351–360 of 527 posts
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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm willing to spend a lot on VR, but Apple would have to absolutely blow everything else out of the water at that price point. I have no doubt that a lot of Apple enthusiasts will buy them, but they've certainly chosen a specific market. You could buy a full Index kit, get the wireless upgrade for it, and then a full Vive Pro kit and its wireless upgrade, and have spent about the same amount of money.
Just with the rumor that the new Apple headset is sporting an M chip, it will likely blow everything else away in terms of potential. Apple will also be focusing on everything that isn’t gaming, meaning that XR people can finally get some work done in mixed reality. Compared to other companies, they don’t like gaming. They just put up with it because of the massive revenue. Sure PCVR still might have better specs, bu…
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'm not sure what value there is on speculating at this level.
We have no idea what sort of gaming content they are planning for it in addition to the AR stuff. At that price point it's hard to tell what the market or usecases with be.
1. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-12-01/apple-mix...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don't think there is a consumer market for head mounted AR anymore anymore, or yet? I think the biggest barriers are form factor and price. History suggests that price of such devices will increase over time. Whether the tech can be squeezed into a form factor that will be desirable to the masses is another problem altogether. The fact that apple (according to this article) have not managed to do it suggests to m…
Typo fix: should have said "History suggests that price of such devices will *decrease* over time."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You mean like the pancake lenses in the Quest Pro? Those are still what I'd consider garbage tier old tech. Probably the best we are going to get down the path of fixed focal point acrylic lenses, but definitely not what I'd call sharp edge to edge. The edges might qualify as "very soft" instead of "totally out of focus" but that's about the best you can say.
Quest Pro is probably the leading example yes. If you're calling that garbage, then I think you're (a) setting impossibly high standards and (b) out of sync with most people's perception, as most people perceive these has having "edge to edge clarity".
It sometimes takes courage to challenge the status quo, to take the risk to establish a new standard. To identify and pursue the "right" standards.
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?
So for VR, foveated rendering could mean the difference between ~2k and 3k is a wash. And AAA games designed for VR tend to be a little more conservative on the graphics. And the chip will only theoretically have to handle half the other game work and no full macOS.
Combine that with Apple's continued Metal development, which is very capable if you're willing to do the leg work to take advantage of it, and yeah I think it'll get close.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What does the author consider to be a victory? Well, there's the Apple II, the iMac, the iPod, the iPhone... Apple has had a long history of products that redefined the future of entire categories, and almost all of them up to this point except the Apple Watch included deep involvement by Jobs.
Apple watch? Airpods maybe? Apple silicon for sure. Other than that not much, but to be clear there has not really been any other inventions in this time span like those you mention. The market is more mature.
This is what makes coming out with new products harder - Apple doesn't have a market for a mid-range camera, or a GPS, or a music player, or a PDA - because those are all things the iPhone does. They add capabilities to the phone to usurp other device markets (most recently, emergency satellite communicators and OnStar-style crash detection). Apple releases new devices most often by releasing them inside the iPhone.
Which is why now, with a saturated cellphone market which is slowing down the upgrade frequency, they are so interested in wearables (separate hardware that augments your phone) and services (software that augments your phone).
The sad thing is that there are areas they could make a lot of innovations, such as smart home accessories. They killed off the AirPort line, and license out HomeKit with almost no first-party hardware, because those just don't move the needle for a company of Apple's size.
I'm utterly unconvinced that AR/VR is a large market or is going to be game changing in every day life. I can see why Apple feel that they need to have a product in the market, but I wouldn't be surprised if its presented as “Just a Hobby” the same way that Steve Jobs presented Apple TV back when it launched (and for a good few years later). I really do think that Apple are much more likely to present some interestin…
> I'm utterly unconvinced that AR/VR is a large market Gorilla Tag, an indie VR game where you're an ape and run around with your hands and tag people (seriously, that's the whole thing) has made $26 million selling virtual hats and has peaks of 90,000 concurrent users.
I think what makes it stick is that it's more than just a game. It's a social space where my kids jump in to sometimes just to chat with their friends from school. Reminds me of hanging out in Team Fortress 2 game servers and just chatting while casually screwing around in the game.
Here's the interview where those stats came from for those curious.
https://venturebeat.com/games/how-gorilla-tag-made-it-big-on...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Not having to deal with cables and increased range of movement are enough I don't think that's enough. AirPods "just work" in a way that no prior Bluetooth headset ever did. Everything else was a kludge, particularly when it came to switching between multiple devices.
Yeah. They're not perfect, and I've had problems with them a couple times, but they mostly just work. The audio latency is also better than anything else I've used.
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…
- Apple Watch: $447 at release (inflation adj); $250 today.
- iPad: $695 at release (inflation adj); $450 today.
- iPhone: $877 at release (inflation adj, carrier subsidized); $800 today.
Similar story with all of their products. Apple has a history of releasing new product lines with the "top end" expensive models (remember in 2017 when they released both the iPhone X and iPhone 8). Early adopters will be early adopters. It should also speak volumes that this is likely to be introduced at WWDC; the first iteration may be extremely developer focused, to help build the platform, with more consumer-oriented and priced devices next year.
Historically: It has practically never been a good bet to bet against Apple, even if all the logic says to [1]. This time could be different. I would not bet on it.