Because they were the first big usable AR platform, it serves as a reference point for all AR to compete against.

The biggest consumer feedback was that the limited FOV results in use cases limited to professional use rather than leisure. This article is about how Apple AR is going from glasses to headsets, for multiple reasons including a more immersive experience.

Headsets have mostly gotten to a place where pixel density is no longer an issue, especially with today’s pancake lenses. Tracking has also become a trivial issue as standalone headsets can track themselves with a simple set of cameras.

This leaves immersion to be determined by the weight/comfort and FOV. Going from glasses to a headset is going to require more weight. This sacrifice is likely to accommodate for better FOV, as the biggest current challenge with glasses is finding a place to mount a screen while remaining balanced.

There’s also battery life,but the headset is planned to have an external battery, the same type of banks I use to power my dinosaur Vive Pro+Wireless. The same way I would have solved the issue for glasses.

Apple is being tight lipped, so I’m speculating about as much as the article. But saying HoloLense isn’t a reference one should consider when comparing AR is like saying the Ford Pinto wasn’t a factor in the design of the Fiat 126, the Honda Civic, or the Renault 5. Even the failures have lessons to learn

As literally the only other existing version of the tech to reference, how can you not mention Hollow lens when discussing this technology?

Microsoft tried it one way and virtually failed, apple saw that and is course correcting. It's absolutely connected.