I was certain Apple won’t go into VR - it would be hard to sell in Apple Stores. With all those wires, bulky look, also this company is more into casual gaming
At that time I was thinking that VR is kind of subset of VR, because AR could display using whole screen making it VR. VR in 2016 is not that great- it requires high resolution screen with high framerate. Even high end, current, graphic cards cannot handle games in 4k resolution, in 90fps - framerate advised for VR, and preferable resolution for VR is 8k or more. If current GPU needs around 150W and it could barely handle VR, how many years away is battery powered device which can do the same? Then, SceneKit has been added to Apple Watch - it is possible to display 3D graphics in a watch - and I realized that for AR limited graphic processing power is really needed. In AR only small amount of screen will be used, because it is essential to see environment, in that case simple shapes and text are enough. And Apple already has hardware to do that.
Then, Tim Cook says that “AR is interesting”. We may wait a while for it. Actually, when Samusung, or Google tries to do it, because to be the best one has to have competition.
When Cook says that AR is more social, he is right, and ‘more social’ means more branding too. Don’t be fooled by Google Glass, Apple AR would look more like this:
Again, Microsoft is making mistake with Hololens by putting existing applications there, making it bulkier than needed. Of course there are 'native’ 3D apps for this device but I’m not sure if anybody use AR for productivity. VR with original, 2D mouse is better for that, more energy efficient than waving hands.(03 November, 2016)