discuss XR domains - Umbrella term for AR VR MR (all reality technologies)

[Elad n]

XR can be X Reality or Extended Reality.

Either way it describes the spectrum just like mixed reality.

Been looking around and shopping for a while now, saw many companies choosing to rebrand to xr or just starting with xr in their names..

Those are only some of my findings that are already developed (there are many more undeveloped by major companies like unity/sony etc..)

Decide for yourself.

Gl.

E

xr-room.com

xrgames.io

hyperspacexr.com

innereyexr.com

biomexr.com

inspacexr.com

HumanXR.com

agencyxr.com

ascentxr.com

womenxr.com

conductxr.com

Xiality.com

FeelXRstudio.com

ShowroomXR.com

FitXR.com

XRconnects.com

orchardxr.com

 

[Andreas B.]

When you say "$3.5k is really high, as it is no car, motor-bike, e-bike- but a headset." that's already the kind of dialog about smartphones that cost over $1k - especially in countries with a lower currency exchange rate like India. Millions around the world don't make $3.5k a year.

But has that stopped the success of gaming PCs that cost $5k or wide screen TVs that cost $3k?

Yep, but make the calculation:

With a headset, I get a (quiet) clunky device,
that does not add anything productive to my workflow, unless I am professional designer for big machines/ cars.

I can do all the work I need to get done on a laptop / PC.

I can really use an e-bike to have fun, or go to work.

I won't however ever buy a TV for close $3.5k; more like $1k.


A headset does not give me anything additional, besides the 'experience' (= luxury with high price tag).


But I truly need my PC, to get work done.

That's a whole difference (and a very good PC just costs half the price).


That's why, headsets are a bit suspicious to me. -

Other than smart-glasses / watches / phones - anything you may wear outside, and which is quite affordable.


To me, this headset stuff will stay a niche, until it won't get out into the real world as glasses, combined with practical AI features like ai pin or rabbit r1.


But lets cross fingers that the development in the next 2 years happens faster than the last 5,
and we are served hopefully ; )


Thus AR/VR/MR/XR will have to wait so long...

 

[NameFu]

Yep, but make the calculation:

With a headset, I get a (quiet) clunky device,
that does not add anything productive to my workflow, unless I am professional designer for big machines/ cars.

I can do all the work I need to get done on a laptop / PC.

I can really use an e-bike to have fun, or go to work.

I won't however ever buy a TV for close $3.5k; more like $1k.


A headset does not give me anything additional, besides the 'experience' (= luxury with high price tag).


But I truly need my PC, to get work done.

That's a whole difference (and a very good PC just costs half the price).


That's why, headsets are a bit suspicious to me. -

Other than smart-glasses / watches / phones - anything you may wear outside, and which is quite affordable.


To me, this headset stuff will stay a niche, until it won't get out into the real world as glasses, combined with practical AI features like ai pin or rabbit r1.


But lets cross fingers that the development in the next 2 years happens faster than the last 5,
and we are served hopefully ; )


Thus AR/VR/MR/XR will have to wait so long...

You've repeated about what you think personally and what you would do personally. If you're judging the value of an niche or product based on your personal perspective, you neither understand how economics or domaining works.

 

[Kingslayer]

People know my views on XR.

I’ve never invested in this area, as far as domains is concerned for the most part i feel domains was traded between investors, yes there was a few end-user sales, but for the most part companies who have branded around XR haven’t paid for their domain name (therefor little to no market).

XR is still a thing though and is used by companies, so could have a future (no one knows for sure) and with that all the best to those who have invested in this area.

Spatial Computing - i know Apple are using this term right now, but is it really marketable as far as branding is concerned? I wouldn’t build a brand around ‘Spatial Computing’ would anyone else here? That is what you have to ask yourself as an investor, I look at this as a term like ‘personal computer/computing’ has personalcomputer+keyword domains ever had any significant sales/demand?

Again no one knows for sure, but again it won’t be an area I will be investing in myself.

 

[Andreas B.]

You've repeated about what you think personally and what you would do personally. If you're judging the value of an niche or product based on your personal perspective, you neither understand how economics or domaining works.

Nope.

I have delivered some real ARGUMENTS, for why I think expensive AR/VR headsets will have a hard time
(as they absorb same workflows as PCs, but cost WAY more),
with the needy argument of giving a new experience
(which is nothing but expensive luxury & more advertising than a true argument).

You want to bet on AR/VR headsets?!

Please do.


I bet on outdoor ready smart-glasses enhanced by AI.


Neither way (whoever is right), we'll end up using mostly the same buzz words,
so it doesn't really matter.


Have a great one.

 

[Andreas B.]

This thread is dead. ...... R.I.P.

For now, you are totally right.

 

[Andreas B.]

People know my views on XR.

I’ve never invested in this area, as far as domains is concerned for the most part i feel domains was traded between investors, yes there was a few end-user sales, but for the most part companies who have branded around XR haven’t paid for their domain name (therefor little to no market).

XR is still a thing though and is used by companies, so could have a future (no one knows for sure) and with that all the best to those who have invested in this area.

Spatial Computing - i know Apple are using this term right now, but is it really marketable as far as branding is concerned? I wouldn’t build a brand around ‘Spatial Computing’ would anyone else here? That is what you have to ask yourself as an investor, I look at this as a term like ‘personal computer/computing’ has personalcomputer+keyword domains ever had any significant sales/demand?

Again no one knows for sure, but again it won’t be an area I will be investing in myself.

That's right, - totally hard to predict what catchy buzz words will be used by the big producing companies & manufacturers.


Spatial is something Apple at least uses & has put a focus on;
all besides it is depending on the grace of the industry leaders meta, samsung, valve, etc. & the developers in this field.

 

[Skyvisum]

This thread is dead. ...... R.I.P.

As far as sales go, there is no indication that XR domains really have as much value as previously predicted by many here (including my self)....but I still hold a few. With Apple's Vision Pro set to release next month and I'm hoping that it would increase demand for this domain niche. But I'm only holding domains, not my breath.

Thread is quiet but the technology isnt. I am still bullish that some good keywords will sell for good prices. . If anyone has good keywords in .Com only and willing to sell at whole. Send me your list and I would reply if I am interested and if no response that means not interested. If I get other names not related to XR,expect to be blocked or ignored

 

[NameFu]

This is going to affect B2C, XR domains if Apple becomes the industry leader.

B2B XR domains may remain still valuable though. Consumers never caught on to XR so it's always been an B2B term. But now chances of them catching on to XR are very, very slim...

 

[Kingslayer]

I’m not sure how that is going to work, Vision Pro is a device that can do both VR/AR, so some developers will make AR apps on this device and some will make VR apps, but they are supposed to call it ‘spatial computing’ no matter what?

Devices/apps/industry uses that don’t need to do both VR/AR, how do you define what is what then? It would like calling TV/Radio the same thing and just labelling it as ‘entertainment’ – This is why I’ve never been fully on board with a catchphrase term in general, there are mixed reality headsets (will always be bulky) but these bulky headsets are not needed and won’t be used in many VR/AR use cases and a catchphrase term linking the 2 together is just not needed as AR and VR are totally different techs from each other, some companies will specialize in AR (AR windshields/military uses/navigation/training/work/communication etc) and some will specialise solely on VR (gaming/fully immersed experiences).

I don’t think Apple have thought this through and don’t think it will stick, if someone creates a VR app, chances it’s not going to be not exclusive to Apples store in the same way Candy Crush for example (hugely popular game) isn’t solely exclusive to Apple’s store, it’s on Windows/Linux/Google and other platforms, so if someone creates a VR app, they will call it what it is, a ‘VR app’ surely?

 

[NameFu]

I’m not sure how that is going to work, Vision Pro is a device that can do both VR/AR, so some developers will make AR apps on this device and some will make VR apps, but they are supposed to call it ‘spatial computing’ no matter what?

Devices/apps/industry uses that don’t need to do both VR/AR, how do you define what is what then? It would like calling TV/Radio the same thing and just labelling it as ‘entertainment’ – This is why I’ve never been fully on board with a catchphrase term in general, there are mixed reality headsets (will always be bulky) but these bulky headsets are not needed and won’t be used in many VR/AR use cases and a catchphrase term linking the 2 together is just not needed as AR and VR are totally different techs from each other, some companies will specialize in AR (AR windshields/military uses/navigation/training/work/communication etc) and some will specialise solely on VR (gaming/fully immersed experiences).

I don’t think Apple have thought this through and don’t think it will stick, if someone creates a VR app, chances it’s not going to be not exclusive to Apples store in the same way Candy Crush for example (hugely popular game) isn’t solely exclusive to Apple’s store, it’s on Windows/Linux/Google and other platforms, so if someone creates a VR app, they will call it what it is, a ‘VR app’ surely?

It will work out fine for Apple because Spatial Computing covers everything you mentioned and other terms.

Internally, AR, VR, XR will still be used in B2B marketing. So it's not all doom and gloom.

But customers are mostly only familiar with VR, so this is Apple tryin to monopolize the narrative about what these technologies are and forcing those in its eco system to comply with its terminologies. This is an attempt at brand superiority and they've done it in other ways in the past successfully.

 

[NameFu]

I have XR names, so it's a real bummer for me too... Trust me...

But colleges have "XR" degrees. There are "XR" events. And that may not be changing any time soon.... Because B2B

 

[Kingslayer]

It will work out fine for Apple because Spatial Computing covers everything you mentioned and other terms.

Internally, AR, VR, XR will still be used in B2B marketing. So it's not all doom and gloom.

But customers are mostly only familiar with VR, so this is Apple tryin to monopolize the narrative about what these technologies are and forcing those in its eco system to comply with its terminologies. This is an attempt at brand superiority and they've done it in other ways in the past successfully.

No one knows the future, but i've seen these things happen before and so have many others who have been investing for a long time, holo/merged/mixed/meta/metaverse/XR to even things like NFT's/CHIPS, NFTs/Meta/CHIPS went crazy for a short time (lots of money exchanged), but all fizzle out quickly and like Apple some of these terms was cheerlead by some of the biggest companies in the world, in my opinion (i might be wrong) the same will happen with 'spatial' because from a marketing standpoint, i don't see it being adopted universally (branding and public usage).

My advice to people who do decide to invest in 'spatial' is get a good offer, take it, past experience seeing things like this, they can be valueable 1 month and the next more or less worthless and that respectable offer you had is now gone.

 

[NameFu]

No one knows the future, but i've seen these things happen before and so have many others who have been investing for a long time, holo/merged/mixed/meta/metaverse/XR to even things like NFT's/CHIPS, NFTs/Meta/CHIPS went crazy for a short time (lots of money exchanged), but all fizzle out quickly and like Apple some of these terms was cheerlead by some of the biggest companies in the world, in my opinion (i might be wrong) the same will happen with 'spatial' because from a marketing standpoint, i don't see it being adopted universally (branding and public usage).

My advice to people who do decide to invest in 'spatial' is get a good offer, take it, past experience seeing things like this, they can be valueable 1 month and the next more or less worthless and that respectable offer you had is now gone.

Yeah, I've been saying similar. Been here since the VR hype. And VR is still a common term. Just like Metaverse. Yet those sales have also fizzled. It's called a hype cycle.

But some niche words stick better than others. XR has had a REALLY hard time sticking, and so has augmented reality, which made it's huge debut with the Pokémon app hype.

Like you said, no one knows the future.

 

[Kingslayer]

Yeah, I've been saying similar. Been here since the VR hype. And VR is still a common term. Just like Metaverse. Yet those sales have also fizzled. It's called a hype cycle.

But some niche words stick better than others. XR has had a REALLY hard time sticking, and so has augmented reality, which made it's huge debut with the Pokémon app hype.

Like you said, no one knows the future.

VR and AR are the technologies and the press/public usage of these terms are sky-high and usage of these terms are not going to change, sure domain sales are not there, but Ai wasn't either 2 years ago.

In my opinion (and I've said this in the past on here), all these marketing terms XR/mixed/spatial etc are doing the growth of VR and AR no favors.

Look at how Vision Pro has been promoted, at its unveiling 6 months ago Apple promoted Vision Pro as a AR device:-

But press called it a 'Mixed Reality' device and now Apple are promoting 'spatial computing' so what is this device? It's changed 3 times in 6 months, I follow VR/AR and I'm confused,

If I'm confused, people less tech savvy than me (who Apple are targeting) are not going to pay money out for something they don't understand, this is half of VR/AR's problem, the other half is these devices haven't been good enough yet and with that no real 'must have' use in day to day life, but to get half-way there, things need to be simplified, call the techs for what they are, 'VR' 'AR' or 'immersive technologies', this is something I've always done myself.

 

[NameFu]

VR and AR are the technologies and the press/public usage of these terms are sky-high and usage of these terms are not going to change, sure domain sales are not there, but Ai wasn't either 2 years ago.

In my opinion (and I've said this in the past on here), all these marketing terms XR/mixed/spatial etc are doing the growth of VR and AR no favors.

Look at how Vision Pro has been promoted, at its unveiling 6 months ago Apple promoted Vision Pro as a AR device:-

But press called it a 'Mixed Reality' device and now Apple are promoting 'spatial computing' so what is this device? It's changed 3 times in 6 months, I follow VR/AR and I'm confused,

If I'm confused, people less tech savvy than me (who Apple are targeting) are not going to pay money out for something they don't understand, this is half of VR/AR's problem, the other half is these devices haven't been good enough yet and with that no real 'must have' use in day to day life, but to get half-way there, things need to be simplified, call the techs for what they are, 'VR' 'AR' or 'immersive technologies', this is something I've always done myself.

You don't think people pay for things they don't understand?? I think you are forgetting the very essence of consumer culture.

Mindless spending is actually Apples primary business model. People want what Apple makes because of their reputation of putting a lot of thought into their products and their customers don't need to understand anything other than the fact that their products make them feel special, not just from the quality of their products but the trendy status associated.

When it comes to Apple, it's consumers will likely feel like Apple's choice terminology is more valid.

Keep in mind that most people have not tried AR/VR devices and most who would never touch a headset will be introduced to them by Apple, simply because " It's Apple". Not because they understand the terminology or what exactly the device is or what it does.

Mindless is the very core of consumer culture.

 

[Andreas B.]

VR and AR are the technologies and the press/public usage of these terms are sky-high and usage of these terms are not going to change, sure domain sales are not there, but Ai wasn't either 2 years ago.

In my opinion (and I've said this in the past on here), all these marketing terms XR/mixed/spatial etc are doing the growth of VR and AR no favors.

Look at how Vision Pro has been promoted, at its unveiling 6 months ago Apple promoted Vision Pro as a AR device:-

But press called it a 'Mixed Reality' device and now Apple are promoting 'spatial computing' so what is this device? It's changed 3 times in 6 months, I follow VR/AR and I'm confused,

If I'm confused, people less tech savvy than me (who Apple are targeting) are not going to pay money out for something they don't understand, this is half of VR/AR's problem, the other half is these devices haven't been good enough yet and with that no real 'must have' use in day to day life, but to get half-way there, things need to be simplified, call the techs for what they are, 'VR' 'AR' or 'immersive technologies', this is something I've always done myself.

its good that apple is settling this debate for us:

With their own usage of 'Spatial', in advertising & product descriptions,
its more than evident that this is becoming the 'go-to' term.

Just as you saw it on CES '24; Spatial names everywhere around.

VR alone is still a strong term, as it is the most known one. - But it does not cover all capabilities of this new emerging tech.

AR is up & coming as a technology, and as long a we have headsets that offer VR & AR altogether, we need a mainstream term for it.
Which happens to be Spatial.

Spatial = mixed reality.


To be honest, never noticed someone here posting a sale with MR;
it just does not sound sexy enough...

 

[Kai W.]

Domain names are all the rage because of open source internet technology, and AI keywords are big sellers because of API interfaces to AI, and right now there's no substantive argument to back up judgments about VR/AR/XR, but one sign that they're ushering in a deal will be the emergence of a XR development language or XR programming tutorial.
Consumers are an afterthought, but the dust will settle when consumers learn whether or not they will replace smart devices like phones/headphones.

 

[Kingslayer]

You don't think people pay for things they don't understand?? I think you are forgetting the very essence of consumer culture.

Mindless spending is actually Apples primary business model. People want what Apple makes because of their reputation of putting a lot of thought into their products and their customers don't need to understand anything other than the fact that their products make them feel special, not just from the quality of their products but the trendy status associated.

When it comes to Apple, it's consumers will likely feel like Apple's choice terminology is more valid.

Keep in mind that most people have not tried AR/VR devices and most who would never touch a headset will be introduced to them by Apple, simply because " It's Apple". Not because they understand the terminology or what exactly the device is or what it does.

Mindless is the very core of consumer culture.

Sure, but the only difference is at $3,500 this is one of Apple's most expensive products ever, many students/working class people have an iPhone at around $1000, but they have to get it contract/finance. With this, who can afford it? You'd have to say upper middle/upper class people only and even then how many are going to do that?

I'm going to be honest, after a lot of research last night (about 3 hours) i did under estimate the threat of spatial to everybodies VR/AR/XR investments, you log into Netflix and you see 'Spatial Audio' so something may be in it more than any other term in the past, but if it doesn't catch-on don't be surprised to see Apple switch back quickly, Magic Leap did this (they promoted spatial computing) and so have other major companies who have tried to be different (Intel etc).

I still can't see it sticking universally or companies branding around it, but the main concern is their app submittion guidelines which i've highlighted in red:-

I think this is targeting Meta (Facebook) and their whole metaverse ambition more than anything with VR/AR being a big part of that, so will be interesting to see how they and other major companies react who have spent a lot of money in immersive tech.

 

[Andreas B.]

Sure, but the only difference is at $3,500 this is one of Apple's most expensive products ever, many students/working class people have an iPhone at around $1000, but they have to get it contract/finance. With this, who can afford it? You'd have to say upper middle/upper class people only and even then how many are going to do that?

I'm going to be honest, after a lot of research last night (about 3 hours) i did under estimate the threat of spatial to everybodies VR/AR/XR investments, you log into Netflix and you see 'Spatial Audio' so something may be in it more than any other term in the past, but if it doesn't catch-on don't be surprised to see Apple switch back quickly, Magic Leap did this (they promoted spatial computing) and so have other major companies who have tried to be different (Intel etc).

I still can't see it sticking universally or companies branding around it, but the main concern is their app submittion guidelines which i've highlighted in red:-

Show attachment 251689

I think this targeting Meta (Facebook) and their whole metaverse ambition more than anything with VR/AR being a big part of that, so will be interesting to see how they and other major companies react who have spent a lot of money in immersive tech.

Don't think that the term Spatial Computing will go away from here anytime soon...

That's the description for this headset;
AR/VR can be anything (videos, games, entertainment, zoom meetings, and maybe some computing / office stuff)
VR on its own is definitely more popular for its entm. capabilities,...

but in Spatial Computing its clear: A computer on your nose for doing stuff.

 

[NameFu]

Sure, but the only difference is at $3,500 this is one of Apple's most expensive products ever, many students/working class people have an iPhone at around $1000, but they have to get it contract/finance. With this, who can afford it? You'd have to say upper middle/upper class people only and even then how many are going to do that?

I'm going to be honest, after a lot of research last night (about 3 hours) i did under estimate the threat of spatial to everybodies VR/AR/XR investments, you log into Netflix and you see 'Spatial Audio' so something may be in it more than any other term in the past, but if it doesn't catch-on don't be surprised to see Apple switch back quickly, Magic Leap did this (they promoted spatial computing) and so have other major companies who have tried to be different (Intel etc).

I still can't see it sticking universally or companies branding around it, but the main concern is their app submittion guidelines which i've highlighted in red:-

Show attachment 251689

I think this is targeting Meta (Facebook) and their whole metaverse ambition more than anything with VR/AR being a big part of that, so will be interesting to see how they and other major companies react who have spent a lot of money in immersive tech.

People purchase things they can't afford every day, because of credit and payment plans. "Affordability" today has more to do with how much a person can pay monthly and how long a person is willing to pay for a product, on a monthly plan - not how much the total price is.

It's completely normal for people to upgrade their iPhones before finishing their payment plan - through a trade-in program or selling them online. So it's a cycle of payments plans and temporary ownership.

A $3,500 iPhone like headset from Apple will be treated EXACTLY the same way.

 

[Andreas B.]

People purchase things they can't afford every day, because of credit and payment plans. "Affordability" today has more to do with how much a person can pay monthly and how long a person is willing to pay for a product, on a monthly plan - not how much the total price is.

It's completely normal for people to upgrade their iPhones before finishing their payment plan - through a trade-in program or selling them online. So it's a cycle of payments plans and temporary ownership.

A $3,500 iPhone like headset from Apple will be treated EXACTLY the same way.

As I heard from a youtuber - so don't know if this source is reliable -
Apple shall have produced around 60k units already.

Aims, alltogether, to sell 100k devices.

They will all sell, that's for sure.

Apple, reportedly, cannot even manage to produce more devices...


So, there will be no 'too many devices / overproduced' situation, and this leads to the best market condition:
Price is high but ok for apple to sell all devices,
ok for 100k+ buyers to buy,
youtube will go viral on this device once all those influencers start to make videos about it...

demand will most likely increase,
resellers will sell new headsets for a lot higher prices...

sounds good.


Then, quite soon, it is rumored that apple will bring a cheaper model on the market.


We have the "Tesla situation":
First devices for the wealthiest,
producing capabilities grow,
resource prices go down,
masses get interested by reviews etc.,
prices for the headset go down,
masses buy.

 

[NameFu]

Sure, but the only difference is at $3,500 this is one of Apple's most expensive products ever, many students/working class people have an iPhone at around $1000, but they have to get it contract/finance. With this, who can afford it? You'd have to say upper middle/upper class people only and even then how many are going to do that?

I'm going to be honest, after a lot of research last night (about 3 hours) i did under estimate the threat of spatial to everybodies VR/AR/XR investments, you log into Netflix and you see 'Spatial Audio' so something may be in it more than any other term in the past, but if it doesn't catch-on don't be surprised to see Apple switch back quickly, Magic Leap did this (they promoted spatial computing) and so have other major companies who have tried to be different (Intel etc).

I still can't see it sticking universally or companies branding around it, but the main concern is their app submittion guidelines which i've highlighted in red:-

Show attachment 251689

I think this is targeting Meta (Facebook) and their whole metaverse ambition more than anything with VR/AR being a big part of that, so will be interesting to see how they and other major companies react who have spent a lot of money in immersive tech.

And of course they're targeting Meta with their branding guidelines. Meta is their primary competitor.

Everything Apple does is an attempt at checkmating Meta's current dominance, and this includes not so obvious efforts, that most wouldn't directly associate with their competition. But branding and marketing guidelines from Apple are a big deal.

Simply because of Apple's history of breathing life into preexisting hardware categories that are not picking up steam.

They did this for mp3 players, tablets, smart phones, smart watches and now it will likely be headsets.

 

[Kingslayer]

People purchase things they can't afford every day, because of credit and payment plans. "Affordability" today has more to do with how much a person can pay monthly and how long a person is willing to pay for a product, on a monthly plan - not how much the total price is.

It's completely normal for people to upgrade their iPhones before finishing their payment plan - through a trade-in program or selling them online. So it's a cycle of payments plans and temporary ownership.

A $3,500 iPhone like headset from Apple will be treated EXACTLY the same way.

People purchase things they can't afford every day that they need, ie:- such as phone/car/TV/roof over head.

It remains to be seen if Apple Pro is a device that people ‘need’ or novelty, if its novelty, people on a large scale are not going to go into debt for it.

 

[NameFu]

People purchase things they can't afford every day that they need, ie:- such as phone/car/TV/roof over head.

It remains to be seen if Apple Pro is a device that people ‘need’ or novelty, if its novelty, people on a large scale are not going to go into debt for it.

You don't understand consumer culture.

No one NEEDS a $1500 phone or a $700 snartwatch or a $3,000 TV but working class people with 9 to 5 jobs are the overwhelming majority of the people buying these things. It's possible because of payment plans and reselling to upgrade. The Vision Pro and it's less expensive versions in the future will be no different.

 

[DomainNature]

Most of my domains are AR domains, why, because I know what I do, Apple, Tesla and other top brands will be down soon because of AR disruption, this is why Apple is afraid and not want to market it.