Support NeoGAF

[Eddie-Griffin]

https://9to5mac.com/2023/03/12/operations-headset-launch/

All reports point to Apple launching its mixed reality headset — an augmented reality and virtual reality capable device — this year, likely at WWDC in June. But the Financial Times this weekend notes that the decision to ship now has been divisive inside the company.

The report says that operations team led by Jeff Williams wanted to ship a technologically-advanced headset as soon as possible, even if the device would be bulky and expensive. Members of the design team disagreed, wanting to wait until lightweight AR glasses product was feasible. Cook backed operations.


Although the idea of thin and light AR glasses sounds appealing, it is technologically impractical today and may still be for several more years. (Apple is reportedly working on a glasses project as a long-term goal, although several generations of headset will ship before it comes to fruition.)

The choice of timing is critical. According to the report, Cook and Williams acknowledge the state of the market and believe it makes sense to enter the fray now, even if the first-generation headset will be expensive and of limited appeal to consumers. The idea is to iterate and improve over time.

The first-generation headset is believed to be expensive (priced around $3000) due to the state-of-the-art technology being included like dual 4K OLED displays and advanced eye-and-hand-tracking sensors. The device is also believed to be relatively bulky and have short battery life; able to last about 2 hours per session. The company expects to sell about a million units in the first year.

The Financial Times report frames this as an operations versus design group divide:

Apple’s operations team wanted to ship a “version one” product, a ski goggle-like headset that will allow users to watch immersive 3D video, perform interactive workouts or chat with realistic avatars through a revamped FaceTime. But Apple’s famed industrial design team had cautioned patience, wanting to delay until a more lightweight version of AR glasses became technically feasible. Most in the tech industry expect that to take several more years.

Under Apple’s structure of ten years ago, Steve Jobs and the design team drove almost all decisions. Operations was in service of the design team’s wishes. That has shifted under Cook, with operations getting more power and visibility in the executive ranks. Significant design team leadership have also departed the company in the last five years, notably with Jony Ive leaving in 2019, and his replacement Evans Hankey also announcing she is leaving the company this year.

Apple has even decided not to name a replacement for Hankey’s role. Instead, the design team will report to COO Jeff Williams.

It looks like that Tim Cook may be helping cause some internal division at Apple by changing how things worked for years over time form before Steve Jobs left. Apparently he helped operations overrule the design team to push releasing Version 1 of the VR headset for this year. However, that may have created a fissure at the company internally.

To be fair, that does make more sense to put out a product and see what needs to be fixed and changed and put out iterations. The VR space has shown this several times already so it wouldn't make sense to wait until 2027 to put out a sunglasses sized product which ay even then, still might not be close to existing and we are still strapping something on our head for a high price.

Apple expects, at a ~$3000 price according to the article, to sell 1 million headsets in the fist year, which is up from an older rumor of them shipping a few hundred thousand in an older report thread. It seems they expect this version 1 product to sell quite well, and don't want to miss the opportunity so are pushing to pressure the teams to get it out in 2023.

The Financial Times which reported on this (which is paywalled) suggests that Tim Cook may be doing this for his legacy, as this wil be according to them the first major tech product release from him since he took over post-Jobs (I guess they forgot about the watch?) and that he wants this VR headset to be part of his legacy. Another article sourcing the FT report says that Apple has been working on this headset for 7 years. If that's true this Mixed Reality headset may be much more advanced than we are thinking.

This may explain why several VR makers are reacting, or in the case of a couple Chinese companies, rushing to beat Apple before they enter, they probably got wind of this news before we did awhile back.

 

[RJMacready73]

$3000, 2hr battery life.... Jesus who the fuck is this aimed at? And all this talk of a technology marvel.. meh, until I see it, it's all bullshit hyperbole, I remember all the secrecy and "incredible" "years ahead" bollocks that came out when the Leap was being developed and look how that turned out, whilst Apple have the deep pockets and best in class engineers there's only so much you can do with the tech available, I'm not expecting to be wow'd tbh

 

[demigod]

I’d like to know how many units of the $1,000 stand they expected to sell.

 

[Baki]

$3000, 2hr battery life.... Jesus who the fuck is this aimed at? And all this talk of a technology marvel.. meh, until I see it, it's all bullshit hyperbole, I remember all the secrecy and "incredible" "years ahead" bollocks that came out when the Leap was being developed and look how that turned out, whilst Apple have the deep pockets and best in class engineers there's only so much you can do with the tech available, I'm not expecting to be wow'd tbh

People who buy $2k LCD monitors from Apple

 

[metareferential]

Ultra high-end VR headsets for commercial use are more expensive than 3k.

I'm curious to see what comes out of this.

 

[Stooky]

$3000, 2hr battery life.... Jesus who the fuck is this aimed at? And all this talk of a technology marvel.. meh, until I see it, it's all bullshit hyperbole, I remember all the secrecy and "incredible" "years ahead" bollocks that came out when the Leap was being developed and look how that turned out, whilst Apple have the deep pockets and best in class engineers there's only so much you can do with the tech available, I'm not expecting to be wow'd tbh

It doesn’t matter, it will sell.

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

$3000, 2hr battery life.... Jesus who the fuck is this aimed at? And all this talk of a technology marvel.. meh, until I see it, it's all bullshit hyperbole, I remember all the secrecy and "incredible" "years ahead" bollocks that came out when the Leap was being developed and look how that turned out, whilst Apple have the deep pockets and best in class engineers there's only so much you can do with the tech available, I'm not expecting to be wow'd tbh

Magic Leap? Those were AR glasses.

 

[AJUMP23]

No way a 3000 dollar VR product is marketable in this economy.

 

[gothmog]

We get it Eddie, you don't like VR.

 

[Chiggs]

Makes me think Sony and Meta will have the market to themselves.

I wouldn't touch Apple's first gen product with a ten foot pole.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

Releasing a product for a CEO's legacy is insanely narcissistic and could backfire if it's rushed to market. Your legacy then has a stain on it.

Having an "operations" guy meddle in "design" is not a good idea.

 

[nowhat]

People who buy $2k LCD monitors from Apple

No, people who pay $1k for a fucking monitor stand.

(I wish I was kidding, but https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MWUG2LL/A/pro-stand)

 

[Rudius]

No need to wait for semi transparent screens, as a good passthrough goes a long way.

Ignoring the fact that it is black and white, the PSVR2 is almost "usable" in terms of resolution and stability, but not quite. I can imagine why the Quest Pro failed in that regard.

Double the resolution, add full stable color and it should be enough enough for a first generation work device.

 

[ckaneo]

A 3000 headset is dead on arrival.

I saw someone put in the theory they were pushinfg the 3000 number so that when it comes it cheaper it looks like a deal. Knowing apple they will probably charge 3000 and people will still buy it

 

[tusharngf]

$3000 ?

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

Releasing a product for a CEO's legacy is insanely narcissistic and could backfire if it's rushed to market. Your legacy then has a stain on it.

Having an "operations" guy meddle in "design" is not a good idea.

That depends on how far they are and what they will show at the June Reveal. The main issue with the design team is they wanted to wait for a lighter headset with decent battery, and more time for some other features.

But if it still has out this year, what most of the leaks say along with the motion pen and Kinect style you are the waggle. and all the high-end OLED and other stuff, then it may be enough to convince 1 million people or more to pay $3000, or get it on a subsidized plan for X amount a month.

it seems that the expect sales of 1 million at least in the first years is part of the reason why Timmy and Operations want to put this out, as well as establishing their place, aiding Tims legacy, and possibly having some control over the market.

Remember we have already seen companies who likely seen more than the public, reacting to Apple stuff or rushing out their OWN headsets to try and get ahead of them.

 

[ChoosableOne]

$3000 price according to the article, to sell 1 million headsets

Playing Beat Saber is getting more expensive every day.

Spoiler: Spoiler

"It's a joke, relax

 

[reinking]

This has the Pippin written all over it. Only more expensive.

 

[diffusionx]

Apple has always had a tension between design and engineering. Jobs mostly walked that line perfectly, outside of some mistakes like the hockey puck mouse. Cook handed over too much power to Ive/design after Jobs died, which led down the road of those horrible butterfly keyboards and the touch bar. They've reined it back and for the better. I don't see why the design team should get several more years to fiddle with this when they can put out something today and evolve it as they, and every other tech company, do with every other product.

 

[Raonak]

I get that it's not consumer focused, but what is even the target audience?

What business is gonna invest in 3K for increased productivity when there isn't even any productivity software available for VR/AR?

 

[NeoIkaruGAF]

Tim doesn't care if your pockets aren't deep enough. He knows he can milk a few thousands loaded idiots with proofs of concept while waiting for the tech to become affordable by the masses.

Expect shiny presentation videos with a lot of bloom and happy, smiling people abusing the words "powerful" and "magic".
And you will be tempted.

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

I get that it's not consumer focused,

Actually it is based on what's been coming out. The pro/dev version is what they are apparently putting out to pros/devs first, and the actual full headset release which sill be the consumer version, is the one that's going to release for everyone sometime this year. To be revealed in June at WWDC.

What business is gonna invest in 3K for increased productivity when there isn't even any productivity software available for VR/AR?

Businesses were paying $4000 or more for Holo Lens and Varjo stuff.

Playing Beat Saber is getting more expensive every day.

I was going to say it will probably be on it, But I wouldn't pass it by Zucker to be petty enough to release Beat Saber on all VR ecosystems except Apple specifically.

 

[LordOfChaos]

This is a place I think Tim is right, the designers wanted to wait until they could do true AR glasses you wear as much as regular glasses, which could be 2027, or it could be later as it's hard to anticipate the progress of technology.

Getting a VR headset out now and building out that developer ecosystem matters, and you can't just win the game by launching so late in 2027. Makes sense to start soon. Apple is still very lacking on the game dev front especially, yes yes I know they make a boatload of money off mobile gaming but that's not the high quality type of title you really want on VR, like who is their developer to make something like a Horizon Call of the Mountain? I hope they very much spend money on courting and growing developers.

 

[Oddvintagechap]

It’s apple, whats with acting like it won’t destroy everything out there

 

[night13x]

What the fuck.

If people actually buy this, they are part of the problem.

I'm going to walk up to a random bridge, brand an apple logo on it, and sell it to some idiot for 500 million.

 

[Raonak]

Businesses were paying $4000 or more for Holo Lens and Varjo stuff.

And look how that turned out. It was never actually used for anything besides being a concept demo of itself.

 

[ChoosableOne]

But I wouldn't pass it by Zucker to be petty enough to release Beat Saber on all VR ecosystems except Apple specifically.

It doesn't matter, it's not the killer app as many people think.

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

And look how that turned out. It was never actually used for anything besides being a concept demo of itself.

Medical is suing those a lot actually, and Military had many orders for Holo Lens.

But of course both were still not very widely adopted sure.

It doesn't matter, it's not the killer app as many people think.

Given the Apple store, I think Beat Saber would probably be more of a hit on an Apple VR platform than anywhere else honestly.

 

[Torrent of Pork]

Fools and their money.

 

[Cert.in.Death]

$3000, 2hr battery life.... Jesus who the fuck is this aimed at? And all this talk of a technology marvel.. meh, until I see it, it's all bullshit hyperbole, I remember all the secrecy and "incredible" "years ahead" bollocks that came out when the Leap was being developed and look how that turned out, whilst Apple have the deep pockets and best in class engineers there's only so much you can do with the tech available, I'm not expecting to be wow'd tbh

At the same demographic who pays $1000 for their monitor stands.

Can’t wait to see the $1500 hook you can hang the headset from.

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

At the same demographic who pays $1000 for their monitor stands.

Can’t wait to see the $1500 hook you can hang the headset from.

People are paying with all add-ons and cloud storage/insurance/case options up to $1800 for the best Iphone. Even if it's not the majority buying that it's still tens of millions worldwide. You guys are acting like $3000 is prohibitive. Especially since they are going to subsidize it was well, probably for $50-$75 a month if I were to guess.

 

[midnightAI]

People are paying with all add-ons and cloud storage/insurance/case options up to $1800 for the best Iphone. Even if it's not the majority buying that it's still tens of millions worldwide.

A mobile phone is used constantly throughout the day every day, its simple, its convenient and it has multiple functions, you generally get your moneys worth with the amount of use they get (although I would never pay $1800 for a phone). There is a huge difference between a mobile phone and a VR/AR headset and even then, mobile phones are still much cheaper than $3000.

You guys are acting like $3000 is prohibitive.

It is for the majority.

Especially since they are going to subsidize it was well, probably for $50-$75 a month if I were to guess.

If Apple were to subsidise it, at $50 a month that would be 60 months, would people really pay something like this off over a 5 year period? especially when, knowing Apple, a better version will be out a year later.

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

A mobile phone is used constantly throughout the day every day,

This generic excuse doesn't work for an $1800_ device that's not even the best selling unit that is being brought full or subsidized by people as a status item and the appeal of having all the goodies, not because it's a phone that's used everyday. Why not go for $1500 or less at that point? We can do this same thing with Apples other items that aren't phones. This excuse is repeated often and is completely lazy.

It is for the majority.

You're contradicting yourself because that applies to $1800_ smartphones too, or other Apple products that are high costs, still selling tens of millions that aren't phones.

If Apple were to subsidize it, at $50 a month that would be 60 months, would people really pay something like this off over a 5 year period?

You're forgetting they discount the item if you stay in an agreement the whole time, and only end up paying full of what's left over if you don't keep and pay off the item in the time frame agreed too.

Kind of like those expensive Ipas on the high-end that can be $0 for the device after two years.

A subsidized VR headset is now going to be $50 for 5 years, it will be $50-$75 for 2 maybe 3 but likely 2 years. You will then also have to buy insurance, which will probably cost more than the phone, probably some other tabs you need to pick up, which will probably go to Apple in part anyway along with whatever retailer you're at, and then you will have the device for 2-3 years likely spending money in it, and that's assuming the $3000 will be the price.

Apple will likely make that back and then some per person.

 

[Dr_Ifto]

In this economy, I do not see this selling like hotcakes. This is a niche market.

 

[V1LÆM]

People betting against Apple again?

I remember when people said iPod was going to suck. I remember when people laughed at the iPhone saying why do we want this? I remember people saying the iPad was just a large iPod Touch, I remember people saying they buy a watch to tell the time.

Yeah yeaaah I get it it's a tough economy and this thing is expensive as fuck but it's Apple. It's guaranteed to sell a lot and they have a good chance of it becoming a success. iPhones were expensive for what they were at launch and it's a reason why they mostly sold them on finance for the first year or so.

Personally I ain't buying a headset until we're a good few generations in and the product has matured. There is huge potential for headsets and Apple hopes that it will eventually replace iPhone so you can bet your ass they are going all in with it.

 

[diffusionx]

The $3000 thing is a feint, it always happens with Apple products, an insane price gets leaked, then it comes out for like $2000 and the Apple simp press falls over themselves praising Apple for pricing so reasonably and aggressively.

I don’t know if this will sell or not but it’s a fact that Apple popularized the smartphone, mp3 player, tablet, and smartwatch. They were not the first in any of those segments but they set the standard (there is a clear before/after Apple demarcation in designs for all of them) and for a huge number of people, tech doesn’t exist until Apple does it. For those people, a $400 Meta is irrelevant.

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

I remember when people laughed at the iPhone saying why do we want this?

To be fair that was a loud small minority of people trying to brainwash, including Jim Cramer types of meatheads. Most were excited they could use a smartphone without having to press down on under screen buttons or needing to use a stylus which many smartphones were using at the time, especially the Windows ones or GPS/PDA hybrids. (Though the screen being small was legit complaint though)

Apple popularized the smartphone, mp3 player,

Both of these were already popular, Apple just helped grow them to mass market size in global shipments.

You're before and after comment makes sense for what you listed except MP3's, because Apple was originally using the same inconvenient proprietary software nonsense everyone else was using, but the everyone else moved to just shifting files to the connected device in seconds and the files would be playable without a software program while APPLE WAS STILL using nonsense proprietary software and while I haven't used an Iphone in many years, I believe it's still true NOW they are still using proprietary software (Itunes) for transferring instead of just dragging an MP4 into the device and it's automatically there to play. (Although recent few years apparently there's a hidden ode you can access to do that now but it''s not obvious to average joe)

But otherwise yes.

 

[midnightAI]

This generic excuse doesn't work for an $1800_ device that's not even the best selling unit that is being brought full or subsidized by people as a status item and the appeal of having all the goodies, not because it's a phone that's used everyday. Why not go for $1500 or less at that point? We can do this same thing with Apples other items that aren't phones. This excuse is repeated often and is completely lazy.

You were the one talking about mobile phones and I told you why people are willing to pay a high price for them, because they use them... a lot. (and 'usually' the higher the price the better the phone, but sometimes its purely as a fashion/poser statement such as folding phones (in my opinion))

You're contradicting yourself because that applies to $1800_ smartphones too, or other Apple products that are high costs, still selling tens of millions that aren't phones.

Not really, $3000 for something that wont get nearly the amount of use as a mobile phone (or other Apple products such as Laptops and iPads and even Apple Watches) is still much more than $1800 (also, which iPhone costs $1800? that seems like a lot even for the top end pro model) for a mobile phone that will get constant use. Most people wont see the value in it (unless it is something truly revolutionary which I doubt).

You are pinning this all on the fact that it's Apple so people will buy it, and I don't believe that will be true for the majority, heck, I dont think it will be true for most Apple die-hards at that price.

We are talking niche (VR/AR headset), within a niche (Apple fans), within a niche (willing to pay $3000)

You're forgetting they discount the item if you stay in an agreement the whole time, and only end up paying full of what's left over if you don't keep and pay off the item in the time frame agreed too.

Kind of like those expensive Ipas on the high-end that can be $0 for the device after two years.

A subsidized VR headset is now going to be $50 for 5 years, it will be $50-$75 for 2 maybe 3 but likely 2 years. You will then also have to buy insurance, which will probably cost more than the phone, probably some other tabs you need to pick up, which will probably go to Apple in part anyway along with whatever retailer you're at, and then you will have the device for 2-3 years likely spending money in it, and that's assuming the $3000 will be the price.

Apple will likely make that back and then some per person.

Admittedly I have never bought anything through Apple, but in the UK when you purchase a mobile phone (or tablet, or laptop) through a mobile phone operator such as EE, O2, Virgin in the UK you pay the same monthly price for the duration of the contract. You pay the full contract price no matter whether that item is reduced for sale later (this is why I prefer to purchase 6 month or more old phones). You can buy yourself out of the contract but that just means paying the whole price of the contact at time of purchase but maybe Apple (or other countries) works differently.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see as always.

 

[diffusionx]

Both of these were already popular, Apple just helped grow them to mass market size in global shipments.

You're before and after comment makes sense for what you listed except MP3's, because Apple was originally using the same inconvenient proprietary software nonsense everyone else was using, but the everyone else moved to just shifting files to the connected device in seconds and the files would be playable without a software program while APPLE WAS STILL using nonsense proprietary software and while I haven't used an Iphone in many years, I believe it's still true NOW they are still using proprietary software (Itunes) for transferring instead of just dragging an MP4 into the device and it's automatically there to play. (Although recent few years apparently there's a hidden ode you can access to do that now but it''s not obvious to average joe)

But otherwise yes.

Complaining about lack of drag and drop on iPods in 2023? Time to move on bro. You can quibble with the facts here and there, I guess the definition of "popular", but it's just a fact that the mp3 market blew up as soon as Apple made iPod support official, and Apple was the dominant player in the market by far. I know that, I dunno, Slashdot posters, loved to argue cause and effect, but the facts are what they are. Also that is when you saw devices standardize into Apple's design. Same exact thing with smartphones, sure WinCE shit came out and had some level of success and Blackberry was relatively popular but most people were on flip phones until 2008 or so, and you can just easily see how Apple's devices influenced the market, just compare Android's pre-iPhone mockups to their post-iPhone design. I'm not even an Apple shill, it's just impossible to deny Apple's incredible influence over the tech sector and how they lead, especially on design. It's not even just what I listed, the "ultrabook" segment of laptops came out largely as a response to Apple, my work laptop is thin, tapered, and metal, basically a Macbook Air design.

I suspect that whatever Apple ends up doing with VR will be copied by Meta and other companies in the next few years.

 

[DrFigs]

Why are companies trying to make vr happen?

 

[DrFigs]

Medical is suing those a lot actually, and Military had many orders for Holo Lens.

Weren't those cancelled, leading MS to basically scrap their AR plans? It just seems like no one actually wants this technology

 

[Spyxos]

Haha 3k I can't even afford the 600 psvr2 headset right now.

 

[yurinka]

Weren't those cancelled, leading MS to basically scrap their AR plans? It just seems like no one actually wants this technology

Yes, the US military spent a lot of money on Hololens, tested them and rejected to use them because weren't practical for the battlefield.

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

Not really, $3000 for something that wont get nearly the amount of use as a mobile phone (or other Apple products such as Laptops and iPads and even Apple Watches)

The headset is going to have an OS that integrates the same stuff across those same devices. You're saying it's not going to have the same amount of use, but Apple is clearly attempting to make it so you can use their headset for several of the same things you can do on other items. If it's executed right than it's just going to be a VROS with IOS compatibility and they already announced continuity for it, as well as hand-off.

(Also watches are generally chained to the Iphone which is a separate product.)

Weren't those cancelled, leading MS to basically scrap their AR plans? It just seems like no one actually wants this technology

Not the original orders. I don't know about the most recent one but Microsoft did come out and say after the layoffs they were not stopping industrial VR, so I don't think they are killing Holo Lens 3. Although they may have to broaden their industry targets if they do release that.

Admittedly I have never bought anything through Apple, but in the UK when you purchase a mobile phone (or tablet, or laptop) through a mobile phone operator such as EE, O2, Virgin in the UK you pay the same monthly price for the duration of the contract. You pay the full contract price no matter whether that item is reduced for sale later (this is why I prefer to purchase 6 month or more old phones). You can buy yourself out of the contract but that just means paying the whole price of the contact at time of purchase but maybe Apple (or other countries) works differently.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see as always.

I wouldn't be surprised if this headset will be primarily marketed tot he US, Japan, and possibly china, with everything else secondary.

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

Complaining about lack of drag and drop on iPods in 2023?

It's almost like you removed context and forgot I was responding to you talking about big issues at the time Apple devices were originally released. I just pointed out it's still an issue to emphasis you're statement that for all the devices you listed there was a "before and after" when that wasn't the case for MP4, and arguably another one.

but most people were on flip phones until 2008 or so

Not accurate, but not sure why you are bringing this up. All I said was smartphones were popular, and then said that it brough to the much bigger global mainstream, which is basically what you were arguing except maybe treating before as more niche than it was. Otherwise, nothing you said was incorrect about Apple aiding in much farther adoption.

I suspect that whatever Apple ends up doing with VR will be copied by Meta and other companies in the next few years.

You're a bit late on this as people are a few VR makers are already moving to motion controls based on the Apple leaks. mova VReven only ships with on controller so they can do the hybrid approach. Meta has moved in that direction more recently as well, a couple headsets are trying to rush to beat Apple to the market like Iqiyi.

They know that the industry is hyping that headset and that there's a strong chance even if it's poorly executed it will sell well and change the direction in the market before people jump from it. Most likely though it's going to be somewhat competently executed at worse.

Though there is still Samsung and TCL to consider. No one seems to be bothered by either of them, or the other upcoming headsets by notable companies.

 

[reksveks]

The 1 million target feels ambitious as hell but ehh, wouldn't surprise me if they get close.

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

The 1 million target feels ambitious as hell but ehh, wouldn't surprise me if they get close.

I think the preorder numbers will give us a good clue as to what direction sales will go in. As well as whatever hype is there once it's shown off in June. It could be that it sells more than that if they can create enough consumer hype over it (and have payment options).

1 million in a year is something not many companies have done in VR over the last 10 years or so. Only 4 companies managed to do it. One was cardboard.

 

[midnightAI]

The headset is going to have an OS that integrates the same stuff across those same devices. You're saying it's not going to have the same amount of use, but Apple is clearly attempting to make it so you can use their headset for several of the same things you can do on other items. If it's executed right than it's just going to be a VROS with IOS compatibility and they already announced continuity for it, as well as hand-off.

Not with a 2 hour battery life they aint. And wearing something on your head for a long time (if same use as mobiles that is) will become annoying (possibly even painful).

 

[ZoukGalaxy]

We get it Eddie, you don't like VR.

Amen.

That's boring at this point.

 

[kvltus lvlzvs]

I hope vr reks apple just as hard as it rekt the zuck