The bill of materials for the Apple headset leaked

https://twitter.com/cixliv/status/1660038281034350592

by avian • 3 years ago

212 294 3 years ago

cianmm• 3 years ago

Is "rear view mirror" a joke, or maybe just a lower res cheaper camera pointing backwards, or maybe this leak isn't legit? Either way, looking forward to seeing the headset!

Geee3• 3 years ago

Yes, it has a full automotive-grade rear-view mirror.

mrbombastic2• 3 years ago

Tree air freshener optional add on for only $250

bottom999mottob2• 3 years ago

It's probably a reverse pass through window that got poorly translated

mecsred• 3 years ago

It's probably more of a rear view-mirror than your typical rear-view mirror.

achow• 3 years ago

This is english translation of original Chinese leak [1].

Lot of formal/informal colloquial terms gets lost in translation. Yes you could be right - wearer of the headset would be aware of environment behind their head and for that this could be the camera system.

[1] https://twitter.com/SadlyItsBradley/status/16590911683768074...

ben_w• 3 years ago

My favourite (possibly apocryphal) example of meanings lost in literal translation, is "water sheep".

(Hydraulic ram).

Through an unrelated anecdote, in my head this is now bound to the music of "smoke on the water", with a sheep impression for the guitar (bass?) — "Sheep on the water, ba baa baaah, ba ba ba baaah"

schubart• 3 years ago

Rear view mirror... looking forward... I see what you did there.

cubefox8• 3 years ago

A "rear view mirror" isn't mentioned on the original source:

Translation: https://i.postimg.cc/gm6ZNFYw/File-20230521-171346.jpg

Chinese: https://twitter.com/SadlyItsBradley/status/16590911683768074...

nickhalfasleep• 3 years ago

I wonder which numbers are altered to find the leaker this time.

mrbombastic2• 3 years ago

I am really struggling to see how this can succeed. Maybe it will be like Apple Pay, lackluster adoption for a time and then years down the line starts to gain marketshare. Even for me a geek who works in the apple ecosystem with a relatively high paying job who would love to mess with this thing it would be hard for me to justify spending 3k+ on a headset like this. Combine that with the fact that building compelling virtual reality experiences is just difficult, where are the apps going to come from? Maybe I will be totally wrong, I am excited to see it though.

bottom999mottob2• 3 years ago

Here's an idea: tack it on as complimentary to the Apple Car. Sunk cost, so all the whales buy it and you get more locked into the Apple ecosystem!

highwaylights• 3 years ago

It feels a lot like it’s been pursued all the way to a releasable product and there’s just too many wheels in motion to stop and think if it’s really a worthwhile idea.

We could be wrong and people are happy to hand over 3k for this, but it’s just hard to understand how for a whole bunch of reasons.

Are they going to get third parties to build software for this? Where is the volume to support that going to come from? Who’s going to want to go first and risk 3k on something that might flop and be on eBay for a fraction of the price in a year?

There’s just so many hurdles to clear for this.

sp332• 3 years ago

Microsoft got people to pay $3k for a 2010 version of this tech. And USD is worth 40% less since then.

ianbutler2• 3 years ago

Just to point out this sounds like the exact criticisms you might have levied at Apple for the original iPhone. Not that this will go the same way, but they've done it once the dramatic world changing effect.

rsynnott4• 3 years ago

We could be wrong and people are happy to hand over 3k for this

There'll be _some_; remember Google Glass? I'm not convinced there'll be enough to make it any more than a niche oddity, though (even the numbers quoted in the post imply that; Apple doesn't launch that many products where they only expect to produce 500k in six months...)

kmos17• 3 years ago

I remember the original Macintosh launch, and just prior to that the failure of Lisa, both were very expensive for their time. I’m also skeptical but Apple has managed to pull it off even if like you point out it might not be an instant success, the main question will be can they take an idea that everyone has been excited about for a while but couldn’t get quite right and hit a home run. Also excited to see what they come up with.

anonymouse0086• 3 years ago

Your perspective here is invaluable: do you think pulling over all the other apps from Mac, iPad and iPhone is enough to make this device compelling at day 0?

There’s no huge productivity shift like there was for spreadsheets to visicalc that pushes our perception for what’s possible - so something has to make this device compelling in a different way.

brookst2• 3 years ago

The original Macintosh was $7500 in today’s dollars. It did ok.

roflyear2• 3 years ago

From apples perspective it is a small project that costs them close to nothing.

Geee3• 3 years ago

You're probably not putting this in the right category. It's not a headset, but a powerful computer with two 4K displays.

This is the first iteration of a product category which eventually replaces desktop and laptop computers.

Next time you're buying a new computer, you might buy this instead.

pohl• 3 years ago

One could have spoke similarly about the Apple Watch, but it’s still tethered to a phone. I’d love to just have the watch.

jsheard• 3 years ago

A headset having 4Kx4K panels for each eye doesn't make it a substitute for a 4K monitor, the distortion through the optics means a virtual display will appear much lower resolution than that. The rule of thumb for headsets with 2Kx2K panels is that a virtual theatre covering most of your field of view has a perceived resolution of about 720p, so you can maybe expect about 1440p from the Apple headset in the best case where the virtual display dominates your field of view, and less than that if the display is smaller.

basisword2• 3 years ago

Apple Pay was great from day one - depending on where you lived. In the UK contactless payments are the standard and already were when Apple Pay was released meaning I could use it in 99% of retailers, even small ones.

omnimus• 3 years ago

It was the case for most of europe actually.

status200• 3 years ago

The announcement coming from WWDC makes me think that the first wave is mostly for developers to build on, and then the cheaper/more advanced headsets coming later will be the ones marketed to regular users. I was on the fence until Palmer Luckey gave it a thumbs up, now I am cautiously optimistic.

twoodfin3• 3 years ago

The rumor mill has been consistent for over a year that the “mass market” iteration is coming in 12–18 months (I’d guess they’re targeting holiday season 2024).

I think people are underestimating how effective a “cost-almost-no-object” version is going to be at generating interest. There will be lines at Apple Stores as soon as it’s available to try.

The model is iPod / iPod mini|nano. Everyone wanted the former, everyone bought the latter.

amelius6• 3 years ago

I am really struggling to see how this can succeed.

It could work if they allowed pr0n on it. They already offer the privacy which makes it a much better proposition than a Quest where Zuck is always watching over your shoulder.

But Apple will probably nanny it to death.

pavlov6• 3 years ago

Nothing stops you from watching porn in the Quest web browser. It has private browsing mode like every other browser.

I don’t think this is the killer app for headsets though, unless maybe someone comes up with a volumetric production pipeline for truly immersive participatory experiences…

moonchrome2• 3 years ago

If they can execute well on a simple use case - virtual desktop for professionals -this will be justifiable to me. I spent >1000€ on my last 5k ultra wide five years ago.

This promises to be a portable unlimited screen space - if I can use it 8h+, OS integration is there - I could see myself spending that kind of money.

Having a portable workspace anywhere with a chair and desk is big - especially when desk/chair dimensions now don't play a factor.

chasd002• 3 years ago

“Portable workspace “ is an interesting concept to me. Something more than a laptop screen. It would be hard to get input devices right when you’re wearing a headset though.

qball2• 3 years ago

This promises to be a portable unlimited screen space

Well, if the resolution is up to par and the software is set up to mitigate the problems even middling resolution would cause.

No headset, except maybe the 8K (and possibly the 4K) PiMax designs, are capable of displaying text in a way that isn't a blurry mess; the problem is both the lack of resolution and the fact that anti-aliasing can only do so much (move your head ever so slightly off axis so the text no longer lines up with the pixel boundaries and fine details become completely distorted by insufficient resolution- software could help fix this if anyone bothered to write any but that hasn't happened yet).

jayd168• 3 years ago

This is probably more like a dev subsidized devkit than a real product. I doubt even Apple thinks $3k is sustainable.

bee_rider2• 3 years ago

Where’d you get $3k from?

$3k seems a bit high. OTOH I wouldn’t pay $3k for a laptop, and Apple seems to sell plenty of $3k laptops.

jonathantf2• 3 years ago

What do you mean about Apple Pay? Ever since it came out I've seen it absolutely everywhere.

GeekyBear5• 3 years ago

I am really struggling to see how this can succeed.

People seem to forget this every time, but this version of the tech is aimed at developers and early adopters, just like version one of Hololens was. It's also priced like Hololens was.

The consumer focused version in a thick sunglasses form factor comes later.

refulgentis2• 3 years ago

Or, not at all - we’re on year, what, 8 of that? There isn’t anyone reputable who thinks there’s a short term breakthrough coming, especially after Metas $$$$ swings at it and Apple failed to.

c.f. Bloomberg recent piece on this; tldr lot of internal strife at Apple because that’s what they were supposed to do and simply couldn’t. Now it’s limping out the door because they might as well ship something. Lead was saying as recently as a year ago that glasses were 3 years out, but they were shelved because there’s no path to it

amelius6• 3 years ago

People seem to forget this every time, but this version of the tech is aimed at developers and early adopters

Iirc, Apple dumped the iPhone onto the market even though it was not ready yet and was missing many elementary functions.

So not sure what you mean by "people seem to forget this every time".

screye• 3 years ago

$3k+ is exactly the right price point. A customer cannot be disappointed from a product they don't buy. And the type of enthusiast who spends 3k+ on it, will be satisfied before they even wear it.

At 3k+ it will likely be the unchallenged top headset on the market, and that alone will mean that tech nerds will be raving over it.

where are the apps going to come from?

Gaming whales exist. Enterprise customers exist. Microsoft got a $2b from the DOD for building the holo-lens 2 at tech demo levels of product quality. IMO, VR is 1 UX breakthrough away from finding a money-generating niche. And UX breakthrough/popularization is Apple's bread and butter.

twoodfin3• 3 years ago

Agree, and would add that “apps” is likely the wrong mindset: This thing is going to be all about experiences. Yoga on the beach. Standing on the pitch during Ted Lasso. Watching the Apollo moon landing from the surface of Tranquility Base.

Either they have the immersion and UI model that makes this kind of content viscerally “wow”, or they don’t have a product. I’m guessing they have a product.

wnevets4• 3 years ago

$3k+ is exactly the right price point. A customer cannot be disappointed from a product they don't buy. And the type of enthusiast who spends 3k+ on it, will be satisfied before they even wear it.

I think you're absolutely right. I think a similar example of this is the RTX 4090. Everyone complains about the price, the power usage, how it's overkill for 99.99% of the population but it's constantly sold out. I doubt anyone who owns one is really disappointed

pfannkuchen2• 3 years ago

High quality head mounted screen could be a huge breakthrough for ergonomic work. Staring at a fixed plane and orienting your body with respect to the plane is pretty mechanically unnatural for the human system and it causes a lot of problems.

alexose• 3 years ago

I tend to agree with this take. It's interesting to think about what you could do with an "infinite" screen, especially if it's socially acceptable to wear in a cafe, on a plane, etc.

sebastianavina• 3 years ago

I thought the same about the iPad.

who in their right mind would like a huge screen like a phone, without a good way to input information like a keyboard or a mouse. what would be the use case for a product like that? watch youtube?

boom

sssilver• 3 years ago

I thought the same about Apple Watch.

who in their right mind would like a watch they need to charge every night?

bam

ktosobcy• 3 years ago

I think problem with Apple Pay you experienced was due to US not being up to speed with contactless payments (or chip one for that matter as well)? In Poland you coild use contactless cards for a veeeeery long time, so when mobile payments came it was just swapping card for a phone. What's mote, before Google / Apple pay, banking apps offered mobile payments, first Via dedicated sim card and then via app

timeimp• 3 years ago

+1 for Australia.

People literally switched banks to get Apple Pay here.

I think the whole "chip-and-pay" thing in the US is so very laughable - everyone else has been with it for at last a decade.

It's a shame it took forcing merchants to wear the cost instead of banks making the terminals more affordable - then again, I am talking about the banks here.

michelb• 3 years ago

I think Apple just needs to get this out. If it’s somewhat decent it may spur development in 3D and vr/ar tooling on the mac platform again, something which is sorely lacking after Apple’s disinterest and inability to have good GPU’s.

Having this in the hands of developers could be great, Apple can followup with an affordable hardware product a few years later. It’s basically Apple’s hololens, with hopefully a different fate.

TheLoafOfBread• 3 years ago

Let's wait and see if 1600USD VR/AR headset will be market hit or miss. I am personally skeptical.

nocoiner• 3 years ago

That’s just component cost though, right? Now apply Apple’s typical margins on hardware to it.

uguuo_o2• 3 years ago

1.6k+ computers, high but understandable . 1.6k phones, way to high. 1.6k+margin (3k?) for a AR/VR headset, seems like something most people would never buy.

llaolleh• 3 years ago

Don’t underestimate Apple fanboys.

brookst2• 3 years ago

“Most people” don’t buy laptops. That’s a terrible measure of whether a business is attractive.

qwytw• 3 years ago

I highly doubt Apple or anyone else expect most people to buy it. It's a new market with no content and no clear use cases. So starting slow and brining the price down over time seems like the best strategy.

roflyear2• 3 years ago

If these costs are right it will be at least $3k

GuB-422• 3 years ago

Looks expensive to me, $20 microphone? $40 PCB? $95 mid frame? $70 "heat dissipation module"? Are these prices normal for a mass produced item?

yellow_postit• 3 years ago

Can’t speak to the bom but the rumors have consistently said this will be multiple thousands at retail.

Apples track record is refinement/perfecting for mass audiences not blue sky innovation. I’m looking forward to seeing their entry in this space should it actually launch.

basisword2• 3 years ago

> Can’t speak to the bom but the rumors have consistently said this will be multiple thousands at retail.

The rumours were similar for the iPad. So much so they poked fun at those rumours when they shared the actual pricing which was shockingly low.

pclmulqdq• 3 years ago

No, but these prices track for an ultra-high-end product given what I saw of the hardware industry years ago.

For example, volume cost of a basic PCB is in the region of 1 cent per square cm, but a $40 PCB in volume can easily come from many layers and a weird stackup (not to mention that this may be up to about 100 sq cm).

reportingsjr2• 3 years ago

Apple (and most high end tech designers) use highly specialized, very $$$ PCBs for a lot of their products.

They aren't created by traditional litho + etch, but rather by a process called modified semi-additive processing (mSAP). iPhone, apple watch, etc PCBs are basically the same as CPU/IC interposers on a large scale.

Definitely not 1 cent/sq cm cheap, but they have massive volume and high price points. It lets them get the insane part density needed these days.

jonhohle4• 3 years ago

Yeah, the “heat dissipation” module set off alarm bells for me as well. It would be hard to get to that with copper and heat pipes.

heliophobicdude2• 3 years ago

I was wondering if Apple is the partner this solid state, active cooling system was referring to at CES 2023

https://www.froresystems.com/

nrp• 3 years ago

The mid frame and thermal module costs are unlikely, but not strictly impossible. I can’t contrive of any scenario where there would be $20 of microphone BOM in a headset though.

cubefox8• 3 years ago

Note that this write-up includes mistakes and omisions. I tried to translate the original source using Google Lens.

https://i.postimg.cc/gm6ZNFYw/File-20230521-171346.jpg

GuB-422• 3 years ago

Thank you, it makes a lot more sense now.

oezi3• 3 years ago

8 USD for the video see through cameras is a big disappointment. So this definitely won't do any AR/MR.

sva_• 3 years ago

These numbers seem pretty high. May this just be the cost of a prototype?

wildrhythms• 3 years ago

Perhaps, but then the tweet alludes to 400k+ units:

Quantity: It is estimated to be 400,000 to 500,000 units in the second half of this year.

tikkun• 3 years ago

Someone mentioned a rumor about "Apple has achieved 1:1 3d video chat where there avatars are almost completely photo realistic"

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35995072

Anyone know a source link?

sebzim45002• 3 years ago

Hard to believe they can sell half a million units this year, but I'd be happy to be proven wrong.

jonhohle4• 3 years ago

This reminds me a lot of the lead up to the iPad announcement. A lot of buzz about a super high price and limited functionality (it’s just a big iPhone!) and the the actual price is significantly lower (though this “leak” is already about half of what the other “leaks” have been estimating).

I wouldn’t be surprised if this is Apple marketing or Wall Street traders inserting information into the news cycle. For Apple, the benefit is obviously to exceed expectations when they release an $800 headset (still expensive, but so much cheaper to someone who had mentally allocated $1,600). For Wall Street, anything to get the stock price to move one way or the other is valuable.

smoldesu7• 3 years ago

The original reported price of $3,000 is not unrealistic. If this BOM is real, a $3,000 price point would be roughly similar to the profit margins of their other hardware products. The past few months have probably seen a lot of closed-door headset demos, and I wouldn't be surprised if the price was a major point of feedback for many people.

jonhohle4• 3 years ago

I doubt Apple discusses pricing with the people it gives demos too or even partners creating content. The only people who know the price are finance, marketing, and C-level.

cubefox8• 3 years ago

That's wishful thinking. Given the estimated BOM of 1500 to 1600 USD, the originally leaked ~3000 USD end user price is much more plausible. The BOM doesn't include costs of development, marketing, or profit margins.

KeplerBoy2• 3 years ago

That's the thing: The entire BOM might be made up and fake.

xoa4• 3 years ago

I'm honestly kind of boggled by the HN comments so far, all seem to be various forms "I can't see how wearable displays can offer any value unless they're cheap". To me the use case is obvious: getting rid of the fucking screen. There is no inherent law of physics reason I can't have a full size desktop 10k 40" or whatever max is "display" for every single system I interact with, anywhere. The current paradigm of lots of different screens for different computers (desktop/notebook/tablet/phone/watch/appliances) is because nobody has yet been able to sufficiently directly project photons into retina via something good enough and wearable. Products like the RETISSA II demonstrate direct retinal projection working but without enough resolution, too clunky, etc. But the fundamentals work. The killer app IMO for a wearable display is replacing every other display. I can sit down at my desk or anywhere else and have whatever screen size/config I want, the only difference being how much local compute I have available and at what latency. No more need for "headless servers", just have the right display key pairs and you can pull up a screen/console just from what you're wearing. Same with anything from network switches to printers, can have augmented local display tech using a full size screen vs some tiny little LED thing at best. On a plane or a train and want to watch a movie, or pull up SSH sessions or whatever else? Full screen, and in total privacy. NV/FLIR, or digital [LMH]VPOs could all just feed into my worn display too. Which would be perfectly crisp even for those of us with bad eyes.

And on and on and on. It's so obvious. All the challenges involved are engineering/polish/politics (in terms of agreeing on some level of industry standards at least for a minimal level of universal interaction). Which doesn't mean it couldn't be mucked up but the promise is clear. I've spent many many thousands of dollars on displays of all sorts. When one wearable one can replace them all I'd cheerfully pay $5k let alone $3k. It'll also open up entire new realms of form factors for computers.

Apple may or may not manage it, and certainly probably not the first go around, but it's pretty clear why they'd want to be getting going on real experience with it even if it's mostly for devs and such to start. It's the definition of a looming disruption, a huge amount of their current visual product design is about "very nice screens, with stuff on them". Something that eventually obsoletes the "screens" bit would be one obvious way someone else could pull the rug out from under most of Apple's current offerings, and conversely is a big new opportunity for them too long term. It might take them 5-10 years, but if they think now is the time to get iterating I don't see why they shouldn't get going even if it's a touch aggressive.

MrScruff• 3 years ago

Yes exactly. They've been foreshadowing this with developers for a while with ARKit. It will take several iterations, and likely as yet non existent new technology to make this a true mass market product. But it's not like it would make sense for them to spin on prototypes for a decade, and some point they have to ship and take it from there.

rcarr• 3 years ago

It’s hilarious, I’ve got a pair of nreal airs and I use them all the time, the ergonomics and comfort alone are so much better than a standard monitor.

smoldesu7• 3 years ago

If there was some massive market for this, it would already exist.

As-is, desktop streaming apps do exist for VR. This emerging paradigm you're describing is yours for the taking, if you want it.

Screens are simply a better paradigm though. I say this as someone with a wireless OLED headset less than 20 feet away from me - I choose to instead respond and browse the internet and program and watch TV on my disappointing, $250 VA panel. There is never a time where I go "I'd rather experience this 2D, traditional content in VR now" even if the headset is charged and ready to go. Casting the content to my TV is much more comfortable, lets me share it with others, lets me eat my popcorn unintruded and works much better for binging sessions where you don't want "headset burns" on your face.

On a plane or a train and want to watch a movie, or pull up SSH sessions or whatever else?

Yes, because this is just so difficult on my phone and laptop. If I want to watch a movie or pull up SSH sessions while I'm on a train, I would much rather do so on an interface that is not stuck to my face.

xoa4• 3 years ago

If there was some massive market for this, it would already exist.

-smoldesu, CEO of RIM (previously Sony, previously IBM), on the iPhone in 2007, the iPod in 2001, and the GUI in 1983

Right.

MontyCarloHall3• 3 years ago

I agree this is the main intended use case, but I’m not sure it’s compelling enough to offset all the downsides:

* Unless Apple has figured out true mixed reality (i.e. transparent lenses with full field-of-vision overlaid video), opaque AR goggles are a non-starter for most people. Seeing your surroundings only through a camera and screen is unacceptable. Not to mention the fact that people around you can’t see your face either.

* Unless other people have these glasses, they can’t see your screen either. Even if these glasses have no shortcomings whatsoever, I can’t imagine a future where everyone in the room needs compatible glasses to look at the same screen.

* Few people actually need enormous amounts of screen real estate, beyond what’s practical to pack in a laptop. The use cases you’ve mentioned (watching movies on the go, logging into device consoles) are fairly niche IMO. There would have to be some compelling new UI paradigm (e.g. truly 3D displays) that’s only possible at massive virtual display scale.

andybak2• 3 years ago

There's a lot of strong statements here:

Seeing your surroundings only through a camera and screen is unacceptable.

Without qualification this statement is strange. I don't care if I'm seeing through a camera and screen or through a transparant piece of plastic. What I care about is image quality, distortion, FOV, latency etc.

So the question is surely a more nuanced one about the relative importance of each of these factors?

Not to mention the fact that people around you can’t see your face either.

When I'm working I'm not sure this is a huge deal.

Unless other people have these glasses, they can’t see your screen either. Even if these glasses have no shortcomings whatsoever, I can’t imagine a future where everyone in the room needs compatible glasses to look at the same screen.

Ah. I get it - you're assuming there's other people in the same room as you! Why would you make that assumption for this device? I rarely work with anyone in the room, and when I do, they tend to be working on their own stuff. My collaborations are 90% remote (and for the 10% I can take the headset off)

xoa4• 3 years ago

Unless Apple has figured out true mixed reality (i.e. transparent lenses with full field-of-vision overlaid video)

This sounds like a very early adopter/developer version 1. The tech for what you describe exists, but this particular version isn't going to be it. Which I'm basing on Apple themselves, leaks says they're thinking in terms of hundreds of thousands of units in a year for this, for contrast they sold something like 220 million iPhones just last year. The question is whether they can achieve an MVP and get iterating.

Unless other people have these glasses, they can’t see your screen either. Even if these glasses have no shortcomings whatsoever, I can’t imagine a future where everyone in the room needs compatible glasses to look at the same screen.

I can, very, very easily. But in the long interim between now and then, I can imagine remaining legacy screens which people already have for that. Because we already have them. It's not a zero-sum game, having wearable displays too doesn't somehow make existing screens shut off.

Few people actually need enormous amounts of screen real estate

Utterly ludicrous. The only reason people use small screens is portability, size (not everyone physically has room for a large display), and cost. If there were two 12" notebooks, one of which had a conventional matching screen like now and the other at the push of a button could pop out a 30" magic solid hologram display (resizable to whatever one wanted) at zero extra mass or stored size cost for the same price, there are zero people who'd pick the former. Everything everyone does with computers and gaming and movie watching and so on benefits from full resolution arbitrary size windows. It's just that right now there is no way to separate that from the physical size of the display hardware itself.

watching movies/playing games/reading books/doing work is niche, and wanting to do it privately is niche

:\ Come on.

aloer• 3 years ago

I share that vision but I don’t see the current Apple doing this.

With their performance advantage they could easily work towards something like Samsung Dex with a compute core that you plug into different terminals, or macOS on the iPad.

But they choose not to, most likely trying not to cannibalize different device categories.

I would love to be wrong but I don’t see this happening for many years until some Chinese brand offers cheap alternative glasses and everyone runs around with a battery powered Mac mini.

Besides that we also obviously don’t know how long until the battery and display tech is good enough to compete with screens

xoa4• 3 years ago

I don't have a crystal ball either. But there is no one in tech at this point who hasn't read The Innovator's Dilemma. And Apple themselves have as good a recent history of disrupting themselves as well as others and shifting tacks, repeatedly, as any other megacorp. They are clearly awake to it. Doesn't mean they can execute, but I don't agree there is any sign of them "trying not to cannibalize" vs just not thinking the timing is there yet.

Granted the question of timing is of course always one of the huge challenges too, someone can have 100% the right idea, product segment focus, etc, but be too early (or too late) and fail. But again, Apple has to have as much insight into all of this as anyone, they've built deep, deep manufacturer relationships. As with some of their previous products, the right time to get going is probably "a bit early, but not too much". Ie, good enough to satisfy a few hundred thousand people, not just thousands/tens of thousands, but early enough that everyone else thinks it's not ready yet. Then there is enough qualities/volume for real feedback and getting the iteration ball rolling, but not so much that it means making major changes isn't doable yet. If I think back to Mac OS X (I still vividly remember both the Public Beta and 10.0), the iPod, the iPhone, the iPad, or even a lot of Mac models (Macbook Air v1 definitely had a host of "this needs more hardware" aspects), that seems to be around the point they always aim for.

Again no special insight on if they've gotten that moment right here but it certainly doesn't feel like it couldn't be given where things are at. And my confusion is people who apparently can't see any value at all, regardless of improvements. It's one thing to say "I think they're 3 years too early for MVP", it's another to say "what's the point of wearable displays ever".

rchaud• 3 years ago

Nowhere in this comment do you mention Apple Music, Apple TV+ or the App Store -- these are the areas Apple is trying to drive traffic to with their hardware. I don't expect them to even bother to give lip service to the kinds of use cases you're describing.

SebastianKra• 3 years ago

Everyone can see the value of a Holodeck, or a magical lightweight high-resolution display that barely weighs on your head, doesn't cause eye-strain and doesn't mess up your hair.

But that hasn't yet been technically achieved.

What the comments are saying is: "I can't see how current state-of-the-art wearable displays can offer any value, given their current limitations"

And I agree. With none of the headsets I've tried (Rift, Rift-S, Valve Index, HoloLens, HoloLens 2), I could imagine working 8 hours per day. They're heavy, scratchy and are annoying to put-on & take off. The Nreal Airs, mentioned by a sibling comment, have a promising form-factor, but only feature a 1080p display.

At our current technological advancement, I doubt that Apple will overcome these limitations next week.

samwillis• 3 years ago

I'm far more interested in the OS and Apps, that's the thing that's going to make this a success or a flop. Hardware (Apple will almost certainly get this right) is important, but the actual user experience and use cases that Apple present are what will be the deciding factor.

Outside of gaming and industry use AR/VR have felt a little like a solution in search of a problem. I do believe though that the people who work at Apple are capable of solving that problem, finding the use cases that an every day person wants it for.

My benchmark for this is my family, they are all different, with different level of interest in tech. If I can see the majority of them having a use for it, being inspired by the UX and marketing, then it will be successful.

Until now none of them have any sort of VR kit, but they all have iPhones and Macs.

As a slight aside though, new hardware products are very hard for Apple to keep completely under wraps, too many people in the supply chain, too many factories. Software on the other hand they can lock down incredibly well (pun intended). I am somewhat suspicious that they may supprise us at WWDC with their take on generative AI. Now that could be part of the headset, but it's more likely to be part of iOS/macOS and a feature that aims to help them sell more of their existing hardware ranges.

NickC25• 3 years ago

I'm far more interested in the OS and Apps, that's the thing that's going to make this a success or a flop. Hardware (Apple will almost certainly get this right) is important, but the actual user experience and use cases that Apple present are what will be the deciding factor.

This is my feeling too - I just don't see an immediate usecase for such a device outside of a select few niches, none of which (even combined) move the sales needle for a company of Apple's size. What are people actually going to use this for? I just don't see it - although there could be something as the tech matures in a few years.

alwillis2• 3 years ago

This is my feeling too - I just don't see an immediate usecase for such a device outside of a select few niches…

As usual, Apple is playing the long game. We should remember that when the iPhone was announced in 2007, Steve Jobs set the goal to get 1% of the cell phone market.

In 2007, there was no App Store and the only native apps were what came installed on the device.

Apple is laying the groundwork for the future. They’ll sell enough for it to meaningful while the rest of the ecosystem comes together.

bbor3• 3 years ago

The use case is replacing laptops - calling it now that we'll be reading Bloomberg articles about the "Headset Class" in our lifetimes :). Definitely don't think apple has a shot in hell of pulling that off in 2023, but I'd love to be surprised.

jayd168• 3 years ago

Honestly, if they can make a device you can comfortably wear for an extended period of time, with that spec sheet, there's a lot of lifestyle shifting things than can be done.

You could imagine locking virtual screens and interactive widgets in real space in exciting ways. You could redesign a living room if your main way to watch something is a virtual screen. Virtual cookbook apps you "leave" in the kitchen that you can interact with hand tracking even when you have raw chicken all over your hands.

The Hololens never got there but the use cases are there IF it actually hits the hardware mark. If its confined to 20 minute bursts before discomfort sets in like current hardware then its far more niche.

bbor3• 3 years ago

HOnest question; would you use a AR headset that wasn't actually see-through but is just streaming video from cameras on the outside? I assumed the answer would be universally no for everyone, but I might be in a bubble. I haaaaate the Oculus Passthrough, personally

whazor2• 3 years ago

Disagreed, for VR/AR there are many issues that can make the experience uncomfortable or even sickening. The hardware and software are key to making a better device that is actually nice to use. Just putting on a Quest 2 headset is a tiring experience, if the battery is not drained again. Even small details like font rendering can cause headaches.

ketzo• 3 years ago

There are lots of possible hardware issues, yes.

But I don't think I'm being a fanboy when I say that if I trust any company to fix physical comfort/usability issues, it's Apple (with a $3,000/device budget).

Fr0styMatt88• 3 years ago

I like the Quest 2 but you’re so spot on about the battery. I have to plan a day ahead — ‘maybe I want to use the Quest 2 tomorrow, better plug it into the charger and make sure everything is updated!”.

Although (tangent incoming!) I think omitting the OLED from the Quest 2 was a bit of a mistake. My theory is that the screen actually has more to do with why most games in the library have that same-y bright cartoonish look, rather than just the limitations of the XR2. It’s a relief the Apple headset is going OLED, if this leak is to be believed that is.

waynecochran• 3 years ago

Supplying content and adding the ability for long range AR (think up to the scale of a par 5 golf hole or a basketball arena) is what I work on at quintar.ai

qgin• 3 years ago

It's a classic Apple move to leak rumors of extremely high prices and then announcing only medium high prices that make people feel like it's cheap.

The original iPad was rumored to cost $1500 to $1800. So when they finally announced it "only" cost $500 people couldn't believe how cheap it was in comparison.

StingyJelly• 3 years ago

Exactly. I'd like to see that $70 heatsink.

heliophobicdude2• 3 years ago

Solid state, active cooling system

https://www.froresystems.com/

cubefox8• 3 years ago

This says 9 USD for "heat spreader and fan": https://i.postimg.cc/gm6ZNFYw/File-20230521-171346.jpg

fomine32• 3 years ago

I don't know why people expected iPad become so expensive. It's a big iPhone without cellular. Though capacitive 9.7 screen wasn't popular, it wouldn't cost so much.

deafpolygon• 3 years ago

It's not. The iPad costs $449, or $329 for the last gen. That is their primary product, along with the Air is $599. The Pro is for the "pro" and tech enthusiasts.

yayr2• 3 years ago

I am wondering when Apple will start putting a second camera onto iPhones with proper pupil distance, so people can start taking 3D photos and videos in landscape format. That would be a real "whole family" use case...

Some years ago I made 3D photos of a wedding with a physical dual camera setup. That was quite a pain to get exposure etc. synchronized and postprocessed. Still the pictures look amazing on a quest. Nowadays this could all be super easy.

Geee3• 3 years ago

With some AI/NERF magic, you could adjust IPD and allow limited head motion for videos and photos, even when they're shot with a sub-optimal stereo setup or even on a single camera.

jayd168• 3 years ago

If you're going that far, you can do it now with mono-scopic shots.

yayr2• 3 years ago

sure, there are already models that allow you to hallucinate a full 3D scene from a single image. Still, it would be pretty cheap to add that camera I assume and it would have the potential to pretty quickly fix the 3D content issue that is prevalent currently without introducing hallucination artifacts.

qingcharles• 3 years ago

I had 3D photos taken of my wedding too in 2009. The wedding was in the snow, so the 3D worked out nicely.

There were several 3D Android phones that I remember in the early days with dual-lens cameras and autostereographic screens, but sadly they all bombed.

At some point the technology will return, I'm certain of that.

cubefox8• 3 years ago

Here is an automated English translation of what seems to be the original source, with a lot more details on the hardware:

https://i.postimg.cc/gm6ZNFYw/File-20230521-171346.jpg

By far the most expensive part are the two 1.3 inch Sony OLED screens at 700 USD (350 each). A "special-shaped flexible OLED" external screen by LG is only listed as 30 USD, which seems quite low. Its purpose may be to see the eyes of the wearer (reverse passthrough).

Here the Chinese original: https://twitter.com/SadlyItsBradley/status/16590911683768074...

rostakagmfun• 3 years ago

I wonder what is WellsennXR's role here. Are they managing the supply chain for Apple's headset, doing RnD for them, or something else?

MichaelZuo7• 3 years ago

The sony screen sounds totally custom, if it's actually 2160p, then that would be an incredibly high PPI.

cubefox8• 3 years ago

(price per inch)

LeicaLatte• 3 years ago

Apple only needs to deliver an inch of greatness every year. Cannot wait.

charlie02• 3 years ago

I just hope this will be usable with the MacBookPro and not require an iPhone for activation like their watch.

agnosticmantis• 3 years ago

What’s the likelihood that these leaks are intentionally fake for misdirection? Has there been precedent for that by Apple?

joseph_grobbles• 3 years ago

It's some tiny Twitter (blue) user posting some nebulous list. Seems pretty BS to me, and it's surprising HN falls for this. Okay, it actually isn't surprising.

It's actually funny how a confirmation bias works: In other posts people say "this tracks with other rumors..."...yeah, that's what people who make stuff up tend to do.

s1k3s3• 3 years ago

Why are all these companies bidding on this? Is there a bubble of headset users that I’m not aware of?

MacsHeadroom• 3 years ago

There are 6 Billion or so display users, give-or-take a billion.

Head mounted displays are just the obvious evolution of display technology.

s1k3s3• 3 years ago

What's so obvious about it? Literally every BIG_CORP except Apple has tried (and failed) at this.

oezi3• 3 years ago

I think Sony was happy with PSVR sales. Everyone else burned money.

A headset which is half the weight, double the resolution and still cheap would sell well.

s1k3s3• 3 years ago

Yeah well Sony already has the biggest gaming marketplace to back that up. Everyone else doesn't have this.

LarsDu882• 3 years ago

I have a VR game I've been working on for 3 years. I planned to have it ready by whenever Apple had a headset ready, but if this thing costs $3000 Idk.

I wish they could offer a subsidized devkit or something

waboremo• 3 years ago

You should probably focus on the already existing market, anything else is a waste of time unless Apple has invited you to prepare something. Otherwise that's just a whole lot of wasted resources on an unsure userbase.

jayd168• 3 years ago

Are you just working in Unity in the hopes it'll be an easy port? How could you expect to target this device knowing nothing about the platform?

LarsDu882• 3 years ago

It would be shocking to me if apple released a AR headset without at least considering Unity and/or Unreal support. Think about how long it takes to make a proper VR game, let alone a quality one

ksec• 3 years ago

So the internet went from $3000 being the BOM cost and Apple not making any profits to $1.5K BOM cost? [1]

And for anyone who knew something about CE BOM cost. That list is just complete BS. At this point it is highly likely Apple will release an AR/VR Headset at $1999 and the internet will think it is a bargain. Given how PR had everyone set the expectation of its cost.

[1] https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/r36yKbcdmZKH0dtxlKAZ8w

charcircuit• 3 years ago

BOM is not the only cost in a product.

fnord772• 3 years ago

software development cost divided per unit isn't listed

layer8• 3 years ago

What’s up with the “Mini LED backlight” mentioned at the end? Aren’t all the panels supposed to be OLED?

cjensen• 3 years ago

BOMs do not have "positioning" remarks attached to them.

Marketing positioning information does not have a BOM attached.

This is fake. Or at least altered from the real information.

ChildOfChaos2• 3 years ago

I believe in the potential of this product. Having a quest 1 that use still to this day, I believe very strongly that Apple will make this work.

People talk about use cases, but there are quite a few. VR/AR is going to be fantastic for home fitness and Apple already have a fitness subscription, pair that with a watch for stats etc and this really will be a great device for that. Also exactly what apple loves at the moment, requires two products and a subscription in the apple eco system, great to getting people locked in.

I think AR/VR as long as they can get it comfortable will replace screens and the TV, why have a TV in the house, when you can put on a headset and be at the cinema? Without it taking up the space of a TV and being something you can take with you anywhere, like a hotel etc. There were rumours for so long that Apple were working on an actual TV, I think what actually happened, is they will release the device that will replace it.

All that needs to be done, is for someone to make all this work together and you have got a killer product, so i wouldn't write Apple off just because Meta have done a bad job with trying to sell the metaverse vision to everyone. I don't think Meta were stupid for pursing this, the current products are just half baked and badly executed, but Apple is in the position to do this right. This was the talk of the tech world not too long ago, before AI came and took over everything, but I believe Apple is going to put it firmly back on the map in a few weeks when they drop this. What Apple does, the world listens.

This will be expensive and have a lot of flaws, but any generation shifting product that Apple has released has been like that, just wait a few years down the line and see where it goes.

dgellow2• 3 years ago

You can watch the TV with your friends and family, you cannot do this with a VR headset.

MikusR2• 3 years ago

You can. And you don't even have to be on the same continent.

xeromal• 3 years ago

I wonder if AR/VR development will find a way to help a solid portion of the race who develops motion sickness when wearing the headset.

musictubes• 3 years ago

I have thought that being able to join a live event like a baseball or basketball game would be the killer feature for VR. I’ve come around to that not being a great experience because you’d basically be going t the game by yourself.

On the other hand, Apple’s bread and butter is one user one device. The question is will Apple lead the way for “killer app” or rely on third part developers?

oezi3• 3 years ago

Doing any fitness activity under sweaty VR googles is a fucking pain. None of the display tech is providing sufficient FPS to allow any sort of jittery sports movement without causing people to be sick.

Watching TV in VR also is highly uncomfortable because you can't relax your head due to the weight (and again it is uncomfortably hot). Unless you are on an airplane it doesn't make any sense. The only other advantage is privacy.

The only hope this has is if apple uses insane camera tech to do video pass through VR in such a low latency that this device can beat Hololens for AR applications.

willyt• 3 years ago

A vr headset is just a really big screen. Imagine how much stuff you can leave on your desktop if it’s a perfect sphere and you can sit in your office chair spinning round with it all whirling past you…

stainablesteel• 3 years ago

can we please stop working on projecting shit into our eye balls and instead project shit onto thin air like a screen

Zetaphor• 3 years ago

How would that even be conceivably possible with the technology of today?

Look at the state of the art for projectors, they still require special reflective screens to reach their full potential. You're asking for what is still very much in the realm of science fiction.

dredmorbius• 3 years ago

Physics works against you.

Your eyball is a screen. And, well, screens are screens. Both work by restricting ambient light and focusing an image at a specific focal length.

Air is ... many things, and useful and all that, but it is not a screen. Fill it with particles and you can get traced patterns through it (e.g., laser through smoke or arclamps through fog), but that's not screen-like projection.

And under any circumstances in which ambient light levels are high, the darkest possible ground is ... the ambient light level. Which means either that the entire image is washed out or it's absolutely blasted with light.

Captain Disillusion has a good debunk of one such purported device, the "Cicret Bracelet": <https://yewtu.be/watch?v=KbgvSi35n6o>

Spoiler: it doesn't work. It can't work.

Though I suppose you could carry a water-sheet-spray system and project onto that:

<https://yewtu.be/watch?v=ImU1mG7QC4I>

fnord772• 3 years ago

I'm not in HW but some of those prices don't look right, especially for a run of 500k. $80 for 3D sensors? $60 for wifi/bt/pmic?

londons_explore2• 3 years ago

70,000 units per month is pretty small for Apple...

I guess they are planning on this being for real enthusiasts rather than a mass market thing.

londons_explore2• 3 years ago

I struggle to imagine which document would have all these details in one place within Apple.

Instead, it looks like someone has reverse engineered one of the devices and guessed at all these figures/details.

Cook4986• 3 years ago

Imagine if the whole internet was VR ready? MyHouse.pk3, I’m looking at you.

SergeAx• 3 years ago

$1600, wow! I should confess that despite I am now using my Oculus Quest 2 only for Beat Saber once a month, buying it for $300 two years ago was a real bargain.

kgbcia• 3 years ago

Surprise no else is making the screen lighter by separating the battery and processor as a necklace or fanny pack or mini backpack.

Would have been better if the screen attached to an iPhone thereby reducing the cost of a separate processor/battery.

culanuchachamim• 3 years ago

I love this thread, everyone is sharing their expert opinion on something that is right down the corner. It would be a great exercise to review this thread 6 months after the headset is on the market, and see the true quality of hn on forecasting.

harrisi• 3 years ago

I had this tab open for awhile and was just re-reading the comments after talking to a retired Intel director. It's interesting to look at other innovative Apple posts here, maybe you'd like to check them:

AirPods Max: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25344762

AirPods (general): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21985239

AirPods Pro: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21378197

M1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25049079

M1 (Max/Pro): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28908031

Something interesting is that a lot of the most popular links for these from algolia are not the announcement. The M1 in particular surprised me. The announcement discussion is a few pages behind many other posts about various M1 things.

I've long thought that there's a lot of interesting research opportunities for hn discussions (see Dropbox announcement). Maybe ChatGPT can summarize it.

Rediscover• 3 years ago

How about not glasses, but a 2cm face shield? Flips up and down...

The bill of materials for the Apple headset leaked

Related Stories