Asymco

Asymmetric Intelligence

What Are the Mobility Design Surfaces?

Research · 1 comment

by

What Are the Mobility Design Surfaces?

An Office Hours question asked by Darcy B., May 1, 2026

Q: Will Apple do more in transportation than CarPlay Ultra? Not just cars — transportation in general.

Well, there's a lot of modes out there, and I apologize I didn't get into all of them. I had assumed falsely — I think way outside of cars myself, obviously, but it's very rare that others do. My bad that I kind of assumed that. But the answer doesn't change. I don't think Apple will do much in mobility. The reason being — first of all, cars are a lousy business. They are, were, and will be a lousy business forever. Maybe to won't even exist very long. I just find it shocking, that it continues to exist today.

But the problem is that the other modes are less of a surface for Apple to add value to. In other words, there isn't a lot of design surface on which you can put your design and your ideas. And the reason for the surface problem is that, first, there's modes that are public and shared — buses and public transport, even airplanes. You could imagine, for example, having the back of the seat in front of you be an iPad. Why is it this screen on the plane one you can never comprehend? But you try to figure that [business] out, and you realize it's a dead end. You just can't serve that market as Apple. So there's that design surface in airplanes — you've got the seat back.

Then you look at other modes, and you look at micromobility. The problem with micromobility is the surface is below your sight line when you're using it. You're looking above typically where the vehicle is. I consider it a heads-up experience, not a heads-down experience. Cars are heads down and becoming more so. They're cocooning the user in a bubble for an hour a day. That's what can be tolerated, typically. Not a great idea. Why? Because an hour is not a significant amount of time that will separate that experience outside of the phone.

Now, if you're looking at micro, the problem there is that it's a heads-up experience. And unless it's going to be through a wearable — that was my dream for the Vision Pro two, three years ago, was that it would be usable as — even integrated into a helmet. And then you have a visor coming, and then you have a beautiful design surface. In fact, the design surface is the entire world. Because as you see it, whatever you're looking at can be considered a surface upon which you can add a new reality [and new services].

And that is a dream and vision, that if it were to happen, not only would Apple be a very, very interesting player to create a virtual world on top of existing worlds — outdoor experiences. That's a great, great opportunity. Spatial computing outside of the home. Just put that down as the summary — spatial experiences outside the interior spaces. When that happens, it'll be very exciting. It'll be very much Apple's contribution to repaint the world.

But it takes time, and this is where we're stuck. We're stuck in this, like, not good enough, not small enough, not light enough, not powerful enough — all those things. And if they get solved, we'll move into that world.

And that goes back to a lot of debates about whether the Vision Pro is or just not going to continue. I definitely think it's going to continue. Even the latest comments from John and Joz, together, saying — the phrase they used was, "we pulled this from the future into the present." So they are effectively stating that it's too early. It's a future that hasn't come yet. But they're proud of what they achieved, and it is amazing what they've demonstrated is possible.

It's not the old Apple, though. Old Steve Apple was: you don't release until it's not just market ready, but mass market ready. And that was a risk. Maybe this was another thing that Tim did that was not what John would do. But to work on this problem is exactly what John would do, because solving spatial computing is, like, more important in my mind, because it is the human-computer interface. Which is essentially the physical layer of the entire world. That reconstruction of the physical world and broadcasting it into your retina is the future. It's not audio. It's not some background thing. It has to go through the eyes. And if it goes through the eyes, it's where Apple wants to be.

So I do believe there's going to be a lot of research to be done there. And maybe it'll still take a couple years once the AI thing runs its course.

This was one of the questions asked by the participants in Asymco's May 2026 Office Hours live Q&A sessions, open to Asymco One subscribers.


Subscribe to Asymco One for more in-depth analysis and commentary like this.

Asymco One gives you full access to our research, analysis, and commentary: Nota Bene, Research, the weekly Bulletin, the Asymetric podcast, and monthly Office Hours. Subscribe at asymco.com/one.

Posted by:


1 comment

  1. Sacto Joe ·

    The high-level integration of spatial computing you described occurred to me as well shortly after the VP experience became possible in Apple Storefronts. I recall someone driving in some big city with their Vision Pros on.

    When perfected, it will lead to safer driving, especially if integrated with truly safe AI.

    Right now, I have a Volvo with very limited self-driving capability. It definitely requires being kept manually “on the rails”, but when so used, and with proper awareness of its limitations, can be alert to issues very quickly.

    There is the possibility, for example, of “mapping” your surroundings, for assisting in lane-change merges, etcetera, which require more information than our stereo-forward vision can normally acquire in sufficient detail, even when aided by mirrors and cameras. And for longer-range overviews, a thin “mast” could loft a camera high enough to map a good-sized area in all directions, with projected depth as well as length and breadth.

    A “bicycle for the mind” indeed!

Leave a comment

Getting the form ready…