With Vision Pro, Apple forecasts the future of computing

With Apple Vision Pro, Apple is launching a product from the future. It’s clear the technology is a stretch: Apple always aims to build the best product possible, not just a good enough product, but this time that has translated into a very high $3499 initial price. As Apple is positioning Vision Pro as a “new computing device”, and not an accessory, the right comparison should be to the price of a computer (i.e. a Mac), but few people buy such expensive computers and it’s double the price of an iPhone. 

Upshot: Apple needs this weeks’ initial demos to the assembled great and the good at Apple Park to impress. If the Vision Pro experience is good enough, then the high price will become less important, and over time subsequent headsets will likely drop in price as the necessary hardware becomes cheaper. 

There are clear reasons for the high cost. Apple is rightly opting to include super high resolution displays featuring a combined 23 megapixels in resolution — much more detailed than rivals — this is a higher resolution than two 4K TV displays combined. In practice this should mean the virtual displays used for spatial computing deliver a good experience. On existing VR/MR devices such virtual screens look rough and are uncomfortable because the hardware is too low resolution. Here, they should be much better.

In effect Apple is incubating a product from the future using its existing devices and software ecosystem. Apple needs to nurture developers, users, and everyone as the platform improves.

In particular, the Vision Pro headset needs to deliver in a number of key areas to establish itself, it needs:

  • Outstanding apps. Yes, Vision Pro supports “compatible iPad and iPhone apps” but the built-for-Vision Pro apps will be key. Apple needs its third party ecosystem on board here as well as creating first party apps too.
  • Seamless and solid Wi-Fi connectivity. Apple has demonstrated a variety of spatial computing and entertainment experiences all of which rely on solid Wi-Fi connectivity to watch movies or download apps, or to project a Mac’s display into the headset.
  • Comfort. Existing headsets from rivals can be uncomfortable to wear for long periods. Headset physical design is important. Apple will hope the high resolution display removes eye discomfort. But the wired battery pack (or mains power supply) is not ideal.
  • Time. At this price, there is no way this will be a mass market device any time soon. Apple will need to nurture the platform, encourage developers, and evangelize the experience.
  • Excellent hand and eye tracking. If this part of the interface fails to work perfectly, every time, Apple will rue its decision to omit more conventional controllers.

Vision Pro is an extremely unusual device. Alongside the high resolution displays there are numerous cameras and sensors on-board too, including both an M2 SoC borrowed from the Mac as well as a new Apple-designed R1 chip. These both increase cost too but also aim to deliver a superior experience. The display of the wearer’s eyes to those around them is also unique.

Apple has historically observed new markets, analyzed what’s wrong with existing products, then entered them with a product that solves those problems. With iPod, Apple offered a vast library of songs and easy sync to a computer. With iPhone, it was a direct interaction multitouch UX and desktop class apps, not cut down pocket versions. Here, with Vision Pro, Apple has focused on beating the competition with outstanding display quality and with a controller-less user experience, and more elegant merging of virtual and mixed reality worlds.

The future is here, nearly, but at a high cost. Apple has to convince the world the Vision Pro experience is sufficiently wonderful, so that developers now build the compelling apps Vision Pro needs to be available for its 2024 debut in shops and in consumers’ hands.

Making the smartwatch independent

Sales of smartwatches have to date been limited by their reliance on the smartphone. Apple can’t sell its Watch to Android phone users, even if they use other Apple products such as the iPad or the Mac. Similarly, WearOS smartwatches only work fully when paired to an Android smartphone. Even if the manufacturer supports iPhone pairing, which not all do, then the linked WearOS watch loses many functions on iOS.

And, by making the watch a phone accessory, it has limited the appeal of the smartwatch for those not excited by health and fitness features. Why use a watch for music streaming, or navigation, or contactless payment, etc etc if there has to be a smartphone near at hand? Why should a developer create a standalone watch app if the user must own a smartphone?

With cellular functionality, and on-board watch app stores, there is now little reason for a smartwatch to still require a smartphone in order to operate with all features intact. But modern smartwatches — even cellular ones — are still dependent on a paired smartphone. For Apple Watch, if the paired iPhone is not nearby, then it acts as a remote mini router to forward app notifications to the remote Watch.

There is a precedent for the smartwatch to drop its smartphone dependence. Twenty years ago the PC or Mac was the digital hub to which all other devices connected, including the iPod and early iPhones (which required a computer for first set up). Ten years ago the smartphone replaced the PC as the hub. Now, the cloud has become the hub for digital living and working, with all devices reliant on cloud services for backup, sharing information, and providing a consistent experience.

For the smartwatch to break free of the smartphone, and so increasing the addressable market and improving smartwatch utility for users, several things must happen:

  • Cloud synchronization replaces smartphone pairing. Rather than smartphone apps forwarding notifications and information to the watch, the watch must connect directly to the cloud.
  • Operators should make cellular support easier. Many operators support the eSIM used on cellular smartwatches, but not all. And, most still price cellular service for a device that uses a tiny fraction of the data a smartphone uses at well above the equivalent smartphone price per gigabyte.
  • Greater battery life, to encourage independence. Larger, rugged, outdoor smartwatch designs make it easier to include greater battery capacity in the larger form factor. With more battery capacity, the smartwatch can take on more functions, be used independently for more hours, and yet critically still deliver at least a full day’s typical usage. 
  • For Apple, health data should shift from iPhone to watch. Today, the iPhone includes a secure enclave in its system on a chip (SoC) that stores health data. While other companies may be content to simply move this personal health data into the cloud like everything else, given Apple’s privacy strategy of keeping sensitive functions on the device, Apple needs to move users’ primary health store onto the wrist where it’s captured. 

There are signs Apple is already creating the foundations for an independent Apple Watch, just as it made the iPhone independent of the Mac and PC using iCloud. Apple Watch has had cellular capability since version 3 — even before Apple introduced an always-on display. Family setup allows a parent to give a child an Apple Watch — even if the child does not own an iPhone — and is testing some of the necessary capabilities for an independent Apple Watch that can be used by anyone, without an iPhone.

Once the smartwatch is independent we will likely see some existing smartwatch features take off in usage and new ones arrive. The watch will become the primary Google Pay and Apple Pay device. Authentication will similarly jump from phone to the wrist, whether it’s acting as a two factor device for logging onto apps and websites, or for unlocking home or car smart locks. Bluetooth earphones and headphones will be used more with the Watch too, for communication, and for music streaming — which is why Apple Music already has a full watch app.

The smartphone will not disappear. It will still sell in vast volumes and be used by almost everyone. But it will no longer be such a central device for the digital life. We will move to a multipolar device world, where users will switch the combinations of devices they use depending on their situation and needs at a given moment in time. Smartglasses, headsets, earphones, tablets, smartwatches, computers and smart home devices will all be used together in various combinations.

And, shifting more functions away from the smartphone, will also build foundations now for a post-smartphone future, for a time when the technology is ready for smartglasses to become viable mass market devices.

The Smartphone Experience Shift from 4G to 5G

Analysis of how Apple’s latest lower cost iPhone, the 2022 iPhone SE, compares with other iPhone models and rival smartphone makers in 5G experience. Notably, Apple prioritized including 5G and the modern A15 chipset over other potential enhancements such as adding Face ID or multiple rear cameras. Apple is not alone with this shift to 5G, other smartphone makers are now increasingly including 5G in mid-range and even in some entry level smartphone models. Read the full analysis here.

The European smartphone speed race: How Apple, OnePlus, Oppo, Samsung and Xiaomi compare

The overall speed experienced by 5G smartphones differs greatly by smartphone brand. However, across all brands we see that the overall speed for 5G devices is significantly higher compared with 4G smartphone models of the same brand. This increase highlights the importance of 5G technology to accelerate the mobile experience.

It’s notable that Samsung sees a much smaller speed uplift for its 5G smartphones than other brands, ranging from 1.4 times faster for Samsung’s 5G models over its 4G models in Italy and Germany, to 1.6 times faster in the UK. The uplift in download speed we see for 5G smartphone models over 4G smartphone models is greatest for iPhone devices.

Read the full analysis here

The US smartphone speed race: how Apple, Google, LG, OnePlus and Samsung compare

Samsung dominates the rankings for the top 25 fastest 5G smartphone models in the U.S., 60% of models in the list are Samsung. The new Samsung Galaxy S21 5G has the highest U.S. average download speed. Apple users see the biggest leap in speeds in 5G areas among smartphone brands — 2.3x faster. “Foldable” smartphones are competitive with conventional 5G smartphone designs for cellular speeds, despite the additional complexity of antenna design in “transformable” form factors. When there is a 5G iPad, users are set to see a speed boost: today, because 5G-capable iPhone 12 Pro users have speeds 36% faster than current cellular iPad Pro users that are limited to 4G. Read the full analysis

The 5G iPhone: Lessons from existing 5G smartphones

Looking ahead to the unveiling of the first 5G iPhone models, I analyzed the experience of current 4G iPhone models and compared it with 5G phones from other brands to understand the potential for 5G to lift improve Apple users’ mobile experience. Read the full analysis.