You can bet Apple has dropped a ton of money on AR/VR as well… just not publicly.

I may be a simpleton but, why is the FDA involved with this kind of tech? FDA, Food and Drug Administration.

​

EDIT: Ah, because its considered a medical device. Got it.

Want to present a balanced take , Apple is very very good at this kind of thing. Newest leaks say they’re expecting low sales and that this is just the first step for them. Apple is very good at taking all of these things that already exist and then having one moment where it comes together on stage in a way no one else has had the follow through in yet. If they can truly build a completely natural interface for VR that we haven’t seen before w this then they are already good. They know it won’t sell but they’re building a platform. I think it’s silly to write Apple off on this front. I also really look forward to what this announcement does for the competition. It’s going to definitely attract the mainstream eye to vr in a way only Apple can and that’s good for the entire space

Pleasure model awesome-o

Interesting. I’ve never heard of it.

[deleted]

No, that was Microsoft…I think.

[deleted]

It was hitting its limit when it released. Doesn’t mean it isn’t one of the best deals in gaming. Extra points for how well it works with moonlight.

I agree, Apple is Apple so they’ll be obtuse in the worst ways but I think they are actually really good in the early stages of building a product category. Apple has the ability to legitimize a market segment, and they can afford to make no money for quite some time on any of it. They’ll always take their closed door pathway on it, but a rising tide lifts all boats. That will allow competitors to really show how their legitimate niche has value without being the figurehead for the entire industry to rail on. There’s enough space in VR/AR rn that Apple only helps everyone by entering the field

Didn't they just fire that whole team?

The FDA regulates lasers and IR lasers too, it’s kind of funny… but not really

At this point, does anyone really believe in VR anything?

What’s the point of this, why would you want to see someone’s avatar over their real face and expressions? It feels like it was hot buzzword in tech and now big tech are just too afraid to divest and lose face so they just keep moving forward a feature people will try once or twice for novelty and entirely forget about 2 week post launch..

Full body avatars aren't a gimmick any more than phonecalls are.

[removed]

I counter your measly 10 eggs with 7 pounds of butter.

😂😂😂

> Food and Drug and Anything Medical Administration?

Always has been. (well since 1976 anyway) https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/overview-device-regulation/history-medical-device-regulation-oversight-united-states

Why is there a person behind the person in the suit holding onto the persons elbows as if they are about to fall over?

Your comment has been automatically removed.

Social media and social networking links are not allowed in /r/gadgets, as they almost always contain personal information and therefore break the rules of reddit.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[removed]

[removed]

What if they force us to look like we do in reality?

[removed]

They really bury the important, good stuff.

>It was previously believed that other people on a call will be displayed as an icon or Memoji. That's still likely to be the case for group calls. For one-on-one chats in which both participants are wearing a Reality Pro, the report suggests that FaceTime will render realistic versions of their face and body. Processing limitations seemingly prevent this feature from being available for group calls. Other companies, such as Meta, typically render users in a more cartoonish fashion (and don't yet include legs).

So... it actually sounds like they're trying to move beyond this.