221–230 of 346 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t recall enabling it.
This doesn't load for me on my iPhone or iPad: https://webgpu.github.io/webgpu-samples/?sample=texturedCube
So definitely not enabled by default yet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is sad but true. I was so excited about the Vision and desperate to get one. Finally my company has bought one for testing and I’m honestly not sure what to even use it for. Maybe a big screen Mac? Is that it? I think Apple has fallen into the same dead end they did with Apple TV: no controller = no games. Both Apple TV and Vision Pro could have been filled with games from indie devs. But it’s impossible to play…
> no controller = no games. Bundling a controller would increase the cost for everyone to satisfy a minority of gamers. So instead they support all PS5, Xbox, BT etc controllers.
Apple doesn't have to increase the cost. The leaked BOM suggests that Apple makes a sizable margin on Vision Pro, even if each controller cost $500 they could give them away in-box and still make more money per-unit than the Quest headset. It's not about cost.
> So instead they support all PS5, Xbox, BT etc controllers.
Those are not 6DOF controllers, they are class-compliant USB devices that every single computer really ought to support. If Apple supported OpenXR then they would likely also have the software to support other controllers, but apparently that's a touchy subject in this thread.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In an ideal world, Apple would have just built DirectX and sold the Xbox too. But you can't look at it from an executive's perspective, you have to look at it from the developer's point-of-view. This insistence on high-investment, low-ROI APIs is why the Mac doesn't have games. If you run the Metal playbook with VR again, you will have developers outright abandon you. We've already seen what happens. Apple's GPUs sup…
It’s more that devs can’t be arsed to write non-mobile games in anything but DirectX unless they’re being paid to (as the console vendors do). Vulkan support is quite rare in commercial games, it’s almost entirely DirectX or Sony/Nintendo’s things. If Apple somehow flipped a switch that turned on Vulkan support, almost nothing would change. The single biggest things Apple could do to bolster gaming on their platforms…
That's not entirely true. Whiskey being depreciated to support Codeweavers was a headline story this week - something that outright would not need to exist if Apple users could run upstream DXVK instead of GPTk.
> pay studios to do it or for Apple to license DirectX from MS.
That doesn't work either! Paying Eidos and Capcom and Hello Games did not start an avalanche of ports. Apple could license DirectX from Microsoft, but they could also just support Vulkan 1.2 and get perfect DX12 coverage through translation.
The bigger point is that the Metal-only route isn't working. We can argue over the merits of Vulkan until the cows come home, but the simple issue is that Metal doesn't get ports. Native APIs on Apple platforms just get ignored.
This is surprising. From everything I've been hearing in the media, I got the impression Apple had mostly given up on their XR products and will keep them on life-support until the technology is ready for mass consumption.
Until things are officially announced they could change at any moment. Rumor mills are rarely productive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In an ideal world, Apple would have just built DirectX and sold the Xbox too. But you can't look at it from an executive's perspective, you have to look at it from the developer's point-of-view. This insistence on high-investment, low-ROI APIs is why the Mac doesn't have games. If you run the Metal playbook with VR again, you will have developers outright abandon you. We've already seen what happens. Apple's GPUs sup…
APIs are the last reason there aren't 'major' games on macOS. You've got architecture changes; PPC to Intel was a big loss of game compatibility, and then again when x86-32 support was removed from OS X nuked most of a user's Steam library. And there's the chicken/egg problem of gamers just not being present in large enough numbers on macOS. The platform already has a fairly small marketshare in the overall PC space,…
This indicates to me that the Apple Vision and visionOS product line and OS are not canceled internally and that Apple is still committed to its future. While the Apple Vision Pro itself is not a good or successful product, progress in display technology will enable Apple to build a more attractive consumer product, in the form of light, comfortable and unobtrusive AR glasses. In this line of thinking — not just focu…
Do you own one, or have used one extensively, to dismiss it so confidently?
I own one, and it's a great product. The experience watching movies/shows is unparalleled.
This is surprising. From everything I've been hearing in the media, I got the impression Apple had mostly given up on their XR products and will keep them on life-support until the technology is ready for mass consumption.
The media loves to spin Apple things as failures right up until the point when they’re a success. See coverage of iPhone, Apple Pay, iPad, etc. Even “Apple faithful” media like MacRumors.com will be measured but pessimistic about Apple’s new efforts because negativity drives clicks more than positivity across the board.
It feels more like Apple users aren't used to acknowledging Apple's own failures. Because Apple refuses to admit certain products don't succeed (see: iPhone Mini, 12" Macbook, Butterfly Keyboard), their users come to believe that Apple is beyond reproach. If Vision Pro was good enough for the public, it's genuinely hard to imagine how much worse the Apple Car and Airpower could be.
This indicates to me that the Apple Vision and visionOS product line and OS are not canceled internally and that Apple is still committed to its future. While the Apple Vision Pro itself is not a good or successful product, progress in display technology will enable Apple to build a more attractive consumer product, in the form of light, comfortable and unobtrusive AR glasses. In this line of thinking — not just focu…
> While the Apple Vision Pro itself is not a good product Do you own one, or have used one extensively, to dismiss it so confidently? I own one, and it's a great product. The experience watching movies/shows is unparalleled.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> VR development model where VR is an extension of an existing supported platform, not a platform in and off itself This is the crux of the issue, both for Apple and for Godot. In Apple’s case, they’re finding that their vision does not resonate with consumers or developers. So they’re searching for ways to expand chances of success but not entering with an equal partnership mentality. Thats their prerogative but I w…
I still don’t understand why I see people saying Vision is an unsuccessful and failed platform. Vision Pro is very clearly an early adopter version of a platform that has yet to truly get started. Obviously, a huge $3500 headset on your head is not the actual intended final form of this platform. The actual intended final form is glasses. And until those glasses are out you can’t say it failed, because it hasn’t even…
The original iPod was an incredibly niche product. It required a Mac at a time when Macs were way less common than they are now. When Windows support was added, it required FireWire, which was quite uncommon.
The original iPhone did OK but didn't sell super well. It was very expensive, had only 2G connectivity when 3G had already arrived, only worked on the #3 cellular carrier, and didn't support any third-party apps.
The original Apple Watch was bulky and severely underpowered.
Apple continued to iterate on all of these and they ended up being quite successful.
That's not to say Vision Pro will see the same treatment. There are plenty of failed products you can point to as well. Just that an iffy initial release doesn't mean anything about the long-term outlook for the product.
This indicates to me that the Apple Vision and visionOS product line and OS are not canceled internally and that Apple is still committed to its future. While the Apple Vision Pro itself is not a good or successful product, progress in display technology will enable Apple to build a more attractive consumer product, in the form of light, comfortable and unobtrusive AR glasses. In this line of thinking — not just focu…
> While the Apple Vision Pro itself is not a good product Do you own one, or have used one extensively, to dismiss it so confidently? I own one, and it's a great product. The experience watching movies/shows is unparalleled.
If Apple cared, they'd drop the money to get, say, immersive courtside experience at every NBA and NFL game for a subscription fee. New long-form immersive content, not these silly 5-10 minute videos they drop every month or two.
It's a great product. But Apple's not serious enough about it. Someone who can deliver at least one of "normal people can buy it" or "a ton of incredibly compelling content exists" will own this market, eventually. It probably won't be Apple.