Multiple trademark filings spotted by Bloomberg over the weekend support the notion that Apple’s long-rumored mixed reality headset will be running under the ‘Reality’ naming scheme.

Trademark applications were filed earlier this month in the US, EU, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Saudi Arabia, Costa Rica and Uruguay for three names: Reality One, Reality Pro, and Reality Processor, Bloomberg reports.

The first two may differentiate classes of the rumored MR headset, much like iPhone 13 and iPhone 13 Pro, while ‘Reality Processor’ could be the platform’s SoC. The report maintains Apple may be using a M2 SoC with 16 GB of memory.

Furthermore, Bloomberg reports Apple’s MR headset will focus on VR versions of apps like Maps and FaceTime, different social apps, and media apps for “sports and movies in VR and gaming.” The trademarks also include a “health-related functions” feature.

None of the applications are registered to Apple by name—many were filed by ‘Immersive Health Solutions’—however the company typically uses shell corporations and small law firms across the globe to obfuscate its connection to forthcoming products. At the time of this writing are still marked as “pending”.

A trademark filed earlier this year which was attributed to Apple seemingly staked its claim to the name ‘realityOS’, or what could be the company’s mixed reality operating system. The trademark was initially filed just two months before ‘realityOS’ began showing up in Apple source code.

SEE ALSO
'Starship Troopers' VR Game Delayed Last-Minute, New November Release Dates Announced

As per usual, Apple hasn’t said anything official or released any mention of its forthcoming MR headset from its black box headquarters in Cupertino. What we do know is based on reports, so take the following information with a grain of salt.

Apple’s first headset, which like Meta’s Project Cambria (possibly named Quest Pro), is said to feature VR displays and color passthrough cameras which will allow it to do augmented reality tasks—i.e. making it a mixed reality headset. Here’s what we (think) we know about Apple’s MR headset, codenamed N301.

Follow-up devices are said to include a headset codenamed N602, and a proper pair of AR glasses codenamed N421. Bloomberg maintains these devices may arrive sometime later this decade.

Newsletter graphic

This article may contain affiliate links. If you click an affiliate link and buy a product we may receive a small commission which helps support the publication. More information.


Scott Hayden
Well before the first modern XR products hit the market, Scott recognized the potential of the technology and set out to understand and document its growth. He has been professionally reporting on the space for nearly a decade as Editor at Road to VR, authoring more than 4,000 articles on the topic. Scott brings that seasoned insight to his reporting from major industry events across the globe.
  • Anfronie

    If you think Meta is a locked down experience just wait until apple has a go at it XD

    • Sven Viking

      With such an obvious limb omission that avatar would not be worth even $233.95.

      • Anfronie

        I’ve used it to pay bills before. Believe me it holds its value well. :)

    • kontis

      Yes and no.

      It’s much easier to get on Apple’s main app store than on the Meta’s secondary Applab and it’s drastically easier compared to the main Meta’s store that has arbitrary BS restrictions based on Zuck’s wishful thinking and visions.

      So in this regard it’s the Meta that has much more restrictive walled garden than Apple…

      However Meta kind of allows sideloading, but it purposeful made with huge friction, you have to pretend to be a developer, so it ensures most people never bother with it and that no commercial app will ever be financially successful this way (ie. without giving Meta 30%).
      But that’s not so much different from smartphone ecosystems, including android, where Google play is de facto a monopoly and its restrictions prevent various forms.

      To be totally fair, a big store affecting the form of content that is made is also a thing on PC (despite having the best, most flexible software market ever made in history). Steam’s ToS restrictions prevent some types of innovative games and even VRchat breaks it on every map that asks for donations or has patron links. Valve may one day put a ban on this 30% TAX avoidance (and they don’t even have a system to monetize individual creators and don’t allow it currently… they got burned on the paid mods disaster).

      But all of this is nothing compared to Sony and Playstation VR.
      Their ecosystem is the most restrictive they even removed a web browser. They also wanted money from the profit multiplatform online games make on other platforms.
      The funniest thing is Sony joining the open metaverse standards for interoperability. Their ecosystem literally bans anything resembling a metaverse or openness. Maybe Tim Sweeny manages to convince them with Fortnite modding and his metaverse aspirations to change the stance, but they will never accept PC-like openness, not even Apple like “opennes”… ironically.

      • Sven Viking

        At least it’s much easier to sideload on Android (change a setting, install from the device’s web browser), but yeah it’s the same strategy and surprisingly effective. Oculus on PC used the same system (the “unknown sources” toggle in settings) but of course on PC it was far less effective.

      • namekuseijin

        > PC-like openness

        read: I’m a windows + steam slave…

    • xyzs

      I don’t mind, as long as the hardware fu@king start to evolve thanks to existing competition.

      Anyway a gnu/linux vr platform with flatpack based open store distribution once again will only be a valiant nerd battle for a small territory, 99 percent will go with big tech golden prisons.

      • kontis

        Yes, this is why we need crazy idealistic (and often also narcistic and hypocritical, but it doesn’t matter) billionaires like Sweeney to fight those manipulative psychopaths in courts. People just want the candies and will sell their souls for them without understanding the ToS and long term implications. There was an episode of South Park about that and it was about Apple.

      • kontis

        Interesting comment from Jim Keller related to this:

        People like platform agnostic, but if you look at the history, there were all these mini computers (that’s where I started) with proprietary Unix implementations and then there were standards for it (POSIX compliance and stuff) and so while they were screwing around making Unix standard Microsoft created a super cheap platform (which was a Microsoft product, but everybody could go on top of it) intel ironically was the open source platform, there were seven licensees of the intel architecture, but that slowly turned into monopoly.

        Then the internet came out which is a wide open platform and then that was followed by the app stores, which was a completely closed, so you see the pendulum swing back and forth.

        People are talking about like what’s the Metaverse going to be like and nobody really knows.

        • The internet will never not be a wide open platform.
          If not for appstores, how’re you gonna run software, in Java alone …?
          You need *some* sort of operating system[s].
          Windows, macOS, iOS, Android, etc. don’t make the web specifically,
          or the internet in general, not a single iota less a wide open platform.

  • Andrew Jakobs

    Nah, not really as the Apple headset will be way too expensive and is sadly even more locked into their walled garden.

    • ONE: You’ll be able to buy it on time in very affordable installments.
      TWO: As demonstrated above, a walled garden is preferable to the alternative.

  • Well, makes sense as a name

  • Ookami

    Bad analogy imo. As long as there’s minimal moderation of content to keep things safe, I’d take an open system any day.

  • Till Eulenspiegel

    Meta/Facebook won’t be able to compete with Apple’s hardware. Apple made their own in-house CPU/GPU that brings desktop performance to the headset. Meta has no expertise in making chips – they have to rely on Qualcomm. They even gave up on making their own OS and has to fall back on Android.

    Zuckerberg knew that – he knew he can’t win the hardware war, that’s why he wants a head start in the Metaverse. He will evolved the company to provide services, eventually giving up the hardware businesses. Meta will be like Facebook/Instagram – just another service provider for VR/AR.

  • namekuseijin

    it begins at $3000

  • Jistuce

    We’re going to the moon next year?

  • Kryojenic

    Uh oh – did Pimax forget to trademark ‘Reality’?!…

  • Sky Castle

    This should be released by the time my great great grand children are born. And They’ll claim to have done it first.

  • Mradr

    The fact that apple is making a high-end headset that is going to cost 3000$ should open your eyes that there is a market space is way bigger than your current wallet lol