It was in the movies they liked when they were kids. Or at least in the movies they think users want to see brought to reality.

As in an answer to the question “what’s cool and futuristic”. Solving medieval barbarism and wars is futuristic, but turns out to not be achievable. Same with floating/underwater oceanic cities, blooming deserts, Mars colonies and 20 minutes on train from Moscow to New Delhi. At the same time the audience has been promised by advertising over years that future will be delivered to them. So - AR. For Apple this is the most important part, I think.

Also to augment something you have to analyze it, and if you have to analyze it, you are permitted to scan and analyze it. That’s a general point of attraction, I think. They are just extrapolating what led them to current success.

Also in some sense popular things were toys or promises of future for businesses and individuals alike, in the last 10-15 years. The audience is getting tired of toys and promises, while these companies don’t know how to make something else.

So let Tim Apple care about anything from AR in front of him to apples in his augmented rear, he surely knows what he wants. As another commenter says, a source of instructions and hints for a human walking drone is one, with visualization. I’m not sure that’s good, because if you can get that information for the machine, having a human there seems unnecessary. And if that information is not reliable enough, then it may not improve human’s productivity and error rate.

And the most important part is that humans learn by things being hard to do, it’s like working out in an exoskeleton, what’s the purpose? And if training and work are separated here, then it seems more effort is spent in total. Not sure.