Raphael Thys
Some thoughts on the clearly forthcoming ‘Reality Pro’ headset
I’m not so sure it’s us seeing smoke anymore in so much as we’re seeing the fire of Apple’s incoming headset. It’s a bit reminiscent of the months leading up to the unveiling of the original iPhone back in 2006/2007. But now reporters have better supply chain sources, and so there’s more detail to report. On the flip side, some of those details will end up being at least slightly inaccurate as Apple has undoubtedly tried many variations of the device at this point and will have scrapped some plans and elevated others. Anyway, it’s coming. And soon.
The latter point seems pretty drilled down at this point by Mark Gurman in his PowerOn newsletter for Bloomberg:
Up until fairly recently, Apple had aimed to introduce the headset in January 2023 and ship it later this year. Now the company is aiming to unveil it this spring ahead of the annual Worldwide Developers Conference in June, I’m told.Apple has already shared the device with a small number of high-profile software developers for testing, letting them get started on third-party apps. The device’s operating system, dubbed “Borealis” inside the company, will be publicly named xrOS.
With the current plan, Apple could introduce the device to consumers — likely under the name Reality Pro — and then get developers up to speed on its software features in June. On this timeline, the company would then ship the product later in the fall of 2023.
This lines up with an earlier note from usually spot-on analyst (thanks to aforementioned supply chain sources) Ming-Chi Kuo. So yeah, seems pretty safe to take these to the bank:
- The Apple ‘Reality Pro’ will be unveiled at a media event likely in March or April.
- A couple months later, in June, ‘xrOS’ will be a focal point of WWDC.
- A few months after that, in the fall, probably after the iPhone unveiling in September so, say October or November 2023, Apple will be ready to ship the device.
A few side notes to the above timetable:
While Apple will undoubtedly show off some of the ‘xrOS’ functionality at the Spring event, the focal point will probably mainly be on the headset hardware with some early demos to whet the public appetite much as it did with the iPhone launch in January 2007 ahead of the actual product launch in June 2007. I suspect we would see gaming and content partners on stage there. As well as at least one wild card to showcase why the new device goes above and beyond the other VR/AR devices we’ve seen to date.
WWDC then would be all about getting third-party developers (those not privy to the early builds) on board with developing for the headset. The big question mark there is if Apple will offer up some sort of hardware dev kit. Presumably they’ll have to given the undoubted focus on immersion with the device (i.e. it would be hard to make a great experience with a software simulator). This could be akin to what they did when the M1 chips were coming and Apple had early Mac mini dev kits for developers. But the Reality Pro dev kit, presumably, will not be cheap nor will Apple want it to be, to dissuade the public from getting a dev account and trying to buy it.
After that, it might make some sense for Apple to showcase the device one last time at one of the Fall events before it ships. Perhaps this is the iPhone 14 event in September — especially if that device won’t see any huge physical changes.¹ Could be a fun “one more thing”. The question there is if Apple will have already outlined the price at their Spring media event or if they hold that back until when you can actually buy it, likely after this later event. I could easily see them going with the latter, especially if the price is going to be high, as rumored. ‘Wow’ the customer and let the hype build before you hit them with the bummer price later after they’re already “sold”. Or, of course, perhaps all these price leaks are sandbagging, just as happened with the original iPad. $3,000 for Reality Pro you thought? How about $1,500? Boom.²
The real and literal nuts and bolts of the device though have largely come from an in-depth report from Wayne Ma for The Information. He seemingly has a lot of details about what we can expect in the Reality Pro. And again, it largely sounds feasible but with a lot of caveats, some of which John Gruber highlighted in linking to the report.
I think you can square some of the circles with the notion that Apple has toyed with all of these ideas and some will launch and some will not. Or will be framed differently than what you can extrapolate from leaks. The battery fanny pack thing in particular seems like something Apple would be loath to do, as Gruber notes. But you could potentially see a world where this is less a vital part of the device and more an add-on, much like Apple’s iPhone MagSafe battery packs. In the middle of a session and need more juice without taking off the headset to recharge? Just plug this MagSafe Reality Pro extension in. Something like that.
Much of the report though centers around how Apple is going to utilize their hard-fought strengths with Reality Pro. First and foremost, their own — fantastic — chips are going to power the thing. This alone is just a massive advantage that Apple has over say, Facebook/Meta. As is having the AirPods, which will undoubtedly be a core component augmenting the device (quite literally), as Ma notes. As is what they’re apparently going to do with iris scanning (and optical tracking).
And, of course, it will undoubtedly be able to tether to the iPhone. While it may not (and hopefully doesn’t) need to, doing so could supercharge its functionality and connections, I imagine.
The “Next iPhone” or “Next Apple Watch”?
No matter the cost, no matter the features, the one thing this Reality Pro headset will not be is the iPhone. Because nothing will likely be the next iPhone. Certainly not now. Maybe not ever.³ It was too perfect of a device and business in the exact right place and right time.
For whatever reason, my mind keeps coming back to the Apple Watch. My best guess here — having not seen the device, of course! — is that Reality Pro follows more of an Apple Watch trajectory. That is, it launches with a ton of buzz and people think it’s interesting but too expensive, a bit underwhelming, and an unclear market. And then Apple does what Apple does. Iterate, iterate, iterate. And in a few years, the device is far more compelling, at better price points, with much clearer product/market fit.
The key to this strategy is that Apple isn’t going to launch Reality Pro as a trial balloon. That is, a device in a space they think is interesting but only as an experiment. The only time Apple has really done this was famously with Apple TV (unveiled a few months before the iPhone, no less!). And I actually think that device has suffered its entire existence as a result of that wobbly commitment. It’s a solid device, but it’s not what it could have and should have been.
This move into XR is too big of an undertaking to undercook it in a similar way. If and when Apple ships Reality Pro, they’re all-in. And that’s what must have Facebook/Meta actually worried here. The first device may or may not blow the Quest devices out of the water. But just as Facebook/Meta hasn’t backed down from investing in their devices — quite literally betting the company — Apple won’t either. Many others have and will and would. Apple will not. And Apple has far, far more money than Facebook/Meta does, of course. Apple does not need to bet the farm here. They have the iPhone.⁴
They also, of course, have Apple Stores. All around the world. Reality Pro, much like Meta Quest, is one of those devices you need to literally see in order to literally believe. This retail presence mixed with their expertise in selling consumer goods is perhaps the single largest advantage Apple has. Obviously.
Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers
But the real key to the ultimate success of the Reality Pro is going to be something which Apple Watch has thus far lacked: a developer ecosystem. Yes, there are third-party Apple Watch apps. But they’re mainly lackluster and there are not nearly as many as there should be. This is Apple’s own fault. They overpromised and underdelivered with regard to the SDKs in the early iterations of that device. In hindsight, they probably should have waited to open Apple Watch up to third-party developers. Like they did, unintentionally, with the iPhone.⁵
It’s entirely possible that Apple will wait to fully open Reality Pro to all developers with this first iteration. Especially given the likely device limitations and undoubted supply constraints. Instead, maybe they create more of a “trusted” developer ecosystem and layer. And maybe they open it more over time.
Perhaps that’s the right play because again, the third-party ecosystem is going to be critical to the longevity of this device. Apple Watch can get away without a large number of great third-party apps because it’s a tracking device, where Apple can (and probably should) control much of what is being tracked given how much of it is about your actual body. Reality Pro is going to be far different. Video content and gaming will be obvious table stakes. But my sense is that these won’t be enough. They’re going to need to create an ecosystem where startups (and individual developers) can thrive. A place to build the next Uber and Instagram and Overcast and Flighty.
Far, far, far easier said than done. Of course! We’ve all been waiting for the “next platform” since, well, the iPhone. The App Store launched 15 years ago this year. Apple will need to make that reality the reality for Reality.
Dall-E has some thoughts on what Apple will release…
¹ Though it does sound like some fairly substantial changes per Gurman and Kuo, with the Pro (maybe now ‘Ultra’) models getting a titanium frame and haptic buttons. And the first 3nm chips. And yes, USB-C.
² As with the iPad, there may also be more than one SKU here, which could allow for a cheaper option and a more expensive one? A ‘Reality’ and a ‘Reality Pro’?
³ ‘Ever’ is, of course, a very long time. But to reach iPhone scale, we’re going to need a device that has some sort of massive new interaction breakthrough. Neural, optical, etc. All of these things just seem so far off.
⁴ And the Mac, and the iPad, and the Apple Watch, and the AirPods, and Services. Etc. Etc. Etc.
⁵ The original gameplan there, of course, was not to open it to developers at all, except via the web. Steve Jobs had to be talked into it. And he was a year later…