Apples watch is a mainstream consumer electronics hit. The closest other thing close to comparable I can think of is the fitbits - at least their simple ones. Nobody in AR (or face wearables) is playing in that space at all.
I think "decade lead" is unsupportable. But the article is right that all of their competitors or potential competitors are well behind in some combination of capability in hardware, software, manufacturing, ecosystem. Most of them in all categories.
I'm not sure what argument you are trying to make. That in some putative future where AR headsets become a meaningful product category for wearable Apple might not be in a strong position?
I suppose for why you would have to take that context from the article; the argument that was in the "out there" parts of AR (e.g. glasses/goggles) nobody has shipped anything with real impact, but in the less flashy areas (e.g. assistive touch) Apple is years ahead. Plus a bit about M&A shifting apples capability in these areas. All sounds plausible. What this translates to in some potential future where more ambitious AR projects find a fit with consumers, who knows. But it terms of systems that ship today, article seems pretty accurate, and not at all deserving of your "what a joke".
Apples watch is a mainstream consumer electronics hit. The closest other thing close to comparable I can think of is the fitbits - at least their simple ones. Nobody in AR (or face wearables) is playing in that space at all.
I think "decade lead" is unsupportable. But the article is right that all of their competitors or potential competitors are well behind in some combination of capability in hardware, software, manufacturing, ecosystem. Most of them in all categories.