Where exactly did you see that Qualcomm holds the tm for XR?
I doubt it will stop anyone iit'sbecoming a catch-all term for the industry.
But lets discuss.
Observant and correct.
If you remember my rant on this issue about 3-4+ years ago, Qualcomm made application for a bunch of TM's in a very broad sense and I could not imagine seeing it being granted, outside of perhaps the graphic, which was as broad as the rest. And they did not have a product or service to actually pin it to.
They were not granted their reservation for the marks.
You do not need the TM to defend a mark in actual use for specific things in use if you can prove you did indeed use the term substantially first. Registration just makes it easier (basically a declaration). They control the space within it's true specific actual uses.
Apple is not going to use the term. I can see them using the term mixed reality and VR/AR. And anything they create along the way. Perhaps AROS or ROS.
So, HTC revealed it's device at CES and it indeed has branded the device with XR and as I said, it uses the Qualcomm XR2 Snapdragon SOC.
https://www.pocket-lint.com/ar-vr/news/htc/163855-htc-vive-xr-elite-headset-launch/
This whole thing about Apple naming it's HMD OS xros is several leaps of faith.
1st because the actual registration is one more of those broad grabs to include all things and if you take the time to look at them, most of the G&S are not even new media. This was going on when Qualcomm made it's initial application. Someone actually trying to steal the mark ahead of what would likely be used.
You have herd of domain squatter, well, these are TM squatters. Extortionist to be short and clear.
Likely Failed TM attorney's trying to make a few dollars from a company that does not want a extended court battle, and settle for money even knowing they would win.
So the applications for the xros was made by mostly Chinese co's as far as when I looked last, many months ago, but likely have grown in number. And the fella reporting for Bloomberg quoted someone who assumed it was Apple reg'n xros because they have had a shell co make applications in the past. But once again, if you look at the G&S it clearly is not Apple.
But since I am on the topic again, I do wonder if anyone out there that has now had years to figure out what exactly XR is, just tell me the difference between XR and VR/AR/MR
So, you are left with those co's who make HMD's with Qualcomm SOC's being the limit for 'hardware' branded with the XR term. And Meta is buying in because of a common interest and a Apple device looming on the landscape.
https://www.roadtovr.com/meta-qualcomm-xr-snapdragon-partnership-apple-silicon/
One could see this as evident and why John Carmac left. What choice does Meta they have ? They are not up to the task of designing their own... yet. So this partnership with Qualcomm is a must.
But how do they do an exclusive remains to be seen. Qualcomm will have to make Meta specialized SOC's.
So, they have 3 years to catch-up to where Apple starts.
All of this brings me back to a point I made earlier. What is Microsoft up to ? They also have the power with all to design and have special purpose SOC made for them for HOLOLENS. But will they ?
The new Intel attitude and US born production plant makes for some more good speculation.
And MS has been pretty quite on this stuff the last year++.
That's not going to stop software from using XR I don't think, but it could be a issue I guess if it is made for a device that runs on a non-qualcomm chipset. I am waiting to see if that one develops at some point.
While XR may be a term to some extent, it is up in the air how broad and deep it invades domains.
By it's original intent, it is to broad of definition to be anything specific. And there is it's problem with exception to Qualcomm's VR/AR/MR platform who was the first to apply for the TM and coin it's use in the real world.
So You can think of XR as the post that started this thread because it was Qualcomm's answer to Project Alloy from Intel which went down the tubes about 2 years after it's inception, just as Intel lost the cellular market to Qualcomm.
It does amaze me just how many monkey see monkey do reporting there are out there since the original story on XROS spread to all the alt media pages we all read. And can legitimately be tied to that one flawed assumption made by someone reporting for Bloomberg. That kinda news sells to people who want to hear it, but where will they all be when everyone figures out it's not so.
It will just be forgotten as they sell you the next assumption and news you want to hear.
https://www.businesswire.com/news/h...HMD-and-5100-AR-Glasses-Solutions-at-CES-2023
We should all know this actual story within about 50 days.
After that,
I'm thinking Apple will announce a month before WWDC and release some 60 days later.
They have a dev program to kick-off. You are not likely to run Quest, Rift or Vive programs on a Apple HMD.
They did release the new Macbook Pro using the latest iteration of it's designed M2 Max
which should allow all the power needed for developing software for the new headset.
And, as I see it,
the new HOMEPOD is going to have the capacity to play a role with the new HMD. Enter John Carmac ?
