181–190 of 356 posts
It's still crazy to me that they put an M5 chip in this thing, but to run Mac apps you need a Mac. Just let the face computer be a computer!
They'll keep their face computers separate for as long as they refuse to build Macbooks with touch screens. Which seems to be forever.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> miniturisation which history has shown the industry can do very quickly. 5 Years... Sadly I think you are vastly overestimating the rate of progress here. Quest 2 came out 5 years ago - in those 5 years we've shrunk headset volume by about half (mostly due to pancake lenses). We'll need to find another fundamental improvement in lens technology to shrink the next 50%
Big screen beyond came out in '23. Meta has made strides with their recent showings. And I don't believe anybody is really dumping vast sums of money into it quite yet, they're coasting somewhat (though I realise that that's conjecture). I'd say the biggest unsolved issue is the focus/depth of field issue...how to provide variable per pixel depth so that virtual objects can appear in a scene and be focussed on natura…
I won't be upgrading from the M2 model, but I still get a lot of value out of mine simply using the Mac Virtual Display with my Macbook Pro. Of course there are other benefits (gaming w/ ALVR and a PC, watching movies, reading comics) but it makes video editing workflows much nicer for me because I can set the resolution to ultrawide and have much more real estate for Davinci Resolve. It never really leaves the house…
Do you do the thing where you can map your room and have different virtual desktops for each room?
I do have a few widgets floating around in different rooms, but rarely use it from somewhere that isn't my chair or bed, so it's mostly a few clocks embedded into my walls to keep track of time, and those are persistent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have access to one for work stuff. It is just too heavy and uncomfortable for more than 30 min of using it.
I had to try several different straps and configurations before I found one that worked well for me. I forget what it's called now, but there's one made by a company that makes CPAP machines. That's the one to get. Makes a huge difference.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They have given up on it. This is simply a chip replacement. It's likely cheaper than keep producing M2s just for this thing.
> They have given up on it > keep producing Maybe it's just me, but if they keep producing it (regardless of what chip), doesn't that mean they haven't given up on it?
Anyone have experience with AVP+ALVR vs Valve Index? I have only used the latter but interested if I can use ALVR effectively enough to replace the Index.
I was super interested in the Vision Pro when it was first released. Then I found out they went with an app model and the device could only display a single MacOS window. There went my dream of surrounding myself with a bunch of vim windows and terminals. If they'd focused on maximizing the device's usefulness instead of its revenue stream, maybe things would have worked out better.
My sentiments exactly. This would be such an easy purchase to justify if it weren't just a toy-- no other VR headset touts to display text so crisply. But instead, their only market demographic are people who really enjoy going to theaters alone. I'm very eagerly looking forward to Valve's headset coming out.
I hope they swap out Haskell though, probably can make your own compositor
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s worked for awhile. ALVR.
I’ve heard the latency is still a pretty major issue. I’d love to use one for sim racing but the latency complaints make it a non-starter. If that’s changed or anyone is using it for sim racing please let me know.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are three problems with AVP: cost, cost and cost. It is priced to be a pack-in with seats of Dassault 3DEXPERIENCE, but Meta's experience has been that the VR consumer is price sensitive which is why they followed up the MQ3 with the cost-reduced MQ3S. I think Apple is looking at this the way they look at AirPods (something you stick in your ears to modify and augment your hearing) which is good and monitors, w…
On top of the three problems of any AR/VR tech: UX, UX and UX. I'm honestly not sure if Apple Vision would fare much better if they had a device that costs $100. Like, sure, they'll sell more units that way. But how many of those units would end up collecting dust?
My take is the MQ3 is pretty good for UX. I regularly use my image sorter and RSS reader in a web browser with a huge number of windows open, bringing my click targets up to the WCAG AAA standards made them very usable in this environment. The Apple Magic Keyboard pairs perfectly, as does a mouse. The controller work great for games and other immersive applications.
I'd say though that my game backlog on the MQ3 is long as is my game backlog in Steam, and there is just a huge amount of competition from flat content so I don't play as many VR games as I could.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Valve already has a headset out…well before Apple had one. https://www.valvesoftware.com/en/index/headset
Yes, and it's one of the best headsets for Linux :) But this is a tethered headset and the text rendering isn't good enough to justify one over a monitor (reportedly-- I haven't bought one yet). Especially because it's tethered. But Valve is reliably rumored to be releasing an untethered successor within the next year for a third of the cost of the AVP. The appeal is having a dozen monitors anywhere.
Vision Pro M5 PR says something about 120mhz. So the M5's "40% faster GPUs" is being used to double the frame rate?
Being noob, I'm guessing each desktop requires 3 additional cores and 16Gb VRAM.
Of course, we can think of many strategies (using current hardware) to support additional desktops, spaces, windows, etc. If Apple really wanted to.