V for Vision: A Bit Glowing and Blurry, Just What We Wanted!
Alright. Finally, Apple has officially introduced their VisionaRy headset, a project they’ve been working on for roughly a decade. It’s quite noticeable that they may not have initially wanted to pursue this path, but felt compelled to do so. The current XR market, dominated by Oculus and others, is not a space where you can allow the competition to threaten your ecosystem.
Here are some alternative apps you might consider as your favourite apps:
Apple TV alternative: Kodi — Your media collection’s new best friend.
Apple Music alternative: Deezer — Spotify’s lesser-known sibling.
Apple Mindfulness alternative: Insight Timer — Meditation made easy, and it’s free!
Apple Pages/Freeform alternative: LibreOffice Writer — The word wizard of open-source.
Apple Photos alternative: Adobe Lightroom — Unleash your inner photographer.
Apple Notes alternative: Joplin — Notes galore, organized and free.
Apple Mail alternative: Thunderbird — A bird that delivers email (not literally).
Apple Messages alternative: Signal — Shhh… it’s a secret messaging app.
Apple Safari alternative: Firefox — The fiery fox of web browsing.
Apple Keynote alternative: LibreOffice Impress — Impress everyone with your presentations.
Apple goes beyond software and social media. Their top-notch hardware for prosumers sets them apart. From computers to iPhones, iPads, and iWatches, their devices are essentially computers. Their latest innovation, the “spatial computer,” is more than a headset — it’s a self-inflicted-surveillance device with sensors, cameras, and tracking software that predicts your intentions. With a simple snap of your fingers, you can access curated content and Apple ecosystem apps. While it offers a relaxing experience, it comes at a high price and raises privacy concerns. Meanwhile, Meta’s upcoming Quest 3 will provide similar features at a fraction of the cost and probably lower quality. The absence of controllers and the psychological impact of data tracking raise important questions. Big tech aims to turn you into a corporate citizen, compromising your privacy and freedom. Marketing manipulates and misleads, while lies detach you from reality and purpose. Magic and illusions in branding deceive, keeping you chasing an unattainable enhancement. Technology is a tool, not a solution to becoming a better human.
The introduction of a new visionary device raises many questions related to old, unresolved problems.
Too heavy?
Wearing heavy hardware on the head for extended periods can lead to several health issues:
Neck Strain: The weight can put significant strain on the neck muscles, leading to discomfort, fatigue, and potentially more serious musculoskeletal disorders over time.
Headaches: The pressure exerted on the skull can trigger tension headaches, especially if the device is worn for prolonged periods.
Vision Problems: If the hardware involves a display close to the eyes, there could be an increased risk of eye strain, blurred vision, and potentially more serious eye conditions with long-term use.
Balance Issues: Heavier headsets can alter one’s sense of balance, potentially leading to falls and related injuries, especially in older adults or those with pre-existing balance conditions.
Skin Irritation: Continuous use of heavy hardware can lead to skin irritation, pressure sores, or even acne due to restricted airflow and accumulated sweat.
Psychological Effects: Extended use of immersive devices might lead to disorientation or „cybersickness,” a form of motion sickness induced by virtual environments.
Preventing these health issues involves using lightweight materials, ergonomic designs, and encouraging breaks from usage at regular intervals. Users should also be educated about the potential risks, so they can make informed decisions about their use of such devices.
Does Vision address these issues more effectively? Also, it’s quite heavy — https://medium.com/@davidpogue/my-first-immersion-in-apple-vision-pro-heavy-man-d99f0a940c7c
Unhealthy?
Viewing small factor OLED screens through sophisticated lenses, as often found in VR/AR glasses or headsets, can potentially lead to a range of vision issues if not used responsibly:
Eye Strain: Prolonged exposure to small, close-up screens can cause digital eye strain or computer vision syndrome. Symptoms include dry eyes, blurred vision, and eye discomfort.
Near-to-Far Adjustment Problems: Regularly switching focus between the small, close-up screens of the device and the real world can potentially cause issues with the eye’s ability to adjust to distance changes, a condition known as accommodative dysfunction.
Blue Light Exposure: OLED screens emit high levels of blue light. While not all blue light is harmful, overexposure, particularly in the evening, can disrupt sleep patterns and potentially contribute to macular degeneration over time.
Vergence-Accommodation Conflict: In VR, the issue of vergence-accommodation conflict arises. This is where your eyes are forced to focus at a consistent distance (the screen), while simultaneously needing to adjust for perceived distances in the virtual environment, which can lead to discomfort and eye strain.
Blink Rate Reduction: When intensely focusing on screens, people tend to blink less often, which can lead to dry, irritated eyes.
No real data from Apple yet.
Even worse?
Augmenting spatial computer realism with real objects in your home environment can offer significant advantages, like enhanced entertainment, productivity, and learning. However, it can also introduce a range of psychological effects that we need to consider:
Reality Confusion: As augmented reality (AR) becomes more realistic, the line between what’s real and what’s not may blur. This confusion could potentially lead to false memories or difficulty distinguishing between virtual and physical experiences.
Dependence on Augmentation: If AR becomes an essential part of our daily routine, there’s a risk of becoming overly reliant on these digital enhancements, leading to potential distress or impairment when the technology isn’t available.
Heightened Expectations: A high degree of realism in AR might create inflated expectations for real-life experiences, leading to disappointment or dissatisfaction when reality doesn’t meet the augmented standard.
Privacy Concerns: If our homes become spaces where AR is pervasive, we might feel an invasion of privacy, knowing that the technology has access to our personal space and daily habits.
Distraction and Safety: Being too engrossed in an augmented environment might distract from real-world hazards and responsibilities, leading to accidents or neglect of important tasks.
Isolation and Social Disconnect: While AR can connect us with others virtually, overuse may result in less face-to-face social interaction, which could contribute to feelings of isolation or loneliness.
Anxiety and Stress: Constant augmentation could lead to sensory overload, potentially increasing levels of stress and anxiety.
These problems are hard to track, as the marketing machine will likely dismiss all inconvenient negative aspects.
Controllers will be introduced, just like the pencil and keyboard were.
While technology has made impressive strides in hands-free interaction through face, head, mouth, eye, and hand tracking, it’s clear that to fully simulate the experience of physical presence in a virtual world, tactile feedback and manual interaction remain essential.
Let’s envision how this headset might evolve:
Adding Hand Controllers: Hand controllers can add a crucial tactile element that increases immersion and interaction capabilities. For example, the sensation of holding or manipulating objects in a virtual environment can only be convincingly simulated through a physical device that users can hold and operate.
Haptic Feedback: Advanced hand controllers could incorporate haptic feedback technology to simulate the sensation of touch. This can provide users with a feeling of actually interacting with virtual objects, enhancing the overall realism.
Combining Tracking with Controllers: The headset could seamlessly integrate facial and body tracking with the use of hand controllers, so users can utilize a combination of gestures, expressions, and direct controller manipulation for more nuanced and intuitive interaction with the virtual environment.
Brain-Computer Interface (BCI) Integration: Future developments might include the integration of BCI technology, where users can control aspects of the virtual environment through their thoughts. While this wouldn’t replace the need for physical interaction, it could offer an additional layer of interaction and immersion.
Controller Design Evolution: Controllers might evolve to become less obtrusive and more natural to hold and use. For example, we could see the development of glove-like controllers that provide haptic feedback and closely mimic natural hand movements.
“Mom, look! No hands!”
While hands-free operation is an important aspect of headset design, the addition of hand controllers can enhance the user experience by providing a more realistic sensation of physical presence in the virtual world.
It’s not uncommon for technology companies like Apple to release peripherals and accessories for their main products later in the product life cycle. This strategy can generate additional revenue, as well as improve and extend the functionality of the main product. In fact, this approach can also benefit consumers, as they are often eager to get their hands on accessories that enhance their use of the main product.
Here are a couple of examples of how Apple has done this:
- Apple Pencil: When the iPad was first launched, it was mainly marketed as a touch-based device. However, later iterations began to incorporate stylus functionality, and eventually, the Apple Pencil was introduced. It was not just a simple stylus, but offered advanced features like pressure sensitivity and tilt recognition, making it a significant add-on for tasks like note-taking and digital art creation.
- Smart Keyboard: Similar to the Apple Pencil, the Smart Keyboard was introduced as an additional accessory for the iPad Pro. By offering a physical keyboard, Apple expanded the functionality of the iPad, making it more suitable for productivity tasks. The keyboard also doubles as a stand and cover for the iPad, integrating seamlessly with the device.
- AirPods: While these aren’t specific to one device, the release of AirPods created another revenue stream from customers who had already purchased an iPhone or an iPad.
Therefore, it wouldn’t be surprising if Apple will introduce hand controllers later. Given the potential for AR/VR devices to be used in various contexts, from gaming to professional applications, additional controllers could offer enhanced interaction possibilities, which in turn could make the main product more appealing and versatile. This would then lead to a win-win situation where both the company and the customers benefit.
Social Impact
Tech giants have come under scrutiny from many perspectives due to their market dominance, data collection practices, psychological effects of their products, and the overall impact on society.
A common criticism is that these companies are so focused on growth and revenue that they neglect the potential negative consequences of their products on users. This has led to issues around privacy, mental health, and addiction, among others.
Here are some areas where tech companies’ practices have been questioned:
- Data Privacy and Security: Tech companies collect vast amounts of data from users, often without explicit informed consent. The misuse of personal data can lead to privacy violations and the potential for manipulation.
- Mental Health: The impact of social media and technology on mental health, particularly among young people, is a significant concern. Issues include social media addiction, cyberbullying, and the harmful effects of comparing oneself to others online.
- Ethics of AI and Algorithms: There are concerns about the lack of transparency and potential bias in algorithms used by tech companies, which can have a significant impact on users and society.
- Market Monopoly: Large tech companies often have a significant monopoly in their markets. This can lead to a lack of competition, stifling innovation, and issues with price control.
In response to these and other concerns, there have been calls for greater regulation of tech companies, as well as an emphasis on ethical considerations in product design and data usage.
Ultimately, the responsibility falls on both the companies to conduct business ethically and sustainably, and on regulatory bodies to enforce fair practices and protect consumers’ interests. Users can also play a part by staying informed about the potential implications of using these products and making choices that align with their comfort levels regarding privacy, mental health, and more.
Apple’s approach to data privacy and security has been questioned several times.
iCloud Data: In 2020, it was revealed that Apple retains the ability to scan user’s iCloud data and can share it with law enforcement when legally required to do so. While this is a standard practice for many tech companies, it raised questions about the degree of privacy users have when storing data in iCloud.
Siri Recordings: In 2019, Apple faced a backlash when it was revealed that some Siri voice recordings were being reviewed by human contractors to improve the service’s accuracy. These recordings sometimes contained sensitive personal information. In response to this, Apple suspended the program, introduced a new privacy policy, and made it an opt-in feature.
CSAM Detection: In 2021, Apple announced a plan to introduce a new feature aimed at detecting and reporting known Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM) stored in iCloud Photos. While the intention of protecting children is laudable, the system sparked a controversy as privacy advocates expressed concerns about the potential for misuse and the implications for user privacy. Critics worried about the possibility of the technology being used for other purposes, such as government surveillance. After facing criticism, Apple postponed the implementation of the CSAM detection system to gather input and make improvements.
Luxury like Lamborghini
There are a few reasons why companies like Apple might earn more money from luxury devices compared to prosumer devices:
Higher Profit Margins: Luxury devices often come with higher price tags. While they do cost more to produce due to premium materials and components, the price increase is usually proportionally higher than the cost increase. This leads to larger profit margins on luxury devices.
Brand Positioning and Perception: Companies can use luxury devices to position their brand as high-end or premium. This can increase overall brand perception, attracting customers who are willing to pay more for perceived quality, exclusivity, or prestige. Additionally, the sale of luxury devices can indirectly boost the sales of other products in the brand’s lineup by enhancing the overall brand reputation.
Target Market: Luxury devices are often targeted towards a wealthy demographic that has the means to afford such devices. These consumers often have a higher willingness to pay for the latest and most advanced technology and design. Conversely, prosumer devices are usually aimed at professionals or tech enthusiasts who may be more price-sensitive or interested in cost-performance ratio.
Service and Support: Luxury devices often come with premium services, like priority customer service, extended warranties, or exclusive software features. This not only justifies the high price for the customer but also provides an additional revenue stream for the company.
Lower Sales Volume, Lower Risk: Although luxury products might sell in fewer numbers, the high profit margin from each unit sold can offset the lower sales volume. Furthermore, lower sales volume can mean lower risk, as the company doesn’t need to maintain a huge inventory which could potentially lead to losses if the product doesn’t sell as expected.
Technological Showcase: Luxury devices often serve as a platform for companies to showcase their technological prowess, including new features or designs that may later trickle down to lower-priced models. While the initial R&D costs can be high, the profits from luxury sales can help recoup these costs.
In contrast, prosumer devices, while cheaper to produce and sell in larger volumes, might not offer the same profit margins. The market is often more competitive, which can lead to price wars and diminished profits. Prosumer devices can be a crucial part of a company’s portfolio, however, by providing volume sales and a broad customer base.
Wealthy owners on the rise?
The growth of wealth globally has been generally on the rise, albeit with significant disparities between different regions and groups.
Global wealth report from Credit Suisse showed that global wealth tripled from 2000 to 2020, despite economic shocks such as the 2008 financial crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic. The report also highlighted that wealth creation in the 21st century has been largely driven by the growth of the middle class, which is expected to continue to expand, particularly in emerging economies.
This growth has not been evenly distributed. While wealth has been growing rapidly in emerging economies like China and India, the wealthiest nations are still primarily in North America, Europe, and the Asia-Pacific region excluding China and India. Additionally, within individual countries, wealth inequality has often been increasing, with the wealthiest individuals owning an increasingly large share of total wealth.
High-income countries, including the United States, Canada, Australia, and many in Western Europe, have a high proportion of their population in the global top 10% of wealth holders. Conversely, countries in sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia, and some parts of Latin America have a large proportion of their population in the global bottom 50%.
There are many factors contributing to this growing wealth inequality, including policies favoring the wealthy, the globalized economy, lack of access to education, political instability, and other systemic issues.
Overall, while the number of wealthy individuals and societies has been growing globally, this growth has been uneven and has often coincided with increasing wealth inequality. Updated and detailed data beyond my current knowledge would provide a more accurate understanding of the recent trends.
At a price point of $3500, the Apple “Goggles” device would likely target a specific segment of consumers. These could include:
Wealthy Consumers: Those with high disposable incomes can afford to spend more on luxury goods and cutting-edge technology.
Professionals: Depending on the features and capabilities of the device, professionals who could use it in their work might be willing to invest in it. This could include designers, engineers, architects, and other professionals in industries like VR/AR, gaming, entertainment, and more.
Businesses: If the device offers features that could be used for business applications (such as virtual meetings, design work, training simulations, etc.), companies might be willing to purchase it for their employees.
Early Adopters & Tech Enthusiasts: Those who are keen on having the latest technology or being at the forefront of new technological trends might be willing to pay the high price, even if it’s significantly above the average consumer electronics product.
Educational Institutions: Universities, research centers, or educational institutions might be interested in using such a device for research or instructional purposes.
While the price point is high for an average consumer, Apple, like many other companies, has a history of introducing new product categories at a higher initial price point. Over time, as technology improves and becomes cheaper to produce, these products often become more affordable and thus accessible to a wider consumer base. In the meantime, sales to the groups mentioned above can help to offset the high development costs associated with launching such innovative products.
While Apple is renowned for its successful marketing strategies, it has also made some marketing decisions that did not go as planned. Here are a few examples:
iPhone 5C: The iPhone 5C was marketed as a lower-cost alternative to the iPhone 5S, aimed at emerging markets and budget-conscious consumers. However, the device was still quite expensive compared to other budget smartphones, and many customers opted to spend a little more for the premium 5S. The 5C did not sell as well as expected and is considered one of Apple’s rare misses.
Siri: At launch, Apple marketed Siri as a revolutionary voice assistant. However, it was initially plagued with issues, including misunderstanding commands and providing inaccurate responses. It didn’t deliver on the high expectations set by Apple’s marketing, especially compared to advancements by competitors like Google Assistant and Amazon’s Alexa.
Apple Maps: When Apple decided to replace Google Maps with its own mapping software on iPhones, it marketed the change as an upgrade. Unfortunately, Apple Maps was riddled with errors at launch, including misnamed cities, wrong directions, and distorted images. The debacle led to a public apology from CEO Tim Cook and a recommendation for users to use competitor services until the issues were resolved.
Macintosh TV: Released in 1993, the Macintosh TV was an attempt to combine a computer and television. The product failed to attract consumers due to its high price and limited capabilities (it could not display TV and computer applications simultaneously). It was discontinued less than a year after launch.
MobileMe: In 2008, Apple launched MobileMe, a subscription-based collection of online services and software. It was marketed as “Exchange for the rest of us”, but unfortunately, it had many synchronization issues and other technical problems at launch, which attracted widespread criticism.
While these examples represent some poor marketing decisions, it’s important to remember that Apple’s overall marketing strategy has been remarkably successful, and the company’s missteps have often led to lessons learned, improved products, and better marketing in the future.
Are you gonna buy it?
It is a future because Apple was able to show something and announce release date in 6+ months. A trick to show you that product is from the future, like they can travel in time.
Interesting researchers of spatial computing issues:
- Martin S. Banks — A vision scientist at the University of California, Berkeley, Dr. Banks has published extensively on visual perception and the issues of vergence-accommodation conflicts in head-mounted displays. https://vcresearch.berkeley.edu/faculty/martin-s-banks
- Kennedy Robert S. — Known for his work in the field of simulator sickness (which is related to cybersickness), Robert Kennedy might have relevant research or publications. — https://europepmc.org/article/med/2818393
- Mark B. Neider — His work often revolves around the cognitive aspects of AR/VR experiences, which could encompass user comfort and health. — https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13506280701381691
- Cynthia S. Owsley — A researcher in vision science and public health, Dr. Owsley might have publications on the long-term impacts of screen use on eye health. — https://www.uab.edu/medicine/ophthalmology/faculty/owsley
- Susanne P. Lajoie — Known for her work in the educational applications of AR/VR, Lajoie might have relevant research on the user experience aspects of these technologies. — https://www.mcgill.ca/atlas-lab/principal-investigator
- Spatial Cognition — Making Virtual Spaces -https://arvrjourney.com/spatial-cognition-making-virtual-spaces-part-1-9fe74dba2e29
