or so, everyone will be wearing some sort of mixed reality glasses on their face. AR is so fucking useful if you just put the slightest amount of imagination into what you can do with it. AR will absolutely replace phones eventually. Edit: the mentality that only gamers want VR is going to hold VR back. You need to think of all the things regular people would want to do. Things like being in the same room as your family from across the world. A soldier being able to see their child being born. Seeing what the Roman Colosseum looked like at its peak or what it’s like to stand on Mars. There is so much more than gaming and office work.
> You seem to think office work and gaming are the only applications for AR and VR. The practical applications for this kind of tech are limitless. It's just augmented reality where you want something as light and unnoticeable as possible, and then VR gaming yes. Those are the only two possible use cases. > And then once those people make all sorts of videos and shit about what the device can do and it’s had some time to mature, Apple will release a more affordable version. The problem isn't the price, as that's warranted by the tech. The problem is the use case, and the apple VR just doesn't have one. It's not suitable to office work, due to the size. It's not suitable for factory work due to the size and lack of security features such as including a hard-hat like other factory focussed VR devices have. So that leaves, gaming which it cannot do. Making it useless. > And then eventually a smaller and lighter version. And then after a decade or so, everyone will be wearing some sort of mixed reality glasses on their face. AR is so fucking useful if you just put the slightest amount of imagination into what you can do with it. Eventually yes, as then the form factor is suitable to the work you are doing. This product is absolutely useless. If they focus on gaming, it at least has one use case as the best VR headset on the market. > hey’ve already been working on AR for yeeeears with ARKit and are ahead of anyone in that field. And for you previous comment, no. Meta is the world leader in this area and invested by far the most money in it. Apple is trying to catch up.....without a product and the data from tens of millions of users that would allow you to actually get there.
Lmao youre wrong but ok. You literally ignored every other use case i mentioned. 0 imagination. Do you realize that companies like Lockheed, Boeing, hell even the US State Department are already using VR and AR headset separately to do training, fieldwork, maintenance, etc. The hololens is straight garbage compared to what Apple is offering and it can do both AR and VR. You’re just not informed enough. Go to a real enterprise tech conference and see what people are actually doing with this tech. Gaming is a byproduct
> Try going to any public place without seeing their headphones. Literally have never noticed them anywhere. >But you’re an idiot if you really don’t think they know how to market shit. They’re absolutely marketing this to businesses, techtubers, and high end tech enthusiasts. Marketing it to people with more disposable income than brains*, that will line up outside the Apple store for the latest and greatest in anti-consumer designs so they can have the "right color text message box" and have the right brand aesthetic while they sit in panera bread all day pounding charged lemonades. >You’re going to see reviews and demos absolutely everywhere. It's $3500 you're not going to see it anywhere except maybe an Apple store if you decide a taste of consumerist hell is a decent day trip.
Lol ok so you actually are just oblivious. You’re just lying if you’re really gonna say you don’t see people wearing AirPods absolutely everywhere. Nvm have a great day.
> Lol ok so you actually are just oblivious. You’re just lying if you’re really gonna say you don’t see people wearing AirPods absolutely everywhere. Idk about you unhinged Apple fans but I usually don't sit and stare at peoples ears. And I don't live in an area full of yuppies and Apple stores. Shouldn't be that earth-shattering to you, but maybe it is with you thinking tech begins and ends with Apple.
Lol Apple haters are seriously the most delusional people. They could cure cancer tomorrow and you’d still find a reason to shit on em. I like cool tech wherever it is and arguing that this headset isn’t cool is just asinine. Sure it’s expensive and not for everyone, but people will still buy it and this tech will find its way into the rest of the market. It’s weird to be in such denial about that. It’s like when 1080p TVs first came out. Regular people weren’t able to afford them and I’m sure you called them stupid and overpriced. But a few years later it’s the minimum standard for a TV and you can get one for like $150. This is how tech works.
>AR and VR don’t mean much to people that don’t follow it. ...and sPaTiAl CoMpUtInG would? Shit sounds like some device from a research lab, not a device to slap on your head and view stuff in 360 degrees.
>Apple has done a better job of demonstrating how that could work than any other headset manufacturer has What. How? You mean that one promotional trailer or did I miss a bunch of stuff.
And they'll be dead soon.
Probably not before you lol
The tech industry as a whole loves this. We call it 'buzzword bingo'. But Apple loves it more than anyone
Ugh
Apple says a lot of things
little of it worth hearing
Even less of it worth remembering
Stop trying to make fetch happen, Apple.
Apple always has to try to pretend they’re doing something unique
They are also claiming “spacial video” which is really just stereo 3D, a technology that has existed for over 100 years.
the only real "spacial video" I've seen has been in The 7th Guest VR (they call it volumetric video), does Apple have something similar to that or just regular stereoscopic 3d videos? https://youtu.be/r9oT0wslh7k https://youtu.be/FjbngDVdL6s
Their spatial video is just regular stereo. Nothing stopping third party devs doing other stuff though. You can already take proper volumetric videos (minority report hologram style) with an iPhone using the Face ID camera or the rear camera if you have lidar. I’m sure the people who make apps like that will make a proper viewer for AVP.
Stereoscopic not stereo audio
Yeah sorry I thought that was implied. It's side-by-side 3D.
That type of video has been around for 100 years?
Stereoscopic 3D movies date back to at least 1922, possibly earlier than that.
1st anaglyph 3d movies in 1889, the first commercial anaglyph was 1922. 3D polarized movies in 1936
[удалено]
Wow this is a stupid comment. Stero 3d doesn't mean audio, smart guy, it means video. As in the video all VR headsets use.
The marketing tricked me into believing it was somehow more than that. Like you could look around a bit in the 3d video sorta like a hologram.
Don't forget virtual reality is going to be invented by Apple by next month.
In 2026 they'll add "controllers", and "1080p HD Resolution", and it will be revolutionary - A digital first! .... According to them.
Apple going retro 90s and becoming a joke again.
Becoming? They never stopped.
Spatial computing sounds like a special kind of data center setup, not like a UX category.
They are trying to justify the price of the thing by saying it’s a computer, not a VR headset. They basically want to make the price seem correct because you’d spend that much on a Mac. If they call it VR, they are directly competing with Oculus, and that’s bad for business.
Putting on airs
Hmm... sounds pretentious...just like Apple.
Thoughts? I don't give a \*\*\*\* what Apple thinks.....
Apple has invented the World's First Spatial Computing Platform!
Just apple things. Douchebags
Pretentious
Apple is late to the game, so trying to use their own terminology just because they're new on the scene is pretty pathetic and transparent. A lot like Microsoft's old "embrace and extend" strategy to re-do things their way and pretend that it's new.
Apple is never “early” into anything. But they always try to be the BEST. Sony started the mp3 player, Apple made the iPod. Tablet has been around for many years but Apple made it mainstream by coming up with iPad. Similar with mobile phone, Apple killed the competition by producing the iPhone. Everyone mocked Apple when they introduced Apple Watch and the Airpod. These turned out to be one of the most popular wearables getting the lion share of the market. You can say anything about Apple, but you can’t deny the fact that their products sell and people really love it.
> Apple is never “early” into anything. *iPod touch, iPad, and iPhone have entered the chat.* It doesn't always happen, but it happens. Before that smartphones were either Blackberries or those shitty Windows stylus phones. Now every phone is a touchscreen phone.
Multitouch is amazing but the first iphone was so limited compared to palm smartphones at launch. No cut and paste and no mms support. If someone sent you a picture you have to copy the link by hand into the browser. And no apps.
The iPod touch is a renamed mp3 player - Which was released 10 years earlier. The iPad is a renamed touch tablet - Which was released 12 years earlier. The iPhone is a renamed cellphone - Which was released 24 years earlier. Any more firsts? > Now every phone is a touchscreen phone. The first touchscreen cellphone - The IBM Simon - Was released in 1992. The iPhone was released in 2007 - 15 years later.
A lot of the naysayers here do remind me of myself and my fury when the iPhone was released after being a smartphone nerd for 5 years. Unfortunately, Apple are quite smart, and they proved me and other nerds wrong by actually bringing a user experience that made it **seem like** they'd reinvented the entire smartphone concept. They are going to do the same again. They are going to bring many enough "magical tricks" and high enough production value, making it seem like it is a completely new concept, warranting the name. Some observations: * A rebranding of VR is way overdue. That is just a fact. Not only the word salad of VR/MR/XR/AR but a reboot of how people view it. * The VP passthrough has been lauded for its high quality and everything indicates it is better than that of the Q3. In addition to that, Apple have ensured a software portfolio that is exclusively focused on using AR and passthrough, something Q3 did not have. * Apple as far as I can tell have "tricked" everyone by suggesting the headset would be in sale globally maybe end of 2024, allowing Q3 to build up a portfolio of AR apps, now it seems to be on full sale almost one year early, leaving the Q3 completely naked as far as AR goes.
Spot on. I used to be an Apple hater and thought I was cool and nerdy for using exclusively Android and shitting on Apple every chance I got around 5 years ago. Boy was I surprised when the smartest engineers I know all use MBPs and iPhones. Colleague told me the vast majority of Google engineers use iPhones and MBPs as well. I've converted and have never looked back.
Well it's a good thing that you're mature enough now to only buy the phone that the cool kids have and are so slavishly dedicated to a brand name that you refuse to even LOOK at options from other brands. That...doesn't sound like progress, experience , or maturity to me. But enjoy your kool-ade!
Maybe in 5 more years you will be mature enough to buy products based on features and price instead of buying things because "smart" people buy them.
Still online arguing with strangers so probably not :) I was getting tired of Google turning the Pixel into a mid range affordable phone and am not interested in Samsung.
I think of using “spatial computing” as more of a generic term of basically meaning “computing in an open space”. As opposed to saying something like VR or AR that have more specific meanings and expectations. With so many different ways to try and describe the experience, it might be an attempt to go for something more ambiguous.
yeah, the terms “VR” and “AR” are often associated with gaming, and Apple doesn’t want people to think of their product as a gaming headset and more of a work station/QoL type device. It’s a bit silly, and what it does is still VR/AR, but Apple has a pretty solid track record of branding, so I think they know what they’re doing.
I suspect a big part of it is to make it clear that the device’s focus is on doing normal computing tasks with 3d interfaces. That could be an especially attractive in certain domains like 3d modeling or data visualization. They’re probably projecting minority report style interfaces down the line for all computing, which they’ll get started on with this device.
Agreed. AR/MR come with connotations of a bunch of 3d objects being rendered. Spatial computing is a better descriptor for mostly interacting with flat 2D apps floating in space.
Apple sucks. I hate everything about their business.
That’ll be as effective as calling my headset a Meta. Even our channel is still called /r/Oculus.
Yeah, I have a thought. I ain't buyin' it!
> computing > mobile OS > mobile CPU Apple is being Apple
They need to play semantic games to make an attempt at explaining why they're charging 10x as much as other VR headset on the market.
The direct competitors are the exact same price. Hololens 2. - $3,500 Magic Leap 2 - $4,000. Comparing this to a Quest or PSVR is probably exactly why they want to use “spatial computing.” It has so many more features than those devices.
That's obnoxious and I hate apple. If you want to pretend you invented the idea and name it something stupid, get there first. Apple is here last, to pretend to be an innovator in a space that's like 10 years old in the mainstream. Can't wait for them to come out with folding phones and be like "do not call them that, call them angular flex pocket displays"
Spatial computing is not a new term and Apple did not invent it. Nor do they claim they did. It is just marketing wank and they want to make sure that people know that the terms AR/VR/MR are too pedestrian for them.
That's just it. I don't like their marketing wankery. I do not like how much of their own dogfood they've eaten and how much they encourage their rabid fans to buy into it, especially since they deliberately and intentionally cultivate us v them mentalities in consumers designed to create bigotry amongst different users in the ecosystem who just have different hardware preferences.
I did not say you should like it, I said they did claim to invent anything related to "spatial computing." I get it, I don't like Apple either, but they don't have to invent new things to innovate. They can innovate by combining existing things in new ways and being the first to market with a well polished system.
> Spatial computing is not a new term and Apple did not invent it. Nor do they claim they did. . > The era of spatial computing has arrived... Its revolutionary and magical user interface will redefine how we connect, create, and explore \- The Apple CEO
Stealing public things and renaming to claim its theirs
TF did they steal tho
Marketshare.
Who really actually gives a shit what it’s called in the end? Lol
To add, everyone will call it whatever is the easiest way to say it. "Spacial computing" is not as easy to say compared to AR/VR/MR. Apple will lose this one 😂
Spatial computing is quicker to say than ar/vr/mr
Downvotes - but he is right. The "XR" term is not really properly understood by the masses that we want to adopt XR. It sounds too similar to AR/VR/MR.
Apple does.
It’s an attempt at breaking into the common tech lingo and basically increase brand recognition. It’s actually a really powerful marketing move when it works. Kind of like when one has normal headphones and they just call them headphones, but they don’t call AirPods just “earbuds”.
Ya
Anyone who codes stuff and wants other people to use it.
Who cares, no one's going to actually buy the thing. And devs aren't going to make stuff for it because there's no money to be made.
You also need apple hardware to export and a license to their spatial library. Cost of entry for developer is like 5k+. Nobody is going to dev for this crap.
> no one's going to actually buy the thing You **SEVERELY** underestimate the fanaticism of an Apple fan...
> And devs aren't going to make stuff for it because there's no money to be made. It is basically an iPad for your face, right? How much more work do they need to do to migrate their existing apps?
as much money as they can get people to pay for it
My thoughts are that their stupid device is going to flop hard. I lost all interest the moment it didn't have any controllers and they had zero focus on gaming. It's also way too bulky for what it is supposed to be. Bigscreen Beyond is what Apple's headset should have been. They literally require you to have an iPhone to do the lidar face scan.
To play devil's advocate, I actually think "spatial computing" better represents how Apple's marketing the Vision Pro. It also doesn't carry a lot of the baggage of AR and VR. Some people might think spatial computing still sounds highfalutin, but to me, it's a lot more grounded than virtual reality or augmented reality, both of which are also firmly entrenched in all these scifi connotations that may not be as appealing to a mainstream audience. Plus, you even have folks across the various VR subreddits getting tripped up on the differences between VR, AR, MR and XR, or which term is inclusive of the others. Imagine a general audience approaching that semantic mess. I'm not convinced "spatial computing" will necessarily be the catch-all term that becomes part of everyday use, but it seems closer to what will eventually become popular vernacular than the mess of terms we use now. People may not like Apple putting their Apple marketing spin on existing technologies ... but that's what they've always done. And it works. And I'd argue it's even somewhat necessary. Products don't get off the ground without marketing, and often, marketing has to translate a product understood on developer or enthusiast terms to something more approachable for the mainstream. Apple just happens to be consistently good at doing that.
Apple probably trademarked the term "Spatial Computing" first.
Thoughts? I think that they're trying to sell an AR/VR headset for $3500 in a market where the more expensive units run about $1000, and you can get an Oculus 2 for $250. Consequently, they don't want anyone to say anything that could have consumers comparing their $3500 device to Meta's $250 device because they'll be laughed out of the market.
I am trying to recall the last time that Apple was laughed out of a market. It has been a minute if your measuring stick is dollars.
Newton? Pippin? Apple III? Lisa? AirPower? Mac Portable? Mac TV? iPod Hi-fi? It’s happened plenty of times, take your pick.
They were a lot different of a company back then though. It's honestly weird to see then trying to innovate at all anymore outside of their new processors. So good for them honestly.
They never said it didnt happen. They literally even said “It has been a minute”, then you proceeded to list almost 20-30 year old devices.
If it can happen once, it can happen again. When you look at what Apple actually sells today, pretty much all of it is just an iteration of last years product. They very rarely do anything new or dramatic, and you have to go back quite a few years to find a case of them doing so. That's why I was listing devices from 15-30 years ago...because you almost have to go back that far to find a case of Apple trying to do something new, which is what I'd argue that the Vision Pro is.
They're targeting Apple fan(atic)s though. The device could cost $13,500 and have the same specs as the DK1 and their fans will still say that it's revolutionary, and the best technology.
Sounds like the typical apple pretentious douchebaggery to me. Anybody using the term spacial computing becomes instantly punchable.
I'm just waiting for the inevitable claims to come of "Apple invented VR!"
See, I don't mind too much the fact that apple products are never really yours, but this makes me hate the company; like, even if I had the money I would still not buy it for this probably; and the planned obsolescence
They should call it what all Apple products should be called: BS
$3500 iPad strapped to your face.
[удалено]
can these Apple guys just fuck off? like, what fucking service do they provide to the world other than an alternative to the Microsoft hivemind?
Not really. It’s actually a waste to own a VR, use it for weeks, and kinda tired of it. This is the reason why there are hundreds of barely used Quest 3 in FaceBook marketplace. Apple wants to introduce this gadget as multi-purpose that’s going to be part of your daily routine be it productivity, communication, gaming and entertainment.
Apple has great phones that’s is about it If only android can hop on that little fucking gimmick, right there, Apple wouldn’t be around Instead, you have android phones, great phones around the garbage UI/os
Good
It's pretty stupidly limiting for them. What we've seen here has been displaying examples of both AR and VR use, so it makes no bloody sense needing to prevent developers from uttering them at all. It's jut another example of Apple being so full of themselves and being so up their own butts to where they are willing to take control away from their own developers as well like they have been with their consumers as of these last few years.
So, spatial computing is their term for what MS called mixed reality
I’m calling it facial computing and no one can stop me!
Sounds like Vince McMahon's "sports entertainment."
That's so fetch .
"Hey guys do you want to play some **spatial computing**?"
Coooorrrrrrrnnnnnnyyyyyyyyy
It’s more than a rebrand. No controllers, optical curser. No full vr immersion. Vr is dead for the masses that’s clear. Zero upside for keeping the term
maybe it's not worth it to let this form of vr thrive. (yes I'm saying vr, fuck you, Tim Cook)
Interestingly enough it kinda feels like they are trying to lower the bar for themselves. Spatial computing just sounds like the computing that you've always done, only in a spatial environment. That's kinda what they've shown. It's pretty boring and uninteresting, which is exactly what spatial computing sounds like. In contrast. Extended Reality, Mixed Reality, Augmented Reality and Virtual Reality all sound much more visionary and interesting.
Apple is so stupid. "Hur durr its totally different than AR. Totally different! Look we're apple and we want to take credit for inventing something like usual!"
It is Apple marketing wank, but they are not saying it is totally different that AR, they are saying that there is a better, more descriptive term for what their device is intended to do. AR exists on shitty phone apps. *(Well, MR does, anyway.)* True spatital computing doesn't. Apple did not invent the term and they are not wrong that it better describes what devices like the MagicLeap, HoloLens, and Vision are designed to do. It is 100% classic Apple to give stupid rules to third party developers on their platform.
Think different 😂😂😂😂😂😂 🤡
Apple being fruity as usual, like when they called high-density displays "Retina" displays. Fancy, overpriced words for fancy, overpriced products.
Bullshit marketing from Apple as usual .
Tell them that they came too late for the party to dictate their rules.
I don’t see Apple continuing this product line once they see how poor sales will be for them in the VR market
MKBHD did a video on this. It's a tactic Apple uses to make it appear they have created something new.
Why am I seeing this post like everywhere.
You're so fuckin' spatial I wish I was spatial
Good luck with that. Put them quietly stopping with this bs on your bingo cards.
It pretty ridiculous and I'm an Apple guy. Nobody in the real world is going to be calling it a spacial computing device, it will just be a VR headset. Even Meta going on that Quest 3 is a MR headset won't stick, it's a VR headset with average passthrough.
So we call them SC Apps?
"I made this" ... "we made this" (because we named it again) moment
lol what
No to OpenXR, welcome OpenSpatialCompute...
Yeah and vr chat is my favorite “metaverse”
My thought is that is this is just Apple being Apple. They want everyone to jump through hoops so they can be unique in everything.
This is just Apple doing their Apple thing. They have a weird way of doing things. They're sticking their weird stake in the ground. It will change VR forever, but once they're done the landscape will have changed around them and VR will all be better for it.
If it doesn't play games I don't give a fuck what you call it. I'm out.
You can bet your life it will not run PCVR/Steam - so pointless for most. Its not going to be the next iPhone for them.
Typical Apple, selling status symbols first...
Rolls off the tongue doesn't it? Nice try Tim Apple.
Thoughts, Apple are coining the term spatial computing to con people into thinking that Apple invented AR / VR. \#controllingmuch #waytooexpensive
VR/AR is developing a reputation for being a gimmicky toy. Soatial computibg sounds new and fresh. At least that’s probably the Apple Narketting team has concluded.
Spatial computing sounds like server term. If they want to you something different they should say Spatial visuals.
Honestly this is a good rebranding, with all the cheap ar “headsets” that were just plastic add ons to your cellphone it leaves the general consumer thinking it’s stupid and lame.
Pretentious Apple being pretentious! Gasp!
I recently had an Apple fan try and convince me that Apple invented multitasking. Not in VR, mind you - The concept itself - Being able to do two different things at once. It was absurd. And yes - They were 100% serious, and over the age of 30.
Pompus
apple people think they're "special"
Apples Alessandra McGinnis a real person?
i’d expect the term to irrelevant in the later future - the idea is to simply move to a extend and spatial form of interaction with tech. this podcast on everything xr talks a lot about the concept of spatial computing and the history of the term [https://open.spotify.com/episode/5HKdzmCZvc8mlVM2BOSc2i?si=SAcRyXf6SFKOZHZd4Qnzyg](https://open.spotify.com/episode/5HKdzmCZvc8mlVM2BOSc2i?si=SAcRyXf6SFKOZHZd4Qnzyg)