Apple's Mixed-Reality Headset Again Rumored to Feature Micro-OLED Internal Displays and Standard OLED External Indicator Display

The use-case I'm imagining for this has me seriously pumped - though I have zero reason to believe this will be a reality.

I'm thinking this will be a content consumption device, but also a work device.

Imagine sitting at a desk that has a mouse and keyboard, but no monitor. You put on your Apple headset, and an augmented version of MacOS is displayed infront of your eyes. The 'monitor(s)' you would use are projected by the device, while you still see the room you're in, and the desk you're sitting at.

This would allow you to have as many screens as you like, at whatever sizes you like, while arranging and manipulating them as you see fit (with a mouse, as we do now, or maybe with your hands). Alternatively, there may not be any 'screens' at all, but you simply move windows/apps around, or snap them to fixed locations; there are many possibilities.

Being able to see the world around you through the device would be key to this working - think AR, rather than VR. Information is projected into your world, as you can look down at your keybord for typing, or grab a pen and paper to jot down a note, or reach for your cup of coffee. I don't think a fully virtual world would be ideal for practical work.

With the way AR has been demonstrated in recent years, I don't think it's a stretch to think these virtual screens could be fixed to a certain position in the room - distance from you, as well as location relative to you as you move around.

Not only would this system allow for nearly infinite ways of organizing and displaying your work, but it would be familiar enough so as to not scare off regular people who aren't tech enthusiasts. Granted, there will be significant push-back from those who think they will look silly, but once they get over that, and look at this as being akin to sitting at your desk in front of three giant monitors, they can simply work within MacOS as they normally would - only with more freedom.

I don't think this is a novelty. I think this has the potential to revolutionise how we work day-to-day.

So the outer display will be a projection of the user's eyes so they can have conversations with others while wearing the device.. not creepy at all!

Dream with me.... Imagine launching Final Cut Pro and from within the video editor being able to toggle preview in different simulated theaters (IMAX, various screen sizes, 3D, etc..). Imagine working in Logic Pro and being able to virtualize a massive mixer console in front of you? Or being able to perform virtual mic placement on speaker cabinets, virtual drum kits, etc...? Imagine the 2D user interfaces we've come to know vastly improved on fully leveraging 3D spatial rendering ability to greatly boost productivity

There's been plenty of indication the above ^ is actually what Apple has been focusing on for their first iteration XR device. Going back many years ago, looking at their job postings, etc... It's speculation, but I firmly believe the above is what we're going to see delivered.... I bolded greatly boost productivity because I believe that is entirely the aim. If the above is what Apple is positioned to deliver, then it's a game changer. It's a game changer because it means if you use one of the (presumably handful) of XR apps this new Apple headset is going to boost productivity on and that app is critical to your job, you're going to either go buy this $2k headset and embrace it or your colleagues who do embrace are going to become a lot more productive than you are. At that point dropping $2k for the device isn't a option, it's required to remain at performance level needed to compete in your field.

If you're shaking your head saying "that's not what's going to happen". Maybe not, but I do believe Apple is aiming for this and if I'm right, then Apple's headset will be revolutionary.

Meta/Oculus's headset coming in Oct "Cambria" will do a lot of the same things, but Meta/Oculus has no first-party software like Logic Pro or Final Cut, they have no respect in the market of industrial software. They have to partner with companies like Adobe, Pro Tools, etc.. to deliver something comparable. There is no coherent ecosystem there for Meta to own, Apple already has this. Apple has partnerships with so many creative tool vendors. They have incredible leverage and are in a great position to not only make money off their XR hardware, but boost interest in their ecosystem as a whole. Definitively, we can say that if Apple goes in the direction above focusing on productivity Meta can not compete. Meta has tried to build a ecosystem, but has failed. Their phone product got scraped before coming to market, Portal is being sunset, their watch project canceled. The Rayban Smart glasses have been struggling, they have no successful products outside of VR headsets to even build an ecosystem with.

Comments from Meta/Oculus fans are entertaining. Their heads are firmly in the VR/gaming space. They are thinking of how Apple has no support for STEAM, how Apple would need to port all the hit VR titles to their platform, etc... If Apple were aiming to compete heavy in the gaming VR space, these thoughts would be accurate. But if Apple releases a $2k headset, you have to be pretty shallow to think that's just going to come to market to give Apple's customers Apple VR Arcade access. Rest easy, for Apple, XR related gaming will probably continue to remain a sidebar thing. I don't see Apple taking the gaming market any time soon. But if they get productivity XR right and innovate in that space, Meta's Cambria won't really be able to complete with the Apple headset either. Even if the hardware spec and features similar, it's going to be all about what the software does with those features that defines the product.

The more I hear about this headset the more excited I am to see how Apple plans to market a $3000 headset… (not being sarcastic). Cost wise are talking $2000-$2500 more than headsets from “Meta”, Valve and the upcoming PS VR2 for the PlayStation 5 which is rumored to come in at around $400. Those headsets may be more focused on gaming but no doubt people will be comparing.

For that much money, Apple must have some bigger use planned for this thing. Maybe “Reality OS” is a more robust operating system than we think it is. Maybe this headset could be used for not only experiencing virtual worlds but also designing objects and spaces for those worlds. For $3000 there’s gotta be some reason that people will want to keep putting this thing on and wearing it for extended hours. VR games and virtual tours just isn’t going to be enough. For content consumption alone, $3000 is a high ask.

They definitely have my curiosity. As a digital artist always looking for new ways to create, I’m certainly curious if they can gain my wallet as well.

It's funny to me Apple is already working on the second-generation version and the first generation is not even out in the wild. Honestly, I'm over this AR/VR Apple Mixed reality headset. Just doesn't seem appealing anymore. But It will be from Apple so I guess I will be buying it.

Does anyone else feel the same?

Starting to think the front of the visor will be a screen unto itself that might let the people around you see the world you’re in, or something to that effect, which would make wearing a visor less of a closed off, shut out from others experience. Leave it to apple to find a way to make something more human friendly and able to integrate better with the surrounding world. They’re thinking beyond just “person wears visor, escapes reality” and rather “person wears visor, has new way of experiencing and interacting with reality”. This would likely make this kind of product more appealing to the masses, which would be so very Apple to accomplish.

That and for displaying "googly eyes."