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

Apple’s new headset meets reality

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 527 posts

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#471

Post by wildrhythms »

XorNot wrote: post #279
bluescrn wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think there is a consumer market for head mounted AR anymore - if there ever really was I suspect there's a market there, but only if the device can be made to look like a pair of fashionable sunglasses, and was driven by the phone in your pocket, adding a customizable HUD to the real world, doing all sorts of things, from translating foreign-language text to overlaying directions or providing real-time inf…

Google Translate in Lens mode is pretty much the killer app for this type of device. Having the in-place translation working feels like damn magic, and if you could do that while in a foreign country then it would be amazing.

I'm surprised more people don't use the Lens feature, it's one of the main reasons I still use Android. I use it to find where to buy clothes and shoes I see in photos, I can just hold my phone up to it and it returns shockingly similar looking products (usually the exact item).

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#472

Post by cubefox »

Ultimatt wrote: post #457
criddell wrote: post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> VR is not there and maybe never will be I think that’s probably the ultimate truth at least as long as it requires glasses or goggles. VR won’t be there , but VR may be here . Tens of millions of units are sold each year. That might be the right size of the market. It’s been around for 30 years now. In some ways it’s a mature market.

That reasoning feels a bit like saying only tens of millions of smart phones will sell because rotary dial telephones have been around since the 1890s. I think its very fair to say the Quest and PSVR and all their friends are a big leap from Nintendo's Virtual Boy or something. Enough we should consider it a different market for sure. The real issue is software still to this day utterly sucks. There is zero incentive…

(consider adding more paragraphs next time, otherwise it's hard to read)

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#473

Post by SXX »

dwaite wrote: post #373
SXX wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Problem is: Apple mostly ruined their relationship with Epic, Meta and even Valve. Whatever excellent VR tech they come up with will be mostly ignored by the game industry. Good part of iPhone / iPad success was due to the excellent apps ecosystem. Who gonna make VR experiences for Apple new VR ecosystem? F2P game companies? I guess they won't be interested either because Apple will try to bite off a lot of profits f…

There was never a big chance that Valve would port Alyx, or Meta would allow Beat Saber to be on another platform. It would take an epically _good_ relationship to convince hardware platforms to port their platform exclusive titles over - just count all the Mario and Zelda games that have shipped for Xbox and Playstation.

Alyx works well on Meta Quest 2 and other non-Valve headsets.

Beat Saber is available on Steam and any standartized VR headset.

Even if not officially Nintendo games work on PC / SteamDeck and even Xbox via emulation. But that will never ever happen on Apple platform because it's gonna be proprietary, incompatible with anything and locked.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#474

Post by danpalmer »

cubefox wrote: post #459
danpalmer wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> From the information available so far, the Apple headset will be fairly close to Meta's Oculus Quest in terms of hardware That's not really accurate. The rumours suggest optics at least as good as the Meta Quest Pro ($1k), possibly with a substantial move forward from there. They suggest resolution of 3k per eye, significantly above the Meta Quest Pro, and using Micro LED for a big improvement on the screen door ef…

You are misunderstanding what I said. Of course the Apple headset would have much higher quality components. But it is similar to the Oculus Quest in that it is a standalone device which uses external cameras to track the environment. It's easy to use. My point was that it seems consumers don't care about expensive high performance VR headsets. They want something that is both easy to use and inexpensive: The unusual…

Apologies, that does all make sense!

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#475

Post by cubefox »

chaostheory wrote: post #324
Turskarama wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The far bigger problem for VR is simply crispness of text and objects at a distance. High poly counts are relatively unimportant, there's a new Zelda game out with graphics that wouldn't have been amazing ten years ago doing pretty well that would probably run just fine on a quest.

You need a PPD of about 35 - 40 for reading comfortably. 50 is retina quality. Even with the Meta Quest Pro, it only gets to about 24. The same goes for the HP reverb g2. For $1999, the Varjo Aero PCVR headset comes at 35 PPD, but at that price it doesn’t include the $3000 -$4000 PC to run it or the $600 base stations and controllers. It’s also wired to the PC At $3000, i am guessing that the Apple headset will be 35…

The original Game Boy did sell quite well despite low resolution and ghosting. There were other devices with better screens and higher price. People chose the lower price and the worse screen. Is this also plausible for VR? The success of the Quest suggests: yes.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#476

Post by cubefox »

crooked-v wrote: post #385
danpalmer wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is effectively a reasonable graphics card per eye . Sure it's no Nvidia 4090, but the M2 is running recent games with very good graphics on Macs. Combine that with foveated rendering, possibly implemented deep in Metal, and being careful about graphically intensive applications, and this could be high FPS on 3K resolution, and be a significant step up in immersion.

The current leaks and analyst claims are saying an 8K screen per eye [1], with some kind of advanced eye tracking and foveated rendering to keep the GPU processing requirements under control. PSVR2 has already shown that at least the foveated rendering part is totally practical even at a much lower price point. [1]: https://www.techradar.com/news/apple-vr-headset

Foveated rendering doesn't seem to have a big impact, as it is only capable of momentarily reducing the resolution of half of the screen. It's very coarse.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#477

Post by KaiserPro »

prng2021 wrote: post #343
danpalmer wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> From the information available so far, the Apple headset will be fairly close to Meta's Oculus Quest in terms of hardware That's not really accurate. The rumours suggest optics at least as good as the Meta Quest Pro ($1k), possibly with a substantial move forward from there. They suggest resolution of 3k per eye, significantly above the Meta Quest Pro, and using Micro LED for a big improvement on the screen door ef…

You think 2x M2 chips could play a AAA game at 6k res (3k per eye) and 90+ fps?

I mean they can, but at what power? You can't have 2x m2s next to your face each kicking out 6o degree heat at 20 watts.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#478

Post by KaiserPro »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #421
neural_thing wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm willing to spend $3,000 on a device that I would want to use every day. The reason I don't spend that much on existing VR tech is that I don't want to use it.

I use my quest every day and if there is a better experience to be had for $3k, I would pay it. I was put off by the quest pro, it wasn’t really better (for my use case) and $1k?

The screens are much much better, as is the form factor.

The rest isn't much better than a quest 2.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#479

Post by cubefox »

Dalewyn wrote: post #230
cubefox wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't say that. A For example, I think a 300 USD standalone gaming console could be the next Game Boy, or the next Switch, in terms of sales numbers. The benfit/price ratio just has to be good enough and it could really take off. Even with fairly primitive graphics.

$300~500 bucks for a game console sounds reasonable to me, downright cheap even since a gaming desktop or laptop would easily go into the 4 digits. But with regards to VR headsets? Even $200 sounds too expensive if I were to be brutally honest, but I surmise going even lower would mean whoever makes the bloody thing won't even be able to cover the cost of materials so I'll compromise.

I meant a game console that is simultaneously a standalone VR headset. A Nintendo Quest basically. With exclusive Mario games.

Re: Apple’s new headset meets reality

#480

Post by KaiserPro »

yayr wrote: post #148
cubefox wrote: post #138

From the information available so far, the Apple headset will be fairly close to Meta's Oculus Quest in terms of hardware: Portable and with external cameras to allow for orientation and "mixed reality". Maybe Apple is on the right track here, since the Oculus Quest has sold more units than all the other VR headsets combined. But there is one big difference: Apple's headset will be a very expensive premium product (a…

I think with respect to compute/GPU capability the Apple headset will be vastly superior. One of the major issues with the Quest is the lack of graphics quality that can be brought to the virtual environments. Unless you run it via Link to a PC with a top end GPU it is just a toy. Having VR experiences like the recent Unreal Engine provides is simply orders of magnitude away for Quest in the current state... Thats on…

> I think with respect to compute/GPU capability the Apple headset will be vastly superior.

They still have the same issues that everyone else has: compute/heat/battery. Sure they have the vertical and are able to offload rendering onto ipads or laptops, but then you're basically tethered like the quest/vive/etc.

Running unreal re

Post reply on HN