Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New report on Apple’s VR headset: 8K in each eye, potential $3k price tag

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 465 posts

Re: New report on Apple’s VR headset: 8K in each eye, potential $3k price tag

#211

Post by buzzerbetrayed »

texasbigdata wrote: post #157
zepto wrote: post #95

Bear in mind that the iPad was rumored to cost >$1000 but then launched at $499. On the other hand it might sense to launch this as a pro-workstation for the usual kinds of task: architects, designers and engineers being able to visualize and interact with models directly in space. If they can make that affordable and usable for pro designers at every level, (which $3500 clearly would be), they will have a hit. A con…

Microsoft’s hololens2 is $3.5k available now for developers.

Isn't hololens2 significantly lower resolution? You can't really have a virtual workspace unless the resolution is incredibly high.

Re: New report on Apple’s VR headset: 8K in each eye, potential $3k price tag

#212

Post by npunt »

dsr_ wrote: post #140
thebean11 wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the resolution in terms of a screen? Like height by width in pixels? Sorry if that's obvious from your comment, coming at this with just basic consumer knowledge about displays.

The eye doesn't care about pixels, the eye cares about the smallest detail that it can distinguish. If you specify a particular distance you can figure out how small the pixels have to be at that range so that you can't see them. It's around one half of an arc-minute, which is to say, 1/120th of a degree. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_acuity is a really useful overview. Now, we know that human eyes can only co…

Probably can cut that down further due to :

* People's vision getting worse with age

* Each OLED pixel consists of 4 subpixels, so may only need to reach that acuity at sub pixel resolution

* Acuity drops and eyestrain increases at the edges of vision so likely only need maybe 75% of our range U/D L/R at the highest resolution, and the outer edges can have much lower resolution

Other hacks for foveated rendering include rendering peripheral vision at lower resolution and monochromatic, and not rendering in the blind spot, since our brains will just fill in those areas. May not be worth the complexity, but there's a lot of hacks that could take advantage of our visual system's quirks. I imagine ray tracing makes these hacks even easier to implement.

Re: New report on Apple’s VR headset: 8K in each eye, potential $3k price tag

#213

Post by djitz »

tenaciousDaniel wrote: post #210
Balgair wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having done a fair bit of AR/VR work in medical and industrial settings, I've always thought the 'killer app' of VR is not in gaming. It's this very weekend: The Super Bowl. Well, not the Super Bowl precisely, but in experiences like sports or other time/space limited events. Sitting ring-side for the next big match. Or at the 50-yard line at the Super Bowl. Or at the finish line of the 100-m dash. All for, I dunno,…

Yes, no idea why this isn’t already happening

It is. The NBA is partnered with Oculus and games can be viewed live in 360 video

Re: New report on Apple’s VR headset: 8K in each eye, potential $3k price tag

#214

Post by fastball »

ghaff wrote: post #74
trixie_ wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The future of AR is VR. With 8K screens you just redraw reality.

AR seems far more interesting long-term. Real-time information about what you're looking at. VR seems much more entertainment, architecture,etc. focused--games, exploration, etc. Which isn't small but not necessarily transformational.

The idea is you have cameras on the outside and just composite digital objects on top of the video feed.

Partially transparent solutions have issues like never being able to make your digital object completely opaque. Probably our materials science will get there one day, but what's the point when HD cameras + screens let you do the same sooner rather than later.

Re: New report on Apple’s VR headset: 8K in each eye, potential $3k price tag

#215

Post by lupinglade »

TheDong wrote: post #194
yaomtc wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A consumer gaming device can come later. They had a partnership with Valve back in 2017 for Vive support on MacOS... Just three years later it was canceled. (There were actually more VR games running on Linux at that point than on MacOS, thanks to Proton.) I'm not expecting Apple to try to enter the VR gaming space again anytime soon.

There are more games on the iOS app store than exist on steam. I don't think apple needs valve or steam's support to make their own VR gaming platform just as they didn't need their support to make iOS a larger app-store for games than steam is.

I don’t think one can really compare the games on iOS to those on Steam.

Re: New report on Apple’s VR headset: 8K in each eye, potential $3k price tag

#216

Post by enos_feedler »

Balgair wrote: post #204
zepto wrote: post #95

Bear in mind that the iPad was rumored to cost >$1000 but then launched at $499. On the other hand it might sense to launch this as a pro-workstation for the usual kinds of task: architects, designers and engineers being able to visualize and interact with models directly in space. If they can make that affordable and usable for pro designers at every level, (which $3500 clearly would be), they will have a hit. A con…

Having done a fair bit of AR/VR work in medical and industrial settings, I've always thought the 'killer app' of VR is not in gaming. It's this very weekend: The Super Bowl. Well, not the Super Bowl precisely, but in experiences like sports or other time/space limited events. Sitting ring-side for the next big match. Or at the 50-yard line at the Super Bowl. Or at the finish line of the 100-m dash. All for, I dunno,…

100% this. Why not do full audio/video capture of the best seat in the house for every sporting event. I am very bearish on VR in general, but as a sports fan this is something I would use about 480 hours per season. Apple actually acquired NextVR that was doing this sort of thing:

https://9to5mac.com/2020/05/14/apple-nextr-ar-headset/

Re: New report on Apple’s VR headset: 8K in each eye, potential $3k price tag

#217

Post by scrollaway »

Sebguer wrote: post #208
scrollaway wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the source on this? I see people keep saying that but from what I've seen, the #1 use of VR is as a gaming console, with a focus on games that embrace the fitness aspect of VR. The Quest 2 has an insane mainstream potential, too, and most people won't bother rooting it. Speaking of, I'm going back to beat saber. You might have been misled by its name if you think that's a porn app. :) Email's in my profile if…

In the context of the rest of this comment, and the one you're referring to, I wonder how many people assume 'Beat Saber' is a euphemism. ( https://beatsaber.com/ )

Yep! And I can only sing praises about this game. It's some of the most fun I've ever had playing a video game. IMO it's the killer app of VR.

Re: New report on Apple’s VR headset: 8K in each eye, potential $3k price tag

#218

Post by abiogenesis »

gambiting wrote: post #58
abiogenesis wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds like an oxymoron.

Why? You can be an apple fan and just not in the right bracket to afford the latest devices. I know plenty of people who love apple but they are still on iPhone 7 and 2015 macbook since they cannot afford anything newer. That's absolutely fine. It's like I love Omega watches but I can't afford a brand new one - so I have a vintage one instead since that was what I could afford.

My point still stands. I wouldn't call someone who buys a vintage Omega instead of a Casio "cheap ass".

Re: New report on Apple’s VR headset: 8K in each eye, potential $3k price tag

#219

Post by dzhiurgis »

hppb wrote: post #9

I could see this as a virtual office, as some of the comments speculate. If I had a set of AR glasses that projected what appeared to be an 8K monitor on top of my dining room table, and integrated with my MacBook Pro for input / output, and that had batteries to last a workday, I’d pay $2K/$3K. Even more if it worked well at brightness levels I’d have in my backyard. Never mind gaming, mobile high-quality virtual of…

If it’s contact lenses you could have terminal with your eyes closed!

Re: New report on Apple’s VR headset: 8K in each eye, potential $3k price tag

#220

Post by judge2020 »

modeless wrote: post #189
pronlover723 wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WebXR will not give you the same experience as a native app. For VR you're always pushing the limits of tech. VR in Safari will never be that.

Well you're going to have to live with it because Apple will never allow porn apps on the App Store. They will certainly not allow alternative app distribution either. Safari is the only loophole you get on iOS, unless and until an antitrust court forces Apple to change.

For reference, this is a Steve Jobs policy (which is undoubtedly going to stay):

> https://youtu.be/tJeEuxn9mug?t=1131

Post reply on HN