What if Apple’s AR glasses development has moved into a new phase?

Jonny Evans for Computerworld:

You see, what’s interesting is the focus on the word “development” in the Digitimes claim.

Has Apple really ceased development, or has it not reached a new stage in development called “production”?

If the latter, would it not make eminent sense to seed the product development team across the rest of the company in order to help bring Apple’s many different platforms and technologies in line with the new platform invention.

MacDailyNews Take: Evans doesn’t appear to be a fan of the DigiTimes claim that Apple has ‘terminated’ AR glasses development. Nor are we. Evans makes a good argument to look at the claim a different way.


      1. Because a glasshole is still a glasshole.

        Like one of my favorite T-Shirts says.

        “Make it idiot proof and someone will make a better idiot”

        Who needs better glassholes?

        1. “Because a glasshole is still a glasshole.”

          Not true at all. The implementation matters. If you can’t imagine how a set of computer/AR glasses can be useful and socially acceptable and respect privacy, that’s a failure of your imagination.

          1. You tell me how you’re not going to do it Mr. Imagination. You tell me how it won’t be intrusive upon others like sticking a video camera in their face. In fact, a “socially acceptable” version would likely be discreet, and that is even worse.

            Look, I fly drones, and some people get understandably upset. I explain to them to imagine their smartphone taking pictures at that distance. And that’s without sticking a camera in their face.

            1. “You tell me how it won’t be intrusive upon others like sticking a video camera in their face.”

              Simple. The glasses don’t take photos or video. Why would they need to? They’re about layering augmented reality and data in a useful way. The killer feature isn’t something as basic as taking a photo. Why would Apple step so far backwards with the camera? It would have to be so small to fit in a pair of glasses that the quality would be very poor. No, I think Apple will keep the camera function unbundled and within the iPhone.

              Apple may have an even better solution in mind though, that is possible. The original iPhone was so surprising that Blackberry execs thought the launch demo was faked.

              “I fly drones, and some people get understandably upset”

              Yeah, that tracks, you flying drones. Takes a certain kind of person to even want to fly drones around.

            2. So your going to be looking them up, in context of location and activity for ar and somehow that’s better….

              Btw… you don’t know either.

              If Google did it you would be singing a different tune. A glasshole is a glasshole.

            3. Thanks for a brilliant response to the simple minded, lacking in imagination buffoon, fool and droning on privacy invader applecynicshythead

            4. “If Google did it you would be singing a different tune. A glasshole is a glasshole.”

              No that’s just you crapping on anything Apple does. If Google created glasses that were thoughtful and useful and respected privacy I’d use them. They didn’t do that. They created a poor product that encouraged poor behaviour. There are so many ways glasses could be used respectfully in public. One easy way is that the glasses don’t record, all they do is deliver information. Google never thought of that because they didn’t give much thought to the user experience.

              Apple is rather good at figuring out the user experience and making thoughtful, useful products. Google isn’t so good at that. Never mind the privacy discussion. Google will never deliver products that respect privacy. Google’s culture just isn’t right for being able to create truly personal computers. Personal is private and that isn’t Google.

              “So your going to be looking them up, in context of location and activity for ar ”

              No idea what you are even trying to say. Maybe figure out how to articulate your thoughts and get back to me.

            5. My thoughts have been articulated, your comprehension is your problem.

              How can I crap on something that hasn’t launched yet? But I can crap on lingo for which there is precedent. Actually many precedents.

            6. “How can I crap on something that hasn’t launched yet? ”

              You made the assumption that whatever AR/computer glasses Apple creates will also have the glasshole issue.

              You said “Who needs better glassholes?” in response to my comment about Apple doing glasses right/better.

              I gave you one very easy solution to the glasshole issue. The glasshole problem was Google’s. Do you really think Apple is so stupid that they wouldn’t address that issue? They will. The only question is how Apple deals with it. Could be the glasses not recording. Might be contextual by use case. Might be with a better user experience. My money is on the glasses not recording anything and being a display only. That solves a lot of other problems as well. Storage, battery life, compute power, camera array, weight, size.

              Maybe you don’t understand what a glasshole is? That happened because Google Glass could record. Take away the recording capability in the glasses and there is no glasshole problem. Wearing glasses doesn’t mean you’re a glasshole. It was the recording part that made people glassholes. It was only partly that Google Glass was very poorly designed and clunky and made you look weird and disconnected from the world. That was a tiny part of it. The recording was the main problem.

              Socially we’re all comfortable with recording capability in our phones so why not leave it there? That gives us a social construct of holding our phones in an obvious way that signals to everyone that we’re taking a photo or video and the community polices that behaviour already. Something similar could be done with glasses to make it obvious when someone is taking a photo or video but the more elegant solution is to make the glasses a display that doesn’t record.

              There probably isn’t much more to say here especially because you can’t even be honest about what you’ve said.

            7. Yes ANY image capturing device from ANY company will have a glasshole issue. My comment on Apple “magically” solving that issue was prophetic, and as you prove, correct.

              Are you now telling me that if Google removed recording, it would be okay? And I am supposed to have faith that neither the device, nor the cloud is recording? What about the ar results?

              Tell you what, even that fleeting nanosecond is mine. And yes, if I’m out in public, it’s in the public domain, but you would still be a glasshole.

            8. “Are you now telling me that if Google removed recording, it would be okay? ”

              Google Glass had many more problems than the glasshole recording problem. That was a major issue that drove the glasshole phenomenon but the product as a whole was very poor.

              Apple doesn’t magically do anything. Apple literally solves problems and gives us useful products. That’s why Apple sells so many products and has such high customer satisfaction.

              The fact is you just hate Apple. It’s your reason for living, which is pretty sad.

            9. Oh, I do have an axe to grind, and that’s no secret. But I truly hate bullshit and when it comes to Apple it’s in abundance.

              Not to mention, like I said, I was proven right. My comment was about the fans, not the non-existent product. But rest assured, it will be worn by glassholes.

            10. Apple Cynic is a Sad Limp Phuqqer who thinks he is smart and has a “way with words” when he is just way out there and… sad

            11. “I do have an axe to grind, and that’s no secret.”

              Uh yeah, no kidding. It defines your life which is just sad.

              “Not to mention, like I said, I was proven right. My comment was about the fans, not the non-existent product.”

              Uh, no, we were talking about products and you were proven wrong. I understand now, you were just calling Apple consumers glassholes. That tracks given how much you hate Apple.

              “But rest assured, it will be worn by glassholes.”

              Exactly what I said, you’ll crap on Apple’s glasses product no matter how good it is. Even worse you say you’re talking about the fans instead of having an intelligent discussion about technology. Why are you afraid to have a real discussion? Is it because you can’t admit that Apple makes good products? Probably. That might shatter you. So sad.

              Have fun talking to yourself, I’m gone.

            12. Duly noted.

              But I want you to know that I was parodying the Apple fan rhetoric, which you’ve so gloriously proven.

              On the other hand, I did not pick on Apple itself on this, it has not shown a product, rather on any and all who produce such products. It’s endemic to the class.

  1. My guess is Apple will be targeting vertical markets, gamers, design/engineering, healthcare, commercial application etc., not general population. Same for autonomous vehicles.

    1. Today’s Apple is more likely to target the larger market over any specialized market. If they do target specific niches that would be a new direction for Apple at this point.

    2. Pretty much spot on. They won’t be Oakley glasses but more like goggles of some sort, sealed with a 4k screen or maybe higher (if you believe in rumors of rumors of goggles that is…).

      The real trick to all this is mapping. If an iPhone can greatly map a particular space or room, etc… then augmented whatever becomes pretty amazing. Gaming would be front and center. Being a pretty big Battlefront (the original mind you) PS4 guy, adding storm troopers into my yard, or turning my hallway into a death star corridor…

      Well, let’s just say if you don’t see where this is going, I can’t help you. At this moment, it would take some specialized chips (Apple’s got them in spades) some great AR (getting there) and some pretty robust processing (Apple is there on that front, or nearly so)…

      1. Google’s Pixel phones have AR Stickers, I don’t see why Apple’s iPhone couldn’t do the stormtroopers too anywhere you can point your camera.

  2. A product may go in a production phase.. but as long as it is not intended to be a one off item.. the development does not stop…. the teams work continues with improvements/ debugging and new iterations for future models and updates.

      1. I agree. Digitimes should be renamed Dodgytimes – the publication is about as reliable as a Citizen C anecdote about how great he was back in the day and how many important tech luminaries he knew, as if anyone cares!

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.