The price endangers it the same way the high price killed the Star Wars Starcruiser at Disneyland. Most of the people who want it won't be able to afford it, the people who can afford it mostly won't want it.
On the other hand Vision Pro's price will go down and quality will go up. Apple has the deep pockets to continue to invest until the technology really delivers at a mass market price. This wasn't really there for the labor intensive high-touch Starcruiser experience.
Even so I am not sure if we will see electronic prices dropping over time the way they have in the past. Probably the most important scaling in semiconductors was the price coming down from shrink to shrink and that seems to be over. That’s why the 40-series cards from NVIDIA don’t improve on the 30-series for performance per dollar.
Apple leads the world in powerful ARM SoC but they make high end parts that sell at high end prices and compete with Meta who is very concerned about selling price and sometimes willing to subsidize hardware in the hope they make it back on services.
I think it kinda goes back to "I'll ignore it for now and wait a few years if it's still around with a reasonable value proposition"
And I mean it in the most positive way: if it ever works out Apple will come out with a better headset year over year, and build a community around it, XR will have made it to the mainstream. If it doesn't pan out will have a data point on what fails, and get other products that skirt around these issues while providing compelling features on the parts that matter, we have enough competition to have the concept survive.
Either way it's a win, and I salute Apple for jumping in the pool.
It feels like the initial launch of the Apple Watch as a luxury fashion accessory. Good thing they were able to pivot that to a Fitbit competitor. Will they do the same here?
What would they pivot to? I'd love to have a normal glasses style device with some cameras and sensors to give me Iron Man/Cyberpunk-style HUD for notifications and calls, etc.. I just... don't understand what they could pivot to.
Exactly that, I think. My prediction is we'll get a 'Vision Air' which is AR-only, like HoloLens, and priced more competitively. But unlike HoloLens you won't look like a dweeb wearing this at home or around the office. Combined with some sort of killer app for the magic leap style gesture recognition this thing seems to have, and you could have a whole new human-computer interface.
Or maybe it dies an early death, like the Apple Newton. :shrug:
I'm skeptical as well... all this VR/AR hype has yet to deliver something... anything... anything at all... It's been years since I trying a VR headset at a friend's place and I distinctively remember thinking "this is useless... cool, but useless". I have yet to walk into someones place and not see one of these things gathering dust in a corner...
Perhaps the only time I actually felt like getting one was when I got hooked into Elite Dangerous, but these days I don't have time for it anyway... so, yeah.
My experience is very similar, even still (boot from linux into windows, have updates shoved down my throat, some random thing doesn't work because reasons, etc.)
Most of it really feels like unforced errors though. As much as I am not at all excited about a $3500 device that's completely locked into Apple's restricted ecosystem, they are the kind of company to actually pay attention to those things and smooth out all the rough edges.
I'm really just hoping it brings more attention and effort into the wider VR ecosystem and we start getting better products and software support.
Had a similar experience with the Rift and it made me buy a different VR headset.
The software stack is critical to these devices not being painful or pleasant.
Devices that are steamvr native have been so much nicer to use, just plug&pay.
I'm assuming Apple isn't going to make their headset SteamVR compatible so I wonder how things will shake out a few years from now - is Apple going to be in their own little world or will existing software really support it?
I have/had OG Vive. It was like, double click the headset button, point and call Lighthouse spinups, put on headset, long press menu buttons on controllers, take a deep sigh for not much reason and I was in VR.
imo it’s years past the point there got to be a head tracked goggle emulator, for “experts”. there are occasional moments I’d want to go back just for few minutes, or finally try VRC(haven’t), and while I’m aware that first impression of VR has to be perfect, the full gear seems like an overkill for those occasions.
> all this VR/AR hype has yet to deliver something... anything... anything at all
…in the consumer space. There have been some really incredible tools I've seen in industrial or medical spaces, and I think that's unlikely to change in the near term.
I’ve seen cool demos and proof of concept of professional tools but don’t know of any that have traction and good retention. Do you have examples of tools with significant adoption?
I'm not sure breadth of adoption and retention are the right metrics here — the use cases I've heard about are highly specialized, so I wouldn't expect it to be massively and quickly adopted, the same way it took a long time for robotic surgery tools or CAD to become widely used.
I've heard of it used in e.g. surgeries, for visualizing data like MRI scans, or building schematics for electrical/steam/wastewater/etc but don't know of specific instances where products are used.
Vision Pro wearers don't show up in FaceTime as wearing goggles though: they show a simulated face that responds to facial gestures (basically a high-res Memoji)
Obviously I don't buy every product Apple launches but up to now I could see me using every one of their products, even if I don't think it would make sense buying one because it's too expensive or I don't need it. The Vision Pro however is something I have doubts could be useful even if it works perfectly and despite its price tag.
I got a Valve Index 2 months ago for VRChat. Turns out there's a huge music and dance community on VRC that spends a rediculous amount of money on various things to make it more usable.
The Index is $1000. Then some people get extra base stations which are $200 a pop. Then if you dance with full body tracking most people get Vive Tracker 3.0 which you need 3 for feet and waist. Add the $2000 gaming desktop I use for powering it and you're already at the price of the Vision Pro.
Except the Vision Pro is stand alone and has some really nice quality of life hacks that I haven't seen before in the VR space.
Also dancing in a VR rave is a pretty good workout and you get to meet tons of cool people. It sort of self selects for cool tech nerds. So far I've met a ton of amazing people through it.
There's a bit of irony there though, in that the most compelling things in VR are from gamers creating awesome things (VR Chat, modding in Beat Saber, etc), and emphatically not from giant companies providing these "experiences" that they're positive everyone will love.
As incredible as Apple's hardware looks, you are absolutely not going to have the kind of freedom you have with a piece of Valve hardware connected to your own PC. We'll be lucky if they even allow VR Chat on the platform.
Some of the most intense users of the VRC platform are hacker furries so I have zero doubt that someone will figure out how to get it going. They said they are working with Unity in the keynote.
It would be weird if they totally blocked VRChat cause it's the top VR app on Steam.
They spared couple minutes on specifically Unity compatibility. That's definitely a codeword for VRChat, Virtual Desktop for SteamVR compatibility, and accommodations for local development for VRChat contents.
The VR ecosystem feel feels a lot like the early 90s all over again. FPS mods, small community on fanatics, 90s wild west internet... Just saying, a lot of the comments here are coming from people who have never used VR. It's the obsessive kids right now that will drive the next 10-20 years, like I bet, a lot of what we do now was driven by 90s kids.
Im extremely skeptical that Apple will let this be used with VRC via PCVR. It would need to be a new build for the device with support for tracking. Plus those body trackers don’t suffer from occlusion.
The only feature I want in an AR headset is for it to tell me the name of the person I'm talking to. I always forget. But I know the facial recognition database is a huge privacy liability, so it will never happen. As a result, I'm also underwhelmed.
I suppose this is good for those people you see walking around texting as they wander into traffic. They might be able to like some Instagram posts AND look both ways before crossing the street. A $3500 headset is cheaper than a $100k spine replacement or whatever. (I just ... stop if I need to text someone while I'm out walking, and do my Internet shitposting when I'm not out and about. But I guess that's only me.)
> But I know the facial recognition database is a huge privacy liability, so it will never happen.
That's fairly easily overcome—you just need to have a local facial recognition database, specific to your contacts, rather than querying some centralized one.
I’m probably in the smaller majority of people who are very excited about it, but still expect it to flop (or at least flounder for a while).
I used a Quest 2 as virtual monitors for a week or so of real work and it was uncomfortable and sweaty and I was isolated and had to keyboard and mouse by touch, but the viewing experience was amazing. And I do use my Quest 2 frequently for games and “workouts” and entertainment. So I’m solidly in the market for this.
But the main thing is that I want to try it, mostly for the AR. I’ll reserve any fanboy comments until I’ve tried it.
Someday, someone is going to get AR/VR right. This isn’t it, but it seems to be moving in the right direction.
I don’t have high hopes for free space holographic displays, a la Star Wars or Minority Report, but augmented reality fills the same niche (with many of the same drawbacks and benefits).
The hardware looks beautiful, as is to be expected from Apple - I just don't think the appetite is there for a general purpose productivity headset, the big wins in VR/AR seems to be very specialized and mostly around things like manufacturing and design/engineering instead of just typical office work.
Apple introduces a new Scuba Mask. iScuba will seamlessly blend underwater reality and the digital underwater, enabling Apple users everywhere to dive deep while staying connected.
iScuba is currently priced at $9999, making it the most affordable digitial Scuba mask produced by Apple in Apple's history.
This seems like a device that could kill the monitor.
If you're upgrading your workstation to that new Mac Pro, do you get one big 5k display? Or get this headset, and have an array of displays in high resolution with built-in spatial 3D that follow you anywhere and don't take up any physical space.
Zero chance it replaces monitors for everyday people, if for no other reason than folks with long hair will not want to sit around with effectively ski goggles strapped to their head all work day. After a long day of work you'll have a ring around your face and totally messed up hair... that will not fly with people.
The eternal issue with AR monitors is you need many multiples of the monitor resolution you're trying to imitate in the goggle display. It's doable but quite expensive
> This seems like a device that could kill the monitor.
No, this screenless laptop [1] is a device that could kill the monitor.
Conventional keyboard, AR goggles for the monitor.
This Apple headgear is intended to kill the smartphone, but the hardware isn't there yet.
As Carmack said after leaving Oculus, the headgear needs to get down to swim goggle size to get any traction, and down to eyeglass size to become pervasive.
This thing is bulkier than expected. Since it's tethered to a box on your belt, it's surprising that more of the electronics isn't down with the battery. Others are shipping
smaller, lighter headgear. You'd expect something like this [2] from Apple.
Despite this, we'll probably see iBorgs on University Avenue in Palo Alto within days after this ships.
Tested spacetop last year; it's not good for extended use. Glasses were dim, it's Chrome OS based so web apps for everything. You have infinite virtual desktop, readability is good, but ultimately it's just a consumption tool for reading and typing. But the cost is looking dorky.
Wont know until we get specs. They at least claimed it could present 4k movies, but, I already have a 4k VR headset and while it is one of the few headsets that can decently display text in the way they're suggesting, it's still not with the clarity of a monitor. Take 4k and stretch it to a much larger (virtual) width and suddenly 4k isnt enough.
The main issue could be the passthrough quality. In the marketing material it's touted as "magic", we'll need to wait a year to see how it pans out in practice (especially with mixed lighting, darker environments etc).
In particular, the speed and quality of the feedback loop between the camera capturing your surroundings and the rendering to your eyes could be enough to kill the experience.
If it's not up to the task, we're back to the full shutdown VR experience, and this device will have to compete with the other next-gen devices (especially up to 3500 bucks)
At this point it's still vaporware, but I'll be excited to read the first actual impressions of the device in real world settings.
I’m interested in it to replace my monitors at work and home, that’s about it. Not only would it allow for more screen space, but (I think?) it would allow my eyes to focus at infinity while working
I did this for a while with my Quest 2. Floating in space on an asteroid while my main screen is bigger (virtually) than an IMAX screen and two other monitors float on either side plus tool windows I could grab and move around was awesome. Just the headset was heavy and sweaty after a while and there was no AR pass thru, so I couldn’t see my keyboard and mouse or find my coffee cup. This looks like a step forward in solving all those problems.
I mean, I'd love to just for the space savings alone. Multiple monitors take up quite a bit of space. If I could repurpose the space for other things without losing functionality that'd be great.
I don't think this is there yet. I'd need to see performance data, and I'd really prefer SteamVR integration (though I could probably reduce a PC+headset to a pretty small if necessary). But it's a step in that direction, and even if it's not necessarily Apple that gets there I think we will see that kind of device in the future.
The Ars live blog mentioned there seemed to be a battery tether, but I didn't see any mention about battery life, so I don't know how long you'd be able to use Vision Pro before you'd have to swap batteries/recharge.
This seems to be the obvious killer feature (what NReal has been tackling for a while now).
What's interesting is they're marketing 4K for each eyes, which I assume means that a display taking a third of the vision area would have a third a third of that resolution to display text etc. That's not unworkable, but we currently already have actual 4K monitors, only for a screen, and having two 4K monitors on a table should give an uncomparatively sharper image than what the headset is offering at best.
Basically, a 4K resolution per eye is impressive, but actually not that much to work with if we're comparing it to real world equivalents.
This seems very promising by being based on already existing experiences (support for iPhone and iPad Apps). Considering all the other features the price of 3499$ doesn't seem to crazy, especially because it can replace all of your monitors, TV and more while also enabling entirely new experiences for basically the same price.
I mean 2d as in "designed for a 2 dimensional monitor". Everything they demo'd was a 3d game, projected onto a 2d surface, projected into a 3d virtual space.
Well, they specifically are calling this the Vision _Pro_. Presumably there'll be a non-pro version at some point (Vision Air? etc) that will address a wider audience.
3500 is way too much when trying to introduce a new platform. I guess that's the cost of the display (two apple watches) and the chips (a Macbook and a half). But still.
I agree that it's way more expensive than I expected, but calling the displays "two apple watches" is really understating how much resolution you're getting. By like two orders of magnitude.
The price can always go down, but it is hard to go up. The high price and the next year date means they don't want to sell a whole lot of it. They probably need more time to improve it.
If I had to bet between Meta and Apple getting it right first, I'd probably bet on Meta now, with apple playing catchup as they usually do, and really well. But so far, if Metaverse was a mistake, this is an even larger mistake.
If these end up being closed systems, Apple will likely win the race. They'll just sell it better and they'll integrate it way better with all their existing hardware. The network effect will ensure that this is pretty much what people end up buying.
It's about 120x the resolution of an Apple Watch. The displays themselves -- by far the most critical, make or break element of such a device -- are multiple generations beyond anything else.
Honestly perplexed why this has seen multiple downvotes. The device features 23 million pixels, or 3x 4K screens. That's 3X the Sony VR2. Over 2X the Vive Pro 2. And of course it's 120x the resolution of an Apple Watch Series 7. The angular resolution approaches the limits of the human eye.
The price is not low, but note the "Pro" in the name. I think that the first two versions will be high-end, and in the third generation they will release a Pro and non-Pro variant.
It took until the third-gen iPhone 3G for that product to really hit its stride. Took a few revs for the iWatch as well (IIRC).
The same criticism was made towards the trashcan, and it sure didn't revolutionize the high end computing world.
I also don't see Apple taking the world by storm with this device, but it probably could fit into the same niche as the AirPod Max, a device that provides what a specific audience wants and won't care that much about what it costs. Which is arguably a sizeable amount of people when it comes to the Apple ecosystem, allowing niche products to survive.
They'll probably push payment plans for this, but it might take some enticement. We are getting used to higher sticker prices anyway because of inflation.
~100 bucks a month financed over 3 years. IMO the question is "can most people wear this for hours on end for both work and play" If that is actually yes (skeptical) I'm probably a buyer.
Adjusted for inflation it's actually cheaper than most early computers (Apple II ~6500 to start at launch).
Wondering how this is going to change the remote working experience. If the price point starts coming down, I can see this as really useful for digital "in-person" meetings that keep people more engaged than a Zoom call.
Intrigued to test this device out to see if it's really much different from the typical VR experiences.
It is like a deal killer for me that in meetings that you get swapped for a creepy uncanny valley version of yourself. The hardware seemed amazing, but the software was disappointing.
You say that now, but bulky embarrassing camcorders at kids birthdays were a major thing in their day. Perhaps there will be some livestream type features to share the birthday with grandparents across the country in 3D.
I dare say one of the next iphones will introduce the 3d video/photo capture capability. Then you could capture with the phone and view it later on the headset.
168 comments
[ 2.5 ms ] story [ 240 ms ] threadI'll give it a few years/generations but doing nothing for me.
Loving pretty much everything else Apple currently.
Even so I am not sure if we will see electronic prices dropping over time the way they have in the past. Probably the most important scaling in semiconductors was the price coming down from shrink to shrink and that seems to be over. That’s why the 40-series cards from NVIDIA don’t improve on the 30-series for performance per dollar.
Apple leads the world in powerful ARM SoC but they make high end parts that sell at high end prices and compete with Meta who is very concerned about selling price and sometimes willing to subsidize hardware in the hope they make it back on services.
And I mean it in the most positive way: if it ever works out Apple will come out with a better headset year over year, and build a community around it, XR will have made it to the mainstream. If it doesn't pan out will have a data point on what fails, and get other products that skirt around these issues while providing compelling features on the parts that matter, we have enough competition to have the concept survive.
Either way it's a win, and I salute Apple for jumping in the pool.
Or maybe it dies an early death, like the Apple Newton. :shrug:
Perhaps the only time I actually felt like getting one was when I got hooked into Elite Dangerous, but these days I don't have time for it anyway... so, yeah.
1. Boot to Windows (Mac bootcamp)
2. Microsoft: It's been 6 months since you ran Windows. I need to force an update for 20 minutes!
3. Steam: LOL you need to update me too!
4. Find the device, the motion sensor/cameras in my cabinet, plug them in and position them in the room.
5. Display driver: Barf! Reboot computer.
6. Unplug/replug everything.
7. Oculus: Hahah new drivers, sucker!
8. Launch Elite Dangerous. Oops, somehow it's not in VR mode. Figure out how to change it in graphics settings...
By the time I got around to playing, I was already exhausted.
Most of it really feels like unforced errors though. As much as I am not at all excited about a $3500 device that's completely locked into Apple's restricted ecosystem, they are the kind of company to actually pay attention to those things and smooth out all the rough edges.
I'm really just hoping it brings more attention and effort into the wider VR ecosystem and we start getting better products and software support.
It's just, not worth it. The discomfort of the headset (in a number of ways) coupled with mostly underwhelming and/or limited experiences.
…in the consumer space. There have been some really incredible tools I've seen in industrial or medical spaces, and I think that's unlikely to change in the near term.
I've heard of it used in e.g. surgeries, for visualizing data like MRI scans, or building schematics for electrical/steam/wastewater/etc but don't know of specific instances where products are used.
This looks like a good overview of efforts in the medical space: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8455774/
And this looks like an okay high-level survey of use in manufacturing and construction: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S240589631...
Like when the fellow walks up in frame perfectly between two windows and hands the viewer something.
Or the FaceTime call where the woman was talking to 3 other people – why weren't they wearing the goggles?
But these would be great on an airplane and probably other circumstances. I doubt I will be buying any time soon though.
Vision Pro uses an ML model to present you without the googles if you are using FaceTime.
The first FaceTime demo had actual people.
The second FaceTime demo showed the ML model and it lacked multiple people.
To me it wasn’t amazing.
I wondered about that too, but if you watch the whole announcement, they explain it. They create a 3D avatar of you for FaceTime.
Obviously I don't buy every product Apple launches but up to now I could see me using every one of their products, even if I don't think it would make sense buying one because it's too expensive or I don't need it. The Vision Pro however is something I have doubts could be useful even if it works perfectly and despite its price tag.
The Index is $1000. Then some people get extra base stations which are $200 a pop. Then if you dance with full body tracking most people get Vive Tracker 3.0 which you need 3 for feet and waist. Add the $2000 gaming desktop I use for powering it and you're already at the price of the Vision Pro.
Except the Vision Pro is stand alone and has some really nice quality of life hacks that I haven't seen before in the VR space.
Also dancing in a VR rave is a pretty good workout and you get to meet tons of cool people. It sort of self selects for cool tech nerds. So far I've met a ton of amazing people through it.
As incredible as Apple's hardware looks, you are absolutely not going to have the kind of freedom you have with a piece of Valve hardware connected to your own PC. We'll be lucky if they even allow VR Chat on the platform.
It would be weird if they totally blocked VRChat cause it's the top VR app on Steam.
I suppose this is good for those people you see walking around texting as they wander into traffic. They might be able to like some Instagram posts AND look both ways before crossing the street. A $3500 headset is cheaper than a $100k spine replacement or whatever. (I just ... stop if I need to text someone while I'm out walking, and do my Internet shitposting when I'm not out and about. But I guess that's only me.)
That's fairly easily overcome—you just need to have a local facial recognition database, specific to your contacts, rather than querying some centralized one.
I used a Quest 2 as virtual monitors for a week or so of real work and it was uncomfortable and sweaty and I was isolated and had to keyboard and mouse by touch, but the viewing experience was amazing. And I do use my Quest 2 frequently for games and “workouts” and entertainment. So I’m solidly in the market for this.
But the main thing is that I want to try it, mostly for the AR. I’ll reserve any fanboy comments until I’ve tried it.
Someday, someone is going to get AR/VR right. This isn’t it, but it seems to be moving in the right direction.
I don’t have high hopes for free space holographic displays, a la Star Wars or Minority Report, but augmented reality fills the same niche (with many of the same drawbacks and benefits).
Also - this paves the way to Mac Laptops (and desktops) without displays, which to me is the big win here.
iScuba is currently priced at $9999, making it the most affordable digitial Scuba mask produced by Apple in Apple's history.
Unreal is owned by Fortnite maker Epic Games - they are not very friendly.
A big court case around App Store monopoly.
If you're upgrading your workstation to that new Mac Pro, do you get one big 5k display? Or get this headset, and have an array of displays in high resolution with built-in spatial 3D that follow you anywhere and don't take up any physical space.
No, this screenless laptop [1] is a device that could kill the monitor. Conventional keyboard, AR goggles for the monitor.
This Apple headgear is intended to kill the smartphone, but the hardware isn't there yet. As Carmack said after leaving Oculus, the headgear needs to get down to swim goggle size to get any traction, and down to eyeglass size to become pervasive.
This thing is bulkier than expected. Since it's tethered to a box on your belt, it's surprising that more of the electronics isn't down with the battery. Others are shipping smaller, lighter headgear. You'd expect something like this [2] from Apple.
Despite this, we'll probably see iBorgs on University Avenue in Palo Alto within days after this ships.
[1] https://www.tomshardware.com/news/this-ar-laptop-promises-a-...
[2] https://inmoglass.com/
In particular, the speed and quality of the feedback loop between the camera capturing your surroundings and the rendering to your eyes could be enough to kill the experience.
If it's not up to the task, we're back to the full shutdown VR experience, and this device will have to compete with the other next-gen devices (especially up to 3500 bucks)
At this point it's still vaporware, but I'll be excited to read the first actual impressions of the device in real world settings.
This is $3500
You are correct, they are not competing in the same space.
I was expecting more. It seems like an oculus but with a software team that can actually do user focused software.
You want to replace your monitors, with a VR headset? What's the appeal?
The cost see very high for something that has no apparent use case, I mean, Disney+ ... that's the best use they can come up with.
I don't think this is there yet. I'd need to see performance data, and I'd really prefer SteamVR integration (though I could probably reduce a PC+headset to a pretty small if necessary). But it's a step in that direction, and even if it's not necessarily Apple that gets there I think we will see that kind of device in the future.
What's interesting is they're marketing 4K for each eyes, which I assume means that a display taking a third of the vision area would have a third a third of that resolution to display text etc. That's not unworkable, but we currently already have actual 4K monitors, only for a screen, and having two 4K monitors on a table should give an uncomparatively sharper image than what the headset is offering at best.
Basically, a 4K resolution per eye is impressive, but actually not that much to work with if we're comparing it to real world equivalents.
It’s cool. I’d rather buy something else.
If I had to bet between Meta and Apple getting it right first, I'd probably bet on Meta now, with apple playing catchup as they usually do, and really well. But so far, if Metaverse was a mistake, this is an even larger mistake.
Honestly perplexed why this has seen multiple downvotes. The device features 23 million pixels, or 3x 4K screens. That's 3X the Sony VR2. Over 2X the Vive Pro 2. And of course it's 120x the resolution of an Apple Watch Series 7. The angular resolution approaches the limits of the human eye.
"No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame." :)
* https://slashdot.org/story/01/10/23/1816257/apple-releases-i...
The price is not low, but note the "Pro" in the name. I think that the first two versions will be high-end, and in the third generation they will release a Pro and non-Pro variant.
It took until the third-gen iPhone 3G for that product to really hit its stride. Took a few revs for the iWatch as well (IIRC).
I also don't see Apple taking the world by storm with this device, but it probably could fit into the same niche as the AirPod Max, a device that provides what a specific audience wants and won't care that much about what it costs. Which is arguably a sizeable amount of people when it comes to the Apple ecosystem, allowing niche products to survive.
Adjusted for inflation it's actually cheaper than most early computers (Apple II ~6500 to start at launch).
Intrigued to test this device out to see if it's really much different from the typical VR experiences.
https://www.youtube.com/live/GYkq9Rgoj8E?feature=share&t=693...
https://www.youtube.com/live/GYkq9Rgoj8E?feature=share&t=676...
Having something strapped to your face is a different beast.
Maybe Quest Pro is amazing but I don't even know where (if) I can experience it.
Went there, was the only customer for the hour of demo I had.