The Vision Pro is most likely the first Apple product that does not have at least some input from Steve Jobs. Possibly he was not involved in any way with the Apple Watch, but since he passed away on Oct. 5, 2011, the Watch came out in Sept 2014, just three years after his death. I would think he was involved in discussions about the Watch. I doubt he was involved in Vision Pro, but aspects of it were probably under development back then. I suspect Jobs would not have supported Vision Pro, but I do not know. Perhaps it is the “Lisa” of its time, and eventually, there will be a “Mac.” 

Is the Virtual And Augmented Reality the Interactive Television of its time?

Apple announced Vision Pro, a very capable, expensive, and heavy entry into Virtual and Augmented Reality. They only use the term Augmented Reality. Watching their presentation reminded me of the promise of Interactive Television. Many of you reading this post may not remember all the hype surrounding the concept of interactive television in the 90s. But I was there!

The Full Service Network-and all that Hype

It began in 1992 when the CEO of Time Warner, Gerald Levin, began discussing a concept he termed “The Full Service Network.” Time Warner then sent a Request for Proposal to most leading technology companies. We received it at Intel, where I reviewed it since I was the only company executive interested in the consumer market. But I gave it a pass. However, others in the industry felt differently. In particular, Bill Gates later incorrectly said that the square foot on top of the TV was the most valuable real estate in the home (back then, TVs did have a top). Bill, whose strategic abilities are vastly overrated, called Andy Grove, a call that changed my life. Bill told Andy that Microsoft wanted to develop technology for the home but could not identify anyone interested at Intel. Andy knew of my interest in developing the home computer market and had permitted me to investigate this possibility even though he did not believe there was a market for home computers. So Andy said, “What do you mean? Do you know one of our Vice Presidents, Avram Miller? Avram is working on developing our plans in the home.” Bill knew me. I first met Gates in 1981, when I was at Digital Equipment Corporation. He was just 25. Bill responded to Andy by saying that he knew me and that I should come right away to Redmond and meet with Rob Glazer, who was leading Microsoft’s consumer activities. It is a long story you can read about in my book, The Flight of a Wild Duck. 

Andy told me that while he still did not believe in the home market, he realized Bill did. He told me my job was to keep Microsoft engaged with Intel and away from our primary competitor AMD. Other than that, he did not care. But this created the opening I had been looking for a way to access Intel R&D resources. At first, I thought we would target the interactive tv opportunity that Time Warner had ignited. Microsoft and Intel began working with General Instruments, the largest set-top-box supplier, to develop an interactive television product. I called it Pandora’s Box.

The PC is it-the birth of residential broadband and the consumer internet.

After a few months, I realized that Interactive Television would fail. It took others a decade to come to that conclusion. We kept the project going to keep Microsoft happy and away from AMD. But in the meantime, the CTO of General Instruments, Matt Miller, and I came up with the idea of using the cable system to provide high-speed residential broadband to personal computers in homes. In my book, you can read what Gates said to me once he discovered we did an end run on Microsoft. So once again, I refer you to my book, where there is a lot of detail.

In the meantime, billions of dollars were lost pursuing interactive TV led by Levin, who should go down in history as one of the greatest destroyers of corporate value (check out his acquisition of AOL, for instance). On the other hand, Intel made billions by investing in companies like Broadcast.com. Broadcom, Verisgn, Launch Media. 

Time Warner finally selected Silicon Graphics as its primary technology provider, which would eventually contribute to that company’s demise. The Full Service Network debuted in Orlando in 1994. It was a gigantic failure, although some declared it a success even after it was turned off in 1997. It was too expensive and limited, but that could have been overcome. What could not be overcome was that people did not want to interact with their TVs.

By this time, it was becoming more apparent to me that the interactive device in the home would be the connected PC. We had a rallying call, “The PC is IT.” I am proud of my role in making this happen.

So how does this relate to Virtual Reality? 

The technology, media, and communication industries were sucked into the interactive dream. Many presentations showed people sitting on their couches, doing everything we now do on PC and have been doing for over 20 years. But they ignored a few key things:

• People do not want to interact with their TVs (except those who like computer games) other than “changing the channel.” That is the kind of interactivity we are comfortable with at 12 feet. The 2-foot experience we have with our computers and how other digital devices, like phones and tablets, is a different experience and not one we usually share with the family sitting next to us (who are probably on their devices).  
• The TV at the time was not suitable for interactivity. It did not have enough pixels to support the resolution required. But even if it did, interactive TV would have failed.
•  The interactive TV was to be a closed system controlled by television providers, while the PC interactive market was built on the back of the Internet, which was an open system.

Do people want to wear a face computer?

Having a smartphone in your pocket or purse differs from having a computer on your face because our pockets and purse were designed to carry things, unlike our faces.

Wearing a massive device on your head will be the most significant limitation. It will likely prevent the widespread adoption of VR/AR, at least in the form of the recent announcement of Apple’s Vision Pro. We have strong instincts not to wear devices that cover our faces which will be hard to overcome. While the Vision Pro does not cover our nose and mouth, it comes very close.

For instance, many people suffer from Obstructive Sleep Apnea, a severe disease. There is a treatment called CPAP, but it requires a mask to cover the nose and mouth. People find this extremely difficult, and most can not tolerate it, even though they know that not being treated can have grave and deadly consequences. In particular, humans have a strong instinct not to want to have objects between them and the air they breathe. Apple is a brilliant company that does a lot of research. I would love to understand how much they did to determine if people would wear a face computer.

What happened to 3-D Television?

Didn’t we have 3D television for a while? Major Television manufacturers like Samsung announced 3D capabilities around 2010. After a few years of consumer curiosity, interest waned, and now no more 3D-compatible TVs are being made.

Vision Pro-Apple’s Segway?

The Segway was a personal transporter that was invented by Dean Kamen and brought to market in 2001. It was very hyped. John Doerr, the legendary venture capitalist, is reported to have said that the Segway could be more important than the Internet. It was a total failure. Much of this failure was assigned to city governments that used regulations to limit the use of the Segway. But I think that was not the problem. Just look at the growth of e-scooters, first introduced in 2017. They are now a plague in most cities. It was the marriage of personal transportation to the sharing economy. Being able to pick up and leave the device made the difference. Who would want to own a Segway if you had to keep or park it? History shows us it was not a consumer product, just as Vision Pro will likely not be a consumer product.

Vision Pro will find its niche.

Vision Pro will likely be a niche product. I am sure it will be successful in vertical markets like medical and defense. Perhaps we will use such products for video communications like Zoom. But I don’t see it becoming the next “iPhone.” I hope I am wrong. I think Apple needs another platform; sadly, this will not likely be it. I don’t believe that all the fantastic engineering they have done can overcome the issue of wearing something of the size and weight of the Vision Pro.

An Alternative Approach to Virtual and Augmented Reality

I do believe that Virtual and Augmented Reality will create significant markets. But we will need a different way to achieve this for consumer applications. I first started working in this field in 1999 through an association with a company called Microvision. We were going to do direct-to-retina displays. Our approach had several technical and business issues. The team left and formed Innovega, where I have been an advisor and investor for over 20 years. We still have a ways to go, but the concept is sound.

Our technology involved using a contact lens with a remarkable macro capability to see things very close to the eye, allowing people to wear something akin to regular glasses. We know that people are willing to wear glasses, and many are willing to wear contact lenses. However, I am not writing the blog post because I have a stake in Innovega. I have a stake in 

Innovega because I believe this approach can lead to broader adoption of VR/AR than products like Vision Pro.  

Home

I should also say that if anyone can pull off a product like Vision Pro, it will be Apple. I certainly will be an early adopter, just like I was for Oculus, which I have used for less than two hours over two years.

The Heard Mentality

I am fascinated by phenomena like this. I think about the early days of PDAs (Personal Digital Assistance) like Newton and GO), Interactive TV, and Segway. 

It is the herd mentality that drives all this. When Steve Jobs was leading Apple, he was not susceptible. It was one of his greatest gifts. 

From Microvision/Avram Announcement in 1999

Microvision, Inc. (Nasdaq: MVIS), the leader in retinal scanning display technology, announced today that it has entered into a multi­year consulting agreement with Avram Miller, a leading business development and strategy consultant. Microvision and Miller will team on the development of Microvision’s next­ generation retinal scanning display technology for applications in mobile computing devices.

By scanning a single beam of light directly onto the eye, retinal scanning display technology projects high ­resolution color images without the use of a conventional display screen or panel. To date, the importance of this technology has been its use in “heads-up displays” for military, medical, and industrial uses. More recently, Microvision has demonstrated a “consumer” version of the technology that will make it possible for mobile devices such as cell phones to display the same amount of information as notebook computers at reasonable cost. The company believes this has the potential to redefine the role of displays in mobile devices such as Cell Phones, PDAs (personal display appliances), and game devices. 

“Several months ago, we made a strategic decision to accelerate our activities relating to displays for mobile internet applications. Soon after, we achieved a technical milestone, demonstrating, for the first time, a prototype of a retinal scanning display that used just three micro-miniature LEDs and two scanning mirrors to form a high­ resolution video image,” said Rick Rutkowski, CEO of Microvision, Inc. “When we realized what we had in hand, we knew that it was now time to get help from someone who had the strategic vision, industry connections, and ability to make things happen on a large scale. We are very fortunate to have Avram Miller collaborate with us in redefining the display capabilities of mobile devices. Avram has a proven ability to recognize major technological discontinuities that create significant business opportunities and then to act on those opportunities.” 

“Mobile devices are where it is at,” said Avram Miller, CEO, The Avram Miller Company. “It reminds me of the early ’80s and the birth of the PC. So many critical technologies are converging in the mobile arena. Bandwidth is coming with 3G, voice recognition promises to change the way we command and communicate with mobile devices, location detection will increase the relevancy of the information we receive, and when combined with miniaturization and long battery life, mobile devices will become a fundamental part of everyone’s lifestyle. All of this,” Miller continued, “will be connected to the ever-expanding power and pervasiveness of the Internet.