Apple Likely Planning to Use Bigger, Lower Resolution Displays for Cheaper Vision Headset

[MacRumors]

Apple is exploring new suppliers for OLED-on-Silicon panels, likely signaling the development of a more affordable headset destined to sit alongside the Vision Pro, The Elec reports.

The Korean website has apparently detected a shift in Apple's supply chain management for OLED-on-Silicon (OLEDoS) panels, a key component in the Vision Pro headset. Currently, Sony provides these high-resolution microdisplays, but its limited production capacity of up to 900,000 panels per year and lack of expansion plans have prompted Apple to seek alternatives for the future. Apple has apparently issued a request for information (RFI) to Samsung Display and LG Display to evaluate their capabilities in producing larger OLEDoS panels, ranging from 2.0 to 2.1 inches in size with a display density of around 1,700 pixels per inch (PPI).

These displays would be larger than those currently used in the Vision Pro and feature a lower resolution. The Vision Pro uses Sony's OLEDoS panels featuring a 1.42-inch screen with a pixel density of nearly 3,400 PPI, employing a white OLED display with color filter (wOLED+CF) technology. This sophisticated display technology is one of the main reasons for the headset's high price point.

At Displayweek 2024, both Samsung and LG showcased advancements in OLED microdisplay technology that could appeal to Apple. Samsung presented a 1.03-inch RGB (direct-emission) OLED microdisplay, developed in collaboration with eMagin, which promises higher brightness levels compared to the wOLED+CF method. Meanwhile, LG revealed a 10,000 nits 1.3-inch 4K OLED microdisplay, utilizing a micro lens array (MLA) to boost brightness by around 40 percent.

Apple's interest in larger OLEDoS panels with lower resolution than those used in the Vision Pro suggests these could be intended for a new, lower-cost mixed reality headset. Apple has been rumored to be working on such a device for over a year, and the latest indications suggest that it may be designed to tether to an iPhone or Mac to eliminate the need for a costly processor. The lower-cost Apple Vision headset could launch as soon as the end of next year.

Article Link: Apple Likely Planning to Use Bigger, Lower Resolution Displays for Cheaper Vision Headset

 

[dannyyankou]

As long as it has more pixels than Quest Pro, I won't complain. But the price really needs to be at least 33% what the pro is.

 

[breenmask]

oh really, I thought they were going to use smaller, higher res, more expensive displays for a cheaper device

 

[foobarbaz]

Ok, so does lower PPI and larger size mean it will end up with the same resolution, just less magnified by the lenses? Or will the quality be worse, also?

 

[JPack]

Makes sense, even though some people insisted Apple wouldn't cut the resolution. Practically, it's only spec that can significant lower the cost. Larger panels that are as bright as before, but lower res.

 

[PsykX]

As long as it has more pixels than Quest Pro, I won't complain. But the price really needs to be at least 33% what the pro is.

This.
It really hit me when I saw it was $5 000 in Canada. Like, I can explore cool tech for $1 500, maybe even stretch it to $2 000, but never $5 000.

 

[AndyUnderscoreR]

"but its limited production capacity of up to 900,000 panels per year"

I think someone is being wildly overoptimistic about sales figures.

 

[EntropyQ3]

Problem is, lower price for a worse product doesn’t necessarily make it a commercial success.

One of the distinct advantages of AVP is its resolution, and what that enables.

 

[dannyyankou]

Problem is, lower price for a worse product doesn’t necessarily make it a commercial success.

One of the distinct advantages of AVP is its resolution, and what that enables.

But it's overkill. If the rumor is true and it has half the resolution, it would still be a significantly higher pixel density compared to the Quest Pro.

 

[spaxxedout]

It’s not a terrible compromise. The larger display will likely yield less barrel distortion and maybe more fov.

 

[contacos]

Why didn’t they release this one first for people to get an introduction into VR, getting them hooked and then release a better product with people always wanting the latest and greatest.

Now they have already alienated a lot of people with this unreachable price and not wanting something „inferior“ either

 

[Coolman717]

Why would someone want to strap a 3D TV + computer onto their face, high or low resolution?
Ohh wait, most people don’t want to do that. What a surprise.

 

[Rogifan]

Why didn’t they release this one first for people to get an introduction into VR, getting them hooked and then release a better product with people always wanting the latest and greatest.

Now they have already alienated a lot of people with this unreachable price and not wanting something „inferior“ either

That’s a good question. This isn’t like an iPod where there are cheaper variations that make sense and will sell easily.

 

[wigby]

Why didn’t they release this one first for people to get an introduction into VR, getting them hooked and then release a better product with people always wanting the latest and greatest.

Now they have already alienated a lot of people with this unreachable price and not wanting something „inferior“ either

No one will get hooked on your device unless you have a full catalog which takes years to develop. And developers don't want to spend hours everyday wearing a headset and developing apps if it's not comfortable with high resolution and low latency. Developers need to experience the best to realize its full potential. So Apple released the best version at the time really just for developers and some early adopters with lots of extra money. Looking back now, I think they should've only released to developers for the first year and not allowed anyone without a developer account to order. At least that way there would still be some mystery to the experience and pent up demand by consumers for a cheaper, gen 2 release.

 

[Marty80]

It’s not the cost that’s stopping me, it’s the fact I hate VR as much as that ridiculous face mask.

 

[miiwtoo]

lower resolution, tethered and 1500-2000 range, we arent idiots Apple, standalone or else,

 

[cardfan]

Yep I was waiting for cheaper lower quality vr from Apple lol. But honestly many wouldn’t even notice the difference. And you have to wonder if most vision or iPad apps are even streaming in 4k. Text and Mac virtual screens would be more noticeable.

 

[cardfan]

It’s not the cost that’s stopping me, it’s the fact I hate VR as much as that ridiculous face mask.

Yep. I’m still not working with a headset pressed tightly against face for hours. That’s not happening.

And once again the movies look great. But you’ll quickly lose interest doing that. Not worth the discomfort. Hard to drink or eat. Or share. And you look like you’ve been in a wreck afterwards.

Get a large screen oled and hang on wall. Much better.

 

[GuilleA]

Who even wants this? It's cool as a tech demo, but I feel it's never gonna catch on as a consumer product. Maybe for short gaming sessions, but other than that I don't see it. Even less so with those prices.

 

[cdsapplefan]

Apple getting the ball rolling quickly on this cheaper version of the Vision Pro headset. They know price is the key thing that’s stopping people from even considering buying

 

[cdsapplefan]

lower resolution, tethered and 1500-2000 range, we arent idiots Apple, standalone or else,

You keep your phone 📱 by your side most of the time anyway so why not use your iPhone 📱 for some processing power

 

[H.E. Pennypacker]

This product was DOA. Way overpriced and completely irrelevant to most people’s needs. Another failed category by Apple. Stick to phones, computers and AirPods.

 

[Amazing Iceman]

A downgraded experience?
No thanks! I’d be comparing it to the original AVP and not able to assimilate an inferior product.

 

[miiwtoo]

You keep your phone 📱 by your side most of the time anyway so why not use your iPhone 📱 for some processing power

battery for example and the most important thing, i don't want a bigger iOS but the same user experience, just like the "Pro" model,

 

[NT1440]

Makes sense, even though some people insisted Apple wouldn't cut the resolution. Practically, it's only spec that can significant lower the cost. Larger panels that are as bright as before, but lower res.

I still don’t believe they’re going to do this. If they’re putting out a request for information on these matters it’s means they are testing.

I still think the AVP set the minimum experience standards that Apple wants to operate in this space with what they consider “retina quality”.

We’ll see, but I don’t see the resolution dropping that much unless the PPI for the AVP was complete overkill for the “retina” level…which I doubt as well.