Live data from Hacker News

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

arstechnica.com

401–410 of 465 posts

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

#401
post #397

The most interesting thing about this is what it says about the work Apple has been putting into graphics hardware. Dual 8k displays that I assume are being driven by Apple graphics hardware. Lots of R&D for future M1s or discrete cards for Mac Pros.

> Apple will liberally use an already-known VR technique that involves using eye-tracking to render objects in the user's periphery at a lower fidelity than what the user is focusing on.

I would be shocked if this is anything but a gimmick, with all sorts of upscaling and rendering tricks.

I very highly doubt apple is all of a sudden the producer of the best gpu in the world, with a wide margin. Nvidia claims their 3090 ( a $1500 card ) is capable of 8k 60fps. In benchmarks, this is only possible in certain easy to render games.

The idea that apple can double that, and push a higher refresh rate for smooth vr (usually 90fps minimum) is wild.

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

#402
post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had to do a search for that [0] and surprisingly (for me, not watching the sport except snippets in movies) it's actually real. The downvotes may come from people who took that as an unrealistic exaggeration. [0] https://www.marketwatch.com/story/there-were-just-1206-minut...

I’ve also never watched American football, so forgive me. This sounds incredibly dull. Can someone ELI5? What is going on for the rest of the game? Why do people watch?

A lot of the time in the second half of the game is intentionally wasted by the team with the lead.

A lot of the time throughout the game is wasted intentionally by game procedure, e.g. refs are setting up for the next play.

Of course there are varied reasons individuals have to watch, but the overwhelming majority of it's market success can be ascribed to tribal desire to see your team win.

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

#403
post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had to do a search for that [0] and surprisingly (for me, not watching the sport except snippets in movies) it's actually real. The downvotes may come from people who took that as an unrealistic exaggeration. [0] https://www.marketwatch.com/story/there-were-just-1206-minut...

I’ve also never watched American football, so forgive me. This sounds incredibly dull. Can someone ELI5? What is going on for the rest of the game? Why do people watch?

An NFL game consists of a series of designed plays, and the 12 minutes is just the execution time. In between plays, there are formation changes and setup, so fans can guess at what the offense is planning and how the defense is reacting. (That happens in other sports too, but here there's a formal beginning and end to each play.) Then there are also breaks between quarters and after changes of possession, where genuinely nothing is going on.

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

#404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The #1 use of VR headsets is porn and porn apps are growing What exactly do you mean by this? Are you saying that right now, the most popular use of VR headsets is for pornography? Or are you speculating on how VR headsets will be used in the future?

> Are you saying that right now, the most popular use of VR headsets is for pornography? Yes, that's what I'm saying. It's a "dirty little secret". Most of it is VR video at the moment but apps are growing quickly. New titles appearing on steam all the time and appearing on the top 10 selling titles.

About which apps are you talking specifically?

I‘m a long time VR user and except for some concepts I haven’t seen anything like what you describe, certainly not that popular.

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

#405
post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had to do a search for that [0] and surprisingly (for me, not watching the sport except snippets in movies) it's actually real. The downvotes may come from people who took that as an unrealistic exaggeration. [0] https://www.marketwatch.com/story/there-were-just-1206-minut...

I’ve also never watched American football, so forgive me. This sounds incredibly dull. Can someone ELI5? What is going on for the rest of the game? Why do people watch?

To anyone else confused: ELI5 means "Explain (it) Like I'm Five (years old)." Now I'll try.

Caveats: I don't watch American football on TV, but I watched it some when I was a teenager. I mostly remember how to play, and while I don't think it'd be safe to do it at my age, I do like to play catch with an American football whenever I get the chance. I wouldn't mind watching a game now, but only live and very close to the field.

The thing is there's a lot of strategy, and each play is a meticulously, often spontaneously, planned action by the Offense (team with the ball) which the Defense does its best to disrupt.

That disruption is almost always at least partially successful, forcing improvisation on both sides. In particular the quarterback (guy who throws the ball) often has to rethink the plan in real time as people chase after him -- he really really doesn't want to be tackled, for his own protection as well as for the game -- and somehow make this work with people who are running around at some distance from him. When it works it can be awe-inspiring and utterly unexpected.

These things -- the strategy, the plan on the field, the disruption, the improvisation, the danger -- are all directly and intimately connected to the physical and mental abilities of the players, which are routinely pushed to their limits, sometimes to the point of causing permanent damage.

This is all the stuff of human drama, and as in most human dramas the decisive physical events don't take up that much of the time.

Another thing I'd add is that compared to a lot of other sports American Football offers an interesting combination of extreme chaos (the tackle, etc) and extreme precision (the long-distance pass to the wide receiver).

Soccer by contrast never has that much precision and is much more about mastering the ever-present chaos, most of it very slow paced; basketball can go long stretches without getting very chaotic at all despite things constantly happening. (I know some people will take umbrage here, but I'm ready to defend these points!)

I can't think of another sport that so closely tracks an idealized version of warfare and group combat. Though I'd love to see other examples.

All that said, familiarity has a lot to do with how much you can enjoy watching a lot of sports. If you grew up surrounded by the culture of Sport X there's probably stuff in it you will like to watch.

I like to watch squash, because I played it enough to understand what's going on. I have a friend who watches hours of snooker online. Even golf draws an audience. Even cricket!

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

#406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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,…

The problem with this is that it’s not VR though. It’s 3D from a fixed point. You can’t look around unless the camera is mounted on motors to allow for that, and even then you’d need to be the only viewer otherwise who’s head does it track?

Why not do multiple cameras and broadcast each of the feeds? Then it's up to the software for each user to do head tracking.

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

#407
post #397

The most interesting thing about this is what it says about the work Apple has been putting into graphics hardware. Dual 8k displays that I assume are being driven by Apple graphics hardware. Lots of R&D for future M1s or discrete cards for Mac Pros.

> Apple will liberally use an already-known VR technique that involves using eye-tracking to render objects in the user's periphery at a lower fidelity than what the user is focusing on. I would be shocked if this is anything but a gimmick, with all sorts of upscaling and rendering tricks. I very highly doubt apple is all of a sudden the producer of the best gpu in the world, with a wide margin. Nvidia claims their 3…

To a point, of course, they'll use all the tricks they can. But if it genuinely isn't in the ballpark, why use 8k screens instead of 4k?

They at least think they can drive enough real pixels to make the more exotic/expensive option worth choosing.

Edit- and the M1, already, is by certain metrics already the best 'CPU' in the world- there isn't any particular reason to think Apple incapable, considering their access to cutting edge chip manufacturing, of doing the same with GPUs if they wanted to throw the silicon and resources at it.

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

#408

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.

I wouldn't say terrible, just like I wouldn't say the gameboy advance had terrible resolution. Sure, it does now , but it'll certainly get better with time and it's hard for me to think that it's the primary issue with VR. I suppose it's the issue if your expectation of VR is resolution-sensitive. But good VR apps will just treat that as a limitation and factor it in. GBA apps of the time were pixel-art, and resoluti…

Perhaps it’s because I play games I expect to be more realistic in nature. When I complain about resolution I’m not talking about beat saber.

I never really feel fully submerged in VR. I blame that on a few things:

1. Resolution. This is the big one for me.

2. Headset. The weight, fogging up (like you mentioned), the fact that I can still tell it’s there.

3. Sound (you mentioned part of this). Sound is important for full submerging.

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

#409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah the idea of having a better virtual office really isn't as great as it seems when you try it out. Basically extra latency to not see all of the stuff on your desk and have the entire world skip frames when you do something that maxes out your CPU or GPU. Not to mention the aformentioned image-in-an-image quality problems.

See mirage[0] - this solves the "can't see your desk" problem. A more recent seems to be ThinkReality (by Lenovo) which prominently features a 'extra screens' application on the home page[1]. 0: https://www.mirage-app.com/ 1: https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/thinkrealitya3

I think the softwre side answers are there, just pump more high quality information in faster and it's easily solved. The problem is i just punts it to hardware. Both the lenovo product and hololens have absymal fovs and resolution but you can at least look to the real world great. Otoh normal headsets can display the virtual world in great detail and double the fov but not only is it taxing on the hardware to do so you need to bring in the real world insted. In either scenario you get pretty bad tradeoffs at this point, and I've tried both approaches for quite a while.

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

#410
post #9

I could see this as a virtual office, as some of the comments speculate. If I had a set of AR glasses that projected what appeared to be an 8K monitor on top of my dining room table, and integrated with my MacBook Pro for input / output, and that had batteries to last a workday, I’d pay $2K/$3K. Even more if it worked well at brightness levels I’d have in my backyard. Never mind gaming, mobile high-quality virtual of…

I never believed in VR as a mainstream thing but AR keeps me curious. There's a Hololens demo on youtube that shows a bunch of virtual monitors of arbitrary size and shape floating around the user. That's potentially awesome. Think the desktop "windows" concepts but with virtual monitors, 3D UI elements where useful. This could have potential. I'd say the technology to make it workable as something you wanna wear for 8 hours a day still isn't there yet, though, and probably won't be until some major breakthrough. It's not just resolution, it's battery, contrast, size... I don't see anything I'd personally want to use with current or next-year tech.
Post reply on HN