NAB
Vision Pro, Apple’s long anticipated entrance into AR/VR headgear, was announced with much fanfare last week and now everyone is trying to figure out what and who it is for and whether it will be a success.
article here
“The Vision is stuffed
with innovations that eclipse every other headset on the market,” The
Economist found in its write-up, adding, “The product is dusted with
Apple’s user-friendly design magic.”
Blogger Nick Hilton called
the device “arguably the most exciting new product on Apple’s slate since the
iPhone.”
The device’s eye-tracking “is the closest thing I’ve seen to magic,” tech reviewer Marques Brownlee said in Business Insider.
VR/AR agency founder Cortney Harding, called Vision Pro “an overnight sensation seven years in the making.”
Apple CEO Tim
Cook said, “We believe Apple Vision Pro is a revolutionary product,” and Elav
Horwitz, EVP and global director of applied innovation at McCann Worldgroup,
took him at his word.
Vision Pro “revolutionizes
advertising, integrating digital experiences into the real world,” she
theorized. “Streets become immersive playgrounds, and homes transform into
immersive stores. Brands can deliver meaningful digital experiences
seamlessly.”
In truth it does nothing of the sort, at least nothing that can’t be achieved now on any number of metaverse platforms from Decentraland to Meta Horizons.
Apple’s
message is clear: after desktop and mobile computing, the next big tech era
will be spatial computing — also known as augmented reality or mixed reality —
in which 3D computer graphics are overlaid on the world around the user.
But it didn’t need Matthew Ball, sage of Silicon Valley, to point out the emperor’s new clothes in Apple’s presentation. The idea of spatial computing has been around for longer than the metaverse and is in fact the metaverse by any other name.
We are pretty
much where we were before Apple’s launch: that is, a long way from a wearable
device that the mass of the population will adopt to access a 3D version of the
internet.
If Apple is
playing a long game, then what does it hope to achieve in the short term with
Vision Pro?
Some this as a victory for
AR over VR and a power shift away from Meta, that has struggled to convince
anyone that VR is now.
“It feels like
Apple will probably force through the advent of AR with Vision Pro,” says
Hilton. “It is, after all, the logical extension of a product base that has
been tied together, as much as anything, by a shared UX.”
That said,
Hilton isn’t convinced that Vision is augmented reality, but is rather an
augmented version of a smart phone.
“AR must,
definitionally, be something that augments the lived, human experience. [Vision
Pro] prioritizes the augmentation of smart phone experiences, rather than human
ones. Improving the way we experience FaceTime and Zoom calls is, in my
opinion, not a way of unlocking new pathways for the human experience, but a
streamlining of extant technological advances.”
The Economist also observed that
Apple had “strangely uninspiring suggestions for what to do with its miraculous
device.
“Look at your
photos — but bigger! Use Microsoft Teams — but on a virtual screen! Make
FaceTime video calls — but with your friend’s window in space, not the palm of
your hand! Apple’s vision mainly seemed to involve taking 2D apps and
projecting them onto virtual screens (while charging $3,499 for the privilege).
Is that it?”
There is
unanimous agreement that Vision Pro is the state-of-the-art AR or VR headset,
but its price point is not the only thing that might put consumers off from
actually using it.
Scott Galloway, a
professor at New York University’s Stern School of Business, was doubtful:
“I believe
these ski goggles will be the company’s first major commercial failure of the
century,” he said. “The device will age as well as candy cigarettes — and Tim
Cook knows it. Headsets are a bad form factor, full stop, and no headset-based
product will achieve mass adoption. The nosebleed price limits trial, even by
influencers and institutions.”
Galloway
suggested the whole launch is a cynical exercise to scupper Meta’s plans for
Oculus: “This may be the first product in history that’s primary purpose is to
remind consumers who can’t afford it how crappy the competition they can afford
really is.”
He added, “The
$250 billion cosmetics industry helps us mimic visual cues for health and
reproductive fertility. There is no version of a headset or goggles that makes
us seem more appealing.”
Although a
post in response to the article points out that in the metaverse we will be
interfacing with each other as photoreal alternative versions of ourselves — so
we can appear to others as we desire.
There is also widespread
acknowledgement that the first-generation Vision Pro is nowhere near the final
iteration of the headset — “in point of fact, it will likely look prohibitively
clunky in just a few years’ time,” says Hilton. “But now everyone knows that
Apple sees AR as its future.”
Galloway
observed something similar, suggesting that the launch was strategically
intended to stop Meta from running away with a virtual reality version of the
spatial internet.
“Apple doesn’t
have to own the headset category to win the war against Meta, or even sell that
many,” he said. “The company just has to keep the category unsettled and
splintered so Meta doesn’t own it. It has the cash to play spoiler — it
generates over $100 billion per year in free cash flow, more than enough to
engage in a high-cost, low-ROI arms race.”
The Economist says the real
purpose of the Vision was to get the hardware into the hands of developers and
thus speed up the march to the metaverse on Apple’s terms.
“Apple will
not sell many of the expensive first-generation units, and doesn’t care. Its
aim is to get the product to the people who will work out what spatial
computing can do.”
Although Apple
pointedly didn’t focus on gaming as an application, it did show a demo from
Disney extolling the virtues of watching movies on the face screen. Perhaps
Apple’s TV and film division will surprise us with some content that can only
be appreciated on Vision Pro?
The Economist speculates that
surgeons, engineers and architects, or educational institutions might adopt the
Vision Pro first — in truth, the same sectors that Meta and Google have been
pushing with their mixed-reality gear.
The truth is
no one yet knows what the metaverse or spatial computing’s killer use-case
might be — or if it even has one.
No comments:
Post a Comment