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

231–240 of 465 posts

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

#231

Post by mparramon »

zamalek wrote: post #96
dsr_ wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A field of view about 180 degrees wide, 135 degrees high, 1 arc minute in maximum pixel size, and updated 100 times per second… twice, to account for full stereography, and using 48 bits of color. 180 * 135 * 60 * 60 * 100 * 48 = 419904000000, 420 billion bits per second, without compression.

Keep in mind that the 90FPS benchmark is merely required to achieve "presence," which is the phenomenon of the brain accepting the virtual reality as reality. Higher framerates are always beneficial (as this also reduces latency). > 420Gbps I assume foveated compression (a pet idea of mine that I have no doubt someone else also has) is probably the only way to realistically deliver the stream to the HMD (assuming tha…

When you say "foveated compression" do you mean >Apple will liberally use an already-known VR technique that involves using eye-tracking to render objects in the user's periphery at a lower fidelity than what the user is focusing on. ?

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

#232

Post by thefreeman »

kortex wrote: post #202
behringer wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no way a Mac could render at that resolution when we have 600 dollar 2k headsets severely stressing top of the line gpus.

The article mentions rendering only the fovea in high resolution. The key advantage is it does not need to render all 33Mpx equally well.

and as mentioned in the article it’s a common technique that all vr headsets are already doing

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

#233

Post by JKCalhoun »

jayd16 wrote: post #75
ghaff wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds utterly unappealing. If I'm in a coffeeshop I have zero reason to want to cut off from the outside world. Otherwise I wouldn't be in a coffeeshop. Most of the reason I'd work in a coffeeshop is for an ambient social vibe. And for many things I do a 13" laptop screen is fine. (And I probably wouldn't feel comfortable being utterly cut off from the environment in an urban space.)

You should look into how the Hololens is able to display floating windows. You're not cut off any more than the physically equivalent monitor would obscure. A full face headset would probably give off a socially isolating presence, at least today, though.

Hmmm... so even at 8K per lens, the floating display(s) is(are) how much of that 8K?

So we're back to VGA resolution on your "virtual display".

Yeah, no thanks.

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

#234

Post by JKCalhoun »

phist_mcgee wrote: post #191
ketamine__ wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So moving your head a lot? You would look like a giant weirdo, right?

People 50 years ago would have said that about people who aimlessly slide their thumb up and down a glass screen on a device the size of a deck of cards.

(I still say that)

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

#235

Post by zepto »

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.

Right - I don’t think Apple is likely to release a ‘developers’ system.

I think it would be aimed at actual designers and engineers etc.

Presumably they would partner with some key developers like Autodesk to have some apps ready at launch time.

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

#236

Post by zepto »

mdgrech23 wrote: post #128
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…

A mobile device strikes me as different here - it's more consumer centric where VR right now at least is more hobbist/professional centric. I think they could away w/ the higher price. I'll add when the iPhone came out it was way way more than it's competition. It was effectively the first $100/month w/ 2 year contract phone bill as compared to other devices where $35/month was common.

Is there any indication that this will be a mobile device?

I haven’t seen any.

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

#237

Post by shock-value »

hwjwill wrote: post #226
tenaciousDaniel wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, no idea why this isn’t already happening

The resolution on today's consumer headsets still isn't there to provide good experience (maybe https://varjo.com/ can work but it's not for consumers). Oculus Quest also last only 2-3 hours after fully charged. Main reason at least for me is it gets quite uncomfortable after wearing it for long (~30 min) due to weight and sweat

IMO the resolution is there so long as you have one of the latest headsets and are viewing a VR180 8K feed (my reference is the Quest 2). Live casting of an 8K feed probably is the limiting factor here (not the headset hardware).

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

#238

Post by ses1984 »

lookdangerous wrote: post #149
darkstarsys wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Not to mention position tracking latency, frame latency, jittery/slow controls, mismatched depth cues (parallax vs. lens focus), and on and on...

I know what parallax is, but what is lens focus? Is that an area seeking improvement in AR research?

Close one eye and focus on something really close with the open eye. Notice that things that are far away are blurry. Now still with one eye open, focus on something far away, and notice that things nearby are blurry. VR doesn't replicate this.

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

#239

Post by mhh__ »

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.

> There are more games on the iOS app store than exist on steam.

What's the figure when you compute the total engineering-hours into the games, though?

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

#240

Post by _coveredInBees »

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,…

Ehh. I've owned a VR headset for a long time now, and I think many people underestimate how fundamentally isolating being in VR is. Humans are social creatures and unless you live by yourself and want to escape into VR, you're a lot more likely to enjoy watching the big game with friends and family so you can shoot the shit, and share the experience.

Don't get me wrong... VR is and can be a lot of fun, but I just don't see it being this next big thing that people seem to hope it will be. On the other hand, I think when someone solves AR, I suspect that may very well produce a seismic change across society with widespread adoption.

Post reply on HN