In reply to Chuck.

I never got a chance to play with a Magic Leap, but I was very impressed with the time I spent with the HoloLens. My understanding is the “wave guide” stuff has known ways to improve, but is already lighter than OLEDs and can be thinner in some interesting ways. I heard that today the problems with “wave guide” are cost and especially “processing cost” (they can in theory do crazy things in tight spaces at ridiculously fine grain [“better than retina”] if you’ve got the raytracing computation power, in theory; none of today’s vendors have proven that potential) rather than weight/thinness.

The HoloLens has a reputation as a heavy device but that is as much that Microsoft went with a heavier Intel PC because the Windows ARM side isn’t yet as strong for the processing needs of HoloLens as they need it. (Not a huge surprise after the death of Windows Phone.) Microsoft also put the battery on your head instead of resorting to the “backpack”/“pocket pack” compromise Apple is using with the Vision Pro, which also a lot of the weight and bulk. I

That said, I’m still not convinced “wave guide” is Apple’s actual plan here, I find it an interesting theory, but not my favorite theory.

I think I somewhat agree that it would feel like more than just a change of “display technology” if they did switch to something like that, but maybe for different reasons because I feel like I have more optimism for that kind of technology. Especially from friends that claim the thing holding back Wave Guide is real time processing power more than hardware innovations, there is an interesting optimism there, especially because if there is a hardware company with the processing prowess in cheap, lightweight machines it is Apple. I don’t know if ten years is a realistic timeline or not, though. I don’t track this all that closely, I just find it interesting.

I think that switching device classes like that but calling it the same device is definitely in the Apple playbook though. The Macintosh has switched processor architectures alone that it is an incredible Ship of Theseus.

But again, I don’t know if I believe yet that is what they will do.

I also selfishly wish Apple wasn’t playing its cards seemingly so close to its vest here, though mostly out of curiosity rather than directly informing a buying decision right now. I really want to know what Apple thinks it can do that Microsoft and Magic Leap failed to do on the AR side. I really want more of an idea of why they’ve dismissed VR as a market they aren’t interested in short term and maybe not long term either, especially given Quest sales figures right now. It would be nice to have an official roadmap and not just trying to read tea leaves and between the lines of keynote presentation reveals.