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

271–280 of 465 posts

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

#271

Post by jayd16 »

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,…

I don't really understand your argument. Videogames revenue is higher than movies and NA sports combined. That said, there's enough room for everything.

>rigging a google-maps-like camera ball

This is also not really how it works at all. Volumetric capture is a lot more complicated than 3D TV which is considered a dud.

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

#272

Post by RandallBrown »

Rapzid wrote: post #169
RandallBrown wrote: post #8

I bought an Oculus Quest 2 when it came out and it's pretty fantastic. The whole experience with setup and gaming is excellent, especially for the price. There are plenty of little rough edges that I feel like Apple would do a good job of smoothing off. Things like not being able to get phone notifications or use bluetooth headphones.

Were you as blown away just by the setup and first tutorial "game" as I was? I bought it on a whim over the holidays when I was upgrading my PC. Haven't used a VR headset since the Oculus devkit 2. Had no idea how far along everything had come; particularly tracking. By the end of the first day I had my tape measure out moving my couch, coffee table, and clearing out the living room. It's the VR space now.

Probably. The "game" where I danced with the robot blew me away. It really felt like I was dancing with someone else.

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

#273

Post by ksec »

Dual 8K Resolution, I am assuming it wont be 60Hz, it will need to be 90 or 120hz.

I am not even sure top of the line PC can do that today. Even Dual 4K at consistent 120fps is pushing the limit.

At VR headset range with 8K Per eye is a display that is nearly 3000ppi. My guess is that 8K is the wrong figure and it is actually derived from 3000ppi. Which is similar to Varjo [1] HMD.

At lastly, this is "The Information". Which means it is an Apple leak. Intentional or Not. Over the years they have been doing PR pieces and other intentional leaks for Apple. It will mostly be the same tactic as someone else has mentioned, setting consumer pricing expectation.

[1] https://www.vrfocus.com/2019/02/the-varjo-vr-1-is-a-6000-hea...

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

#274

Post by ryanSrich »

I can’t wait for a truly usable VR headset. I’ve tried them all, and they’re all pretty terrible in terms of resolution, screen door, etc.

The content, and non-visual tech is all there. Everything is primed. Now we just need a headset that has proper resolution. I’m hoping Apple gets this right, clearly they understand the true issue with VR by focusing on resolution.

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

#275

Post by pezezin »

Tomdarkness wrote: post #18

8k seems... optimistic. The PPI of such a display would be off the charts. Not to mention the kind of hardware required to run such a device. The NVIDIA RTX 3090 can barely run a 3D 8k game at 30fps, let alone in 3D for VR. What would you even connect such a device with? Displayport and HDMI wouldn't support two 8k streams.

If you want the latest AAA game in ultra quality, then of course no GPU can run it at 8k. But I'm pretty sure a RTX 3090 can run older games at 8k.

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

#276

Post by Simon321 »

ksec wrote: post #273

Dual 8K Resolution, I am assuming it wont be 60Hz, it will need to be 90 or 120hz. I am not even sure top of the line PC can do that today. Even Dual 4K at consistent 120fps is pushing the limit. At VR headset range with 8K Per eye is a display that is nearly 3000ppi. My guess is that 8K is the wrong figure and it is actually derived from 3000ppi. Which is similar to Varjo [1] HMD. At lastly, this is "The Information…

They will use eye tracking and foveated rendering to reduce the hardware requirements.

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

#277

Post by red75prime »

dsr_ wrote: post #47
endisneigh wrote: post #14

What's the necessary resolution in each eye needed to be "retina"? Once we reach that will it be the end of the "monitor era"? A lot of interesting things can happen once you no longer need monitors. Though sharing with others will still be a practical limitation so I doubt they'll go anywhere for now. Once you no longer have monitors I think there will have to be a UI and UX shift around how you interact with things…

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.

Foveated imaging can dramatically decrease the required bandwidth. We have about 6 million cone cells and about 1 million of them is in the fovea centralis. Rods are more numerous, but they are mostly for low-light vision.

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

#278

Post by Const-me »

thefreeman wrote: post #232
kortex wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Nobody does that and it's not possible due to GPU latency.

Eyeballs rotate very fast, up to 1000°/s. Fovea has just under 1° of high resolution. You gonna need to render 1000 FPS with 1 frame of latency to catch up.

GPUs can't do that. They evolved for decades optimizing for throughput at 60Hz, not latency at 1000Hz.

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

#279

Post by Const-me »

slimsag wrote: post #258
wruza wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? The article says “well-known method”, not “all vr headsets already doing”. From what I can find, DeepFovea and others were only work in progress (summer 2020) at best, in contrast to mainstream tech. Is there more info on that?

I don't think most support foveated rendering, currently. But there are consumed ones available / becoming available: * HP Reverb G2 Omnicept Edition * HTC Vive Pro Eye

Just because they track eyes doesn't mean they gonna use it for rendering. That's probably for input.

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

#280

Post by Kiro »

gre345t34 wrote: post #133
dcre wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is not a fixed focal distance in VR. The screens are an inch in front of your eye, but the objects you look at can be (virtually) at any distance. It’s like normal vision. The question of the effect on vision of shining screens into your eyes for hours at a time still stands. Edit: whoops, guess I was wrong about that!

This is inaccurate. Unlike IRL in which objects can appear at varying focal distances, requiring the eye muscles to constantly adjust the focal distance of the eye, the two images in a VR headset (one for each eye) remain at a constant focal distance as determined by the lenses. The 3D illusion in VR comes from stereoscopy. The objects that appear in VR are actually all at the same focal distance.

So why do you need glasses in VR? Just trying to understand.
Post reply on HN