Apple Is Breaking Its Own Rules with a New Headset | Hacker News Reader

Apple Is Breaking Its Own Rules with a New Headset

wsj.com

19 pointsdcgudeman29 comments

"Executives and tech analysts say Apple isn’t waiting longer because it would take too much time to make its ideal version, competitors are already in the market and the company has already devoted a lot of capital and resources into developing the headset."

None of this is about the user.

That would be sad if why. Apple was really late to the mp3 player game with the iPod, but if you're Apple, it's not about when you do it but that you do it really well. See also: iPhone.

Also iPad, Apple Watch; maybe HomePod (we'll ignore iPod Hi-Fi.)

But Apple also sometimes does "hobby" projects like Apple TV.

(Personally I kind of wish they'd sell an Apple TV gaming configuration with a decent controller included in the box and maybe a full year's subscription to Apple Arcade.)

iPod and iPhone solved problems users had. They needed an easy UI to transition from 12-song CDs to properly tagged 500 track libraries.

The iPhone combined music player, mobile internet device and camera phone in an easy enough to use package for the average cellphone user.

What issue does a headset solve? Apple at least had heavy competition from Blackberry and Nokia back then. Here they are walking in largely unopposed as there aren't enough customers to bother competing over.

If the experience were immersive enough, I can see the headset offering a movie theater or large computer display experience in a portable device you can take almost anywhere.

But they lose me every time I hear something about workplace collaboration or gaming.

They're going to lose most people at the price. The original Oculus Quest was $400 for OLED displays that were amazing for watching movies on. If their headset is a high-DPI version of that with a mandatory tether, I don't think it's going to be very successful.

And maybe it's not a bad product. The Lisa wasn't. It was ludicrously expensive compared to it's competitors though, which sealed its fate regardless of how practical or visionary the computer was.

I think that they really need to ship it to get it from what is likely to be a good prototype to an actual polish product that really matches people’s needs. They can only do so much on their own behind closed doors guessing at that software developers will do and what people will want. The best way to improve quickly is to get it in people’s hands and on their heads.

It would be sad for anyone to think it's really ever been about "the user". Oh, sure, the reality distortion field made it seem that way, but it really never was.

Cynic.

"Everyone is out for their own profit, except me of course"

Why is it hard to believe that anyone wants to build something that people will like?

Do you really think money on top of money is that gratifying?

After Jony Ive left it's mostly operations people in Tim Cook's inner circle, and no one outside of operations with equivalent credibility to push back.

Steve talked about the most important thing he could do is say no to really great ideas. To focus the company on the area of highest potential impact.

He gave the example of the iPad. They could have developed that earlier, but the same tech could make a phone and that was higher impact.

I think if the rumors about the status of a headset are true and they release it they will be making the mistake of releasing something that is just not underbaked, but without a real purpose.

The iPhone despite early limitations was still a phone and an iPod all rolled into one and it had a better mobile web browser than the world had seen.

The watch still told time and had other basic functionality that made it a functional gimmick for the first couple years until the hardware caught up.

What would I want a headset for? The two primary use cases I have seen are games and various types of 3d modeling.

The first is something Apple is not in much of a position to excel in unless they change how they think about games and the second is such a small market for Apple it isn’t worth the R&D cost.

EDIT: The form factor makes me think what if the idea is the main use case is air travel. You put them on, block out sound with AirPods and then watch a movie, play a game or look at some virtual beach or something. A rich persons escape.

Oculus Quest proved out the exercise use case. A solid niche of people pay a monthly subscription for the at-home motivation and gamified workout.

MBP is usable after Ive’s exit. He’s surely Is talented but his success rate is not 100%. Apples main problem right now is software quality - this has become difficult as there is integration between every device with every other apple device and the combinatorial complexity is difficult to maintain and test.

Second gen Apple silicon MacBook Pro sales (M2 models) are only moderately higher then second gen Touch Bar MacBook Pro (2017) sales.

And 2017 macbok pros only got a small spec bump.

So the vast majority of customers were satisfied enough with usability even with the more sensitive keyboards, Touch Bar, etc.

Another way to look at the data is that Mac users are buying Macs and Mac is not growing market share.

This isn't surprising as the notebook/desktop market is mature and people are unlikely to switch platforms.

So as long as Apple doesn't completely botch an update/upgrade, they will likely continue to sell about the same number each year.

So then the usability concerns were not that big of a concern among most of the customer base.

If Apple was still making the terrible 2017 macs with their lousy broken keyboards I think the users would be headed elsewhere with their next computer purchase. The M1s saved their marketshare.

That a bunch of long time Apple buyers, used to a quality product from Apple, got suckered into buying the 2017 computer that was lousy says little.

Can you explain a bit more about software quality? (I am not a Mac user.)

If you buy the latest macbook pro and download vmware and run Mavericks (the OS from 2013) it will feel faster and snappier in several areas compared to the native OS that actually came preinstalled, even though it's running via an emulation layer.

Yep. On top of that:

- Mavericks will look nicer and fit more content in the same screen space

- You'll have less advertisements for Safari and Apple Music

- 32-bit applications will Just Work

I left my Mac behind for good after Mojave. It's too much work when Linux is what I deploy to anyways.

https://archive.is/6d8Ns

Is there any evidence this device even exists? The "leaks" seem to be hearsay at best. Apparently it will have foveated rendering which I doubt very much.

Paywall.

That said, I thought the rumor was Apple was going to reveal 2 headsets - 1 available soon for $3k, and another priced at ~$1.5k(ish) that would be available in Q1 of next year.

The $3k model was essentially the beta version of the mass-market device so that Apple could continue to field test software and apps to make sure that the next iteration of the device would knock it out of the park.

My whole question is - what sort of killer apps does Apple have right now that would make a headset a must-buy? That was one of the things that sort of doomed the Hololens and the Magic Leap - lack of useful applications.

Would Apple really release a device without a reason for consumers to actually use it? I'm all for AR/VR - it's cool tech for sure, but I don't see any mass-market necessities the device would fulfill. But that doesn't seem like Apple's M.O, does it?

I would love a headset that could serve as a true multiple 4k monitors replacement (with over 120 ppi) and had a passthrough. I am sure more creative people would get excited about something closer to a holodeck, but I just want endless high-res displays in VR with little to none eye and neck strain.

This is the only thing that appeals to me about AR and is definitely lowest priority.

I’m trying to imagine where it will be used most not just how home or office or public places? Still feels socially awkward but so did AirPods for me.

I'm with you on AirPods being socially awkward. Seems that everyone always has at least one in their ear, so you never know if someone you're speaking with is blasting music, talking with someone else, or actually focusing on you. Really tough.

They must have some interesting app(s) but for their sake I guess they just haven't leaked yet. I wouldn't be surprised to see a repeat of the early iPod and iPhone where people who tried it loved it and people who hadn't tried it loudly proclaimed its doom.

Tried it to do… what? The iPod was a music player. The iPhone is a mobile phone. Those are things people do every day.

What would be the mass market use case for a VR headset?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com