Apple Rumored To Be Working On Project T288 AR/VR HMD with 8K Lenses
The new headset would be capable of both augmented and virtual reality.
Rumors are currently swirling around a new headset that Apple could have in the works. The rumored headset, first discussed back in November 2017, would be capable of both virtual reality and augmented reality, with 8K displays for each eye and a faster processor than anything Apple currently has on the market. Reports claim that the product's codename is T288, and it could be hitting a 2020 launch, which really isn't that far away.
According to sources via CNET, the prototype currently looks a bit like a PC tower, with a "base" that houses the sensors needed for motion tracking, as well as some built into the headset as well. This is different from the Vive and Rift, which both use external satellites when it comes to detecting and translating full-body movements into VR and AR space. Avoiding cables like Apple supposedly plans to do here, however, will require additional bandwidth, which Apple will compensate by using 60-gHz WiGig, or WiGig 2.0.
As far as the processor goes, supposedly Apple is looking to use 5-nanometer technology that's actually sized at around half of what the iPhone X'a A11 Bionic chip requires. If that's the case, we'll be looking at a pretty svelte and powerful piece of technology. The headset is something we don't actually know a lot about just yet in terms of what's been confirmed already, but according to details from last November's report, the headset could be using software called "rOS" with a mixture of different command inputs, including touch panels, Siri commands, and hand gestures.
This is certainly one headset we'll be keeping an eye on. Are you excited to see what's coming next from Apple in terms of VR and AR capabilities?
-
Shacknews
replyBrittany Vincent posted a new article, Apple Rumored To Be Working On Project T288 AR/VR HMD with 8K Lenses
-
[deleted]
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
[deleted]
-
They didn't do it for mobile software development; it's largely a myth. You hear about the super rare successes, not the vast majority that never turn a profit.
The narrative I'd suggest is Apple convinced everyone that mobile software is worthless, so now microtransactions are the only way to make any money.-
The broad market convinced itself that not only software, but other media like movies and music are also near worthless. Music is no longer a thing of value that you purchase and cherish, now it is a utility like water or electricity. Movies are treated almost the same way while PC and console gaming is filled with rapid discounts and microtransactions, etc.
In the gaming space there are exceptions like Nintendo, Blizzard, and Rockstar. Those companies have retained longterm value in what they sell by making a very high quality product and not discounting themselves below a certain level. A few others like Yacht Club has enforced a maximum discount across all platforms, but for the most part I see the problem with media being worthless as a widespread issue, of which it is most obvious on platforms like the App Store and Google Play.-
-
Apple doesn't control pricing on their platform, no platform I can think of does. Its up to developers and publishers to set their prices anywhere, where its the App Store, Steam, eShop, PSN, Google Play, etc.
The sheer volume of apps and a race to the bottom from most developers is what did this to prices.
As for promotion, now that they're doing some measure of curation and promotion on the front page I see a fair amount of pushing apps in the $2-$10 range, games like Monument Valley 2, Alto's Odyssey, Super Mario Run, The Room series, etc. I just opened the App Store and RBI Baseball 18, a $7 game, is featured.
Its impossible not to promote free to play given how popular games like Clash Royale are, but its hardly unique to the App Store. One of the top games on it is Fortnite, a game that is just as free on PC. I mentioned Blizzard above as a company that has done a fantastic job maintaining their prices over the long term, and even they have two free to play games right now (three if we're counting the recent changes to SC2).-
-
-
-
I did a Google search for 2008 price tiers (first year of the app store) and this is what came up: https://discussions.apple.com/thread/1761285
Tier 6 is $5.99, so I have to assume that tiers 1-5 cover 99 cents to $4.99. I've only ever purchased on the app store but I do remember prices being in dollar incriments from $1-$20.
I do remember this though lol: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Am_Rich
-
-
-
-
Requiring that you price your software with an up front cost and only IAP is controlling pricing. Saying you can't charge $10/mo is controlling pricing. Saying you can't require a user to rebuy or purchase an upgrade is controlling pricing. If Apple didn't allow IAP that would be controlling pricing. There's much more to price than the initial purchase. And that has dictated the nature of the mobile software market unlike all the other stores that don't do this where you see a much wider category of options.
-
-
-
Apple defines how you can make money on the app store. They did not allow paid upgrades, subscriptions, or free trials. This directly caused a race to the bottom on up front prices as the best way to make money was to be in the top 10 list. Apple's only change to viable business models for years was to allow in app purchases, which further fueled a race to the bottom on initial purchase price. There's a reason you see this on mobile software sales and not on Windows/Mac or consoles or Steam. It's also the reason the iPad productivity software market never had a chance to be like PCs.
-
This is partly correct. That said, this didn't stem the rise of free to play or race to the bottom pricing on other platforms either. Its such a common thing to just wait on the purchase of AAA games nowadays. Don't like the price of a $60 game? Wait a few months, it'll be marked down by 50%-75%. The biggest PC and console games in the world right now are all free to play, and its by an insanely wide margin.
I'd pin the limitations on iPad productivity software on things like the hardware and user input itself. I actually use them for remotely controlling things like DMX boards, but there's loads of other applications like word processing and spreadsheets that people would still prefer to do on a laptop. It isn't only due to things like subscription policies.-
To be clear, yes, the broad race-to-the-bottom trends are clearest on mobile, no question. That said, a lot of what we're seeing there is just a magnification of what is everywhere else. More payment options may have helped but that wouldn't have stopped the bigger problem of a market that is flooded with cheap garbage dragging the value of everything else down.
In the end its up to developers and publishers to make something of value and actually price it that way.-
To add to that final point, yes, sometimes even that doesn't matter when media has been commoditized to such a point where its been turned into a utility (ie - media on streaming services, etc).
There's a lot going on and its not as simple or basic as blaming specific policies for something that was inevitable given ease of distribution and an excess of content. "Free" is the end goal and creating and maintaining a moat of value is something very few media companies are capable of right now.
-
-
The business models used by productivity software were not allowed on the iPad until very very recently. That's why they didn't exist. There were plenty of Mac developers who didn't ever attempt to get on or stay on the platform for this reason. It wasn't input method related. You simply couldn't afford to pay for the ongoing development of software on iOS through cheap up front sales. Games were the same way. The difference is Apple offered a business model games could use by parcelling up usage into small chunks of items, levels and playtime sold via in app purchases. There's no way to do this effectively for business software. So the types of apps that needed to sell for $100, or charge for yearly upgrades, or sell subscriptions simply didn't exist on iOS unless you were a big player who was just adding a mini experience on IOS (MS, Adobe).
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
More like "wow, Apple has this new thing called VR - super cool."
-
It’s primarily an AR device, wedging in VR hardware/software side will take ages and will just be a bonus.
It is not meant for gaming anyway, it’s supposed to complement and eventually replace a smartphone so how they transfer the UI/UX from touch screen to the device (here’s hoping it does not rely too much on Siri) is going to be the interesting part. Text input is still a clumsy task in XR. Is it going to be voice input only or hand/finger gestures or eye tracking with a virtual keyboard...?
It also remains to be seen how useful/user-friendly the productivity apps are on it. How to best check emails, make a call, write messages and post on social media, navigate maps, etc. without you walking into traffic.
Hololens is probably the best reference for now but just projecting 2D screens/UI into a space is not really the Apple way.
Excited to see what they come up with.
-
-
lol 8K lenses
-
[deleted]
-
I think you miss the joke. 8K LENSES, LENSES don't have a K measurement or any kind. It's the kind of bullshit marketing speak apples thinks up because they know their customers are idiots and don't actually know what any of this stuff means. Sadly, it works....how else could Trump get elected.
-
-
-
Apple makes amazing VR headset -> Apple makes their amazing VR headset locked into apple infrastructure -> Apple's VR headset fails because gamers, the only people willing to pay for awesome VR headsets, don't have anything they want to play that can be played on anything apple makes -> Apple kills VR headset and releases a new iPhone claiming it's better than VR -> also claims they invented VR.
-
[deleted]
-
One of the directors I work with sometimes is also involved with VFX and AR. He did an AR app for Eminem at Coachella and its pretty cool what they pulled off on their first try. It extended the set around the audience, the visuals were based on geo-location so audience members have different views based on where they're standing (ie - if you're off to the side and underneath the axe or chainsaw then you see it coming down on you), etc.
https://techcrunch.com/2018/04/16/the-eminem-ar-show/
-
-
-
sure are a lot of people in this thread who live in some alternate universe where Apple regularly releases bad and failed products
-
Guys, guys, stop calling it a VR device.
Why do you think the ARKit framework is already a thing now when a smartphone + camera are terrible hardware/interface for the tech?
I bet the first iteration of the device is AR only.-
[deleted]
-
-
From what I hear Apple is starting to ramp up on chip production for this AR/VR device
-
