Exclusive: Mercor’s Fast Growth Relies on Biggest AI Companies, Documents Show Save 25% to unlock this story

Sign in
Subscribe

    Data Tools

    • About Pro
    • Enterprise Software Startup Takeover List 2026
    • The Next GPs 2026
    • The Executives Leading the Data Center Race
    • The Next GPs 2025
    • The Rising Stars of AI Research
    • Leaders of the AI Shopping Revolution
    • Enterprise Software Startup Takeover List 2025
    • Org Charts
    • The Information 50 2025
    • Generative AI Takeover List
    • Generative AI Database
    • AI Chip Database
    • AI Data Center Database
    • Tech IPO Tracker
    • Tech Sentiment Tracker
    • Gigafactory Database

    Special Projects

    • The Information 50 Database
    • VC Diversity Index
    • Enterprise Tech Powerlist
  • Org Charts
  • Deep Research
  • Tech
  • Finance
  • Weekend
  • Charts
  • Events
  • TITV
    • Directory

      Search, find and engage with others who are serious about tech and business.

    • Forum

      Follow and be a part of discussions about tech, finance and media.

    • Brand Partnerships

      Premium advertising opportunities for brands

    • Group Subscriptions

      Team access to our exclusive tech news

    • Newsletters

      Journalists who break and shape the news, in your inbox

    • Video

      Catch up on conversations with global leaders in tech, media and finance

    • Partner Content

      Explore our recent partner collaborations

      XFacebookLinkedInThreadsInstagram
    • Help & Support
    • RSS Feed
    • Careers
    Sign in
  • About Pro
  • Enterprise Software Startup Takeover List 2026
  • The Next GPs 2026
  • The Executives Leading the Data Center Race
  • The Next GPs 2025
  • The Rising Stars of AI Research
  • Leaders of the AI Shopping Revolution
  • Enterprise Software Startup Takeover List 2025
  • Org Charts
  • The Information 50 2025
  • Generative AI Takeover List
  • Generative AI Database
  • AI Chip Database
  • AI Data Center Database
  • Tech IPO Tracker
  • Tech Sentiment Tracker
  • Gigafactory Database

SPECIAL PROJECTS

  • The Information 50 Database
  • VC Diversity Index
  • Enterprise Tech Powerlist
Deep Research
TITV
Tech
Finance
Weekend
Charts
Events
Newsletters
  • Directory

    Search, find and engage with others who are serious about tech and business.

  • Forum

    Follow and be a part of discussions about tech, finance and media.

  • Brand Partnerships

    Premium advertising opportunities for brands

  • Group Subscriptions

    Team access to our exclusive tech news

  • Newsletters

    Journalists who break and shape the news, in your inbox

  • Video

    Catch up on conversations with global leaders in tech, media and finance

  • Partner Content

    Explore our recent partner collaborations

Subscribe
  • Sign in
  • Search
  • Opinion
  • Venture Capital
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Startups
  • Market Research
    XFacebookLinkedInThreadsInstagram
  • Help & Support
  • RSS Feed
  • Careers

In-depth insights in seconds. Ask Deep Research.

Exclusive

Behind the Apple Design Decisions That Bogged Down Its Mixed-Reality Headset

In 2019, Apple had to make tough choices about the final design of its augmented and virtual reality headset. In this story—the second of two on the origins of the project—we reveal how those decisions have led to huge technical challenges and delays for Apple's biggest product gamble in years.

By
Wayne Ma
[email protected]Profile and archive
(L-R) Jonathan Ive, Johny Srouji, Dan Riccio and Tim Cook. Photos by Bloomberg; Apple. Art by Mike Sullivan

Apple’s executives had a critical design decision to make about the company’s riskiest product in years. It was 2019, and a growing team of Apple engineers had been working for more than three years on a headset that combined augmented and virtual reality capabilities. Now they had to figure out whether the mixed-reality headset would be a stand-alone device or would require a powerful base station to produce the dazzling digital imagery Apple envisioned for it.

Apple CEO Tim Cook and then–Chief Design Officer Jonathan Ive were among the executives who viewed VR demos on prototype headsets that simulated how the two approaches would differ, according to two people familiar with the demos. The headset that worked with a base station had superior graphics, including photorealistic avatars, while the stand-alone version depicted its avatars more like cartoon characters. Mike Rockwell, the Apple vice president in charge of the company’s AR/VR team, favored the headset with the base station, believing that Apple’s top brass wouldn’t accept the stand-alone version’s lower-quality visuals, according to the two people.

He was wrong. Ive had pushed for the stand-alone version of the headset since the early days of the project, according to a person familiar with it. Ultimately, Apple’s senior executives sided with Ive. Despite that, Rockwell still assured them he could make a great product. The choice has had lasting repercussions for the repeatedly delayed headset, which goes by the internal code-name of N301.

Recommended