this is hilarious to read.
thanks for the friday afternoon giggles MacRumours
[doublepost=1524853596][/doublepost]
but it's also not a computer! even though, it is in fact, a computer
What´s a computer?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Working on AR/VR Headset With 8K Displays and No Smartphone or Computer Tether
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What´s a computer?
Wearing virtual reality goggle is a big Fail. This so-called industry will collapse in on itself like that 3D LCD TV nonsense several years back.
And how do you think Apple gets these margins from its users? Obviously, the most expensive product is moot if nobody wants to buy it. And the chief reason why so many people to buy Apple products is precisely because they offer great value despite their higher sticker prices.
When I buy an Apple Pencil, a $99 stylus, it’s because the pencil offers the best writing experience amongst all the different styluses I have tried. When I got the Apple Watch, that’s because it was the best smartwatch available to an iPhone user, and it still is. When I purchased the AirPods, that’s because it was the best headphones for my needs (perfect blend of portability, ease of use and battery life). And when I sprang for an iPad Pro, that’s because iOS was the ideal platform for me in the classroom. And I installed an Apple TV in my classroom out of my own pocket because airplay mirroring is that indispensable to me.
Apple made a product that I liked, and I paid for it. That’s all there is to it.
I guess one could argue that I might be in the exact same position as you all were many years back. You bought into the Apple ecosystem at a certain point in time when it best suited your needs, but then Apple moved on and left you all high and dry. Just as Apple’s newfound focus on ios and wearables is in line with my needs as a consumer. And maybe one day I will find myself in the same situation as well.
I suppose I will just have to cross that bridge when I get there.
Sounds great, battery lasts weeks, easy pairing, never drops, super convenient. May not be for everyone, but I use them daily and they are a great product.
Color me excited. My partner bought a PlayStation VR kit and a Vive [sp?] some time ago and I gotta say they’re incredible! I’ve been an on again off again game player since the late 1980’s and found them waaaaay more engrossing than anything before them. It just makes games better and I think they could be good for movies too....
sad to see so many cynical people these days.
sad to see so many cynical people these days.
I believe they are convenient, but come on. Battery lasts roughly 5 hours before they go back into the floss box for charging. That's not exactly the uninterrupted experience most people have in mind.
I Steveo is right though.... the sound quality is dreadful for the price. I believe they’re fashion over function and targeting people that want to be seen having a particular accessory rather than the price reflecting how the device tackles its purpose (providing good quality sound). When I bought mine I hoped to god almighty they wouldn’t sound like wired Apple earbuds. So imagine how fast they were returned! In the end I replaced them with a (same price) Sony headphone..... not sure the model number but they sound genuinely phenomenal for their price, have a bass boost button, port to use with wired aka non-BT devices and best of all cover my entire ears enhancing sound isolation..... and to keep them warmer on cold days
. Battery life is about a week too. Very good product.[doublepost=1525088744][/doublepost]
Correct. I held onto mine for a week hoping we’d see an improvement to battery life via an update. I held onto that hope being their sole purpose, a nice convenient earbud. It was just too fiddly plus they fell out of my ears too often. The wired ones never did so I wonder if it was weight distribution?
Well personally, I am using for about 2 hours at a time, so I don't mind. I would guess if you are using headphones for 5 plus hours a day, you'd probably invest in something better, maybe more comfortable.
I would really like to know if we will be able to develop for this on Unity and Unreal engine on PC or if it will be xCode only.
It would seem strange for Apple to build out their own 3D engine but I guess not impossible.
I'm hoping development on Unreal/Unity on PC would be possible as high power GPU options on Mac are way to expensive.
It would seem strange for Apple to build out their own 3D engine but I guess not impossible.
I'm hoping development on Unreal/Unity on PC would be possible as high power GPU options on Mac are way to expensive.
The way they are designed to put in and forget? Easily, that could be.
There is no “most people” in user analysis for a new product. Most people eg. who do office work might want to plug their ears and focus for several hours, including the commute home or air travel.
Yeah, sorry, 8K in a display the size of a stamp just doesn't exist. Even as a tiny 8k projector small enough to fit in a headset doesn't exist. Apple doesn't invent display technology and they are not partnered with some display R&D company that nobody has ever heard of that has achieved this accomplishment yet.
Also you have to realize that in order to render something at 8k, and actually two 8k displays, requires a LOT of processing power, so the idea this will work without a tethered computer/phone also screams ********. Just because it is small screen doesn't mean that a CPU/GPU won't be taxed hard trying to render dual 8k worth of content. Rendering a pixel is rendering a pixel, at any size. This is why even 4K gaming on consoles/PC's needs current gen technology, increasing the pixel count like this just isn't going to work on some adapted AX custom processor.
I can fully believe Apple might be working on some AR/VR headset, but the dual 8K display claim is pure fanboi fiction.
Also you have to realize that in order to render something at 8k, and actually two 8k displays, requires a LOT of processing power, so the idea this will work without a tethered computer/phone also screams ********. Just because it is small screen doesn't mean that a CPU/GPU won't be taxed hard trying to render dual 8k worth of content. Rendering a pixel is rendering a pixel, at any size. This is why even 4K gaming on consoles/PC's needs current gen technology, increasing the pixel count like this just isn't going to work on some adapted AX custom processor.
I can fully believe Apple might be working on some AR/VR headset, but the dual 8K display claim is pure fanboi fiction.
Technicall @ChrisCW11 Apple is currently R&Ding display technology called MicroLED, which could thoeretically be what they're working on towards 8k per eye.
However, you're not wrong with the amount of GPU power required to power 2x8k. there's no current GPU on the market that can do this.
Here's a fun video of Linus Tech Tips trying to game at 16k. even with multiple top end GPU's at lowest settings, most of the games were crawling.
So if you listened to this silly rumour, Apple has magically invented a CPU/GPU combo that will trounce everything that has ever been made before... on first shot, without ever having evidenced it before.
However, you're not wrong with the amount of GPU power required to power 2x8k. there's no current GPU on the market that can do this.
Here's a fun video of Linus Tech Tips trying to game at 16k. even with multiple top end GPU's at lowest settings, most of the games were crawling.
So if you listened to this silly rumour, Apple has magically invented a CPU/GPU combo that will trounce everything that has ever been made before... on first shot, without ever having evidenced it before.
There are techniques (already mentioned here) for reducing GPU load, such as rendering at full res only for what you're directly looking at and using lower res for peripheral vision. You wouldn't actually individually render every pixel of a full 16K x 8K display. But even then, yeah, it would still require some serious GPU power.
--Eric
--Eric
And who exactly in the tech sector, isn't?
[doublepost=1525111657][/doublepost]
Is your DVD Player a Computer? Howabout your Apple TV? Your Microwave Oven? Your "Smart TV"? Your XBox? Your WiFi Router?this is hilarious to read.
thanks for the friday afternoon giggles MacRumours
[doublepost=1524853596][/doublepost]
but it's also not a computer! even though, it is in fact, a computer
All computers. Ask any Linux fanboi!
It's an EMBEDDED System. Look around you, you probably have 3 or 4 in sight right now.
They are "Computers"; but DEDICATED ones. Not "General Purpose" computers.
But again, don't tell any Linux fanboi that...
[doublepost=1525111852][/doublepost]
They are clearly offloading the real grunt-work to the "special box", to try and get that battery life (and heat!) under control.
That, or it's going to have a wireless power connection like the M-5 Computer did on TOS...
If it's limited to 60 fps, a lot of people are going to be puking their guts out because of motion sickness. 90 fps is bare minimum for VR for the general population, not to mention the issue of latency (I don't recall those figures offhand). For those like me who are a bit prone to motion sickness to begin with, 120 fps feels much better still.
Tried some VR myself. Anything < 90FPS triggers symptoms of my TBI and will last for a few days. really need to have latency free, full 90+FPS for many of us.
Time is relative in Apple's multiverse.
MR just reported that Gurman reported in 2015 that Street View is coming to Apple Maps.
This is like macMini updates...
[doublepost=1525177226][/doublepost]
Oh, I was just typing that eye has only about 1Mpx of resolution and mostly consentrated to around fovea (ca. 1°). And you need personal display, because eye movement is personal...
Last edited:
Yes, true Stereoscopic rendering *alone* will cut your frame rate to 1/3 what it is without Stereoscopic rendering. "Fake" (not really fake, just created using depth-buffer information rather than actually rendering the game twice) stereoscopic rendering can have very little performance impact but always has rendering artifacts (not too bad in some titles, horrible in other titles.)
With LCDs and similar types of displays (as opposed to the older CRTs) it used to be of paramount importance that your game-rendering resolution was equal to (or greater than - if using downsampling) your display resolution because upscaling was utterly dreadful. That really isn't true any longer with the UHD displays. For example, a game rendered at 1280x800 and upscaled to a MacBook Air's 1440x900 screen would look absolutely awful. Take that same game, still running at 1280x800 on a MacBook Pro w/Retina's display (either 13" or 15") and it looks quite acceptable. No worries about "exactly double the resolution" anymore either. (Used to be if you couldn't run at say, a native 2560x1440 on a traditional LCD display you could try 1280x720 so that every rendered pixel was formed by exactly 4 actual pixels - this could help to reduce the extreme blurriness introduced by upscaling on most displays.)
The upshot is that you can now render games at a much lower resolution than the actual physical-resolution on modern ultra-high-resolution devices without having to worry that your quality will instantly and completely tank. You still want to run at the maximum resolution you can while still retaining your minimum FPS (90 in the case of VR) of course, but upscaling is nothing like the colossal problem it used to be.
Last edited:
I'd definitely be interested to see any statistics/reviews showing this - I've never seen any, and trying cannot find anything.
[doublepost=1525193654][/doublepost]
Vega is top of the line AMD GPU, in an all-in-one PC with very limited cooling options compared to a full-sized tower. Regardless, this has nothing to do with the GPU's Apple has designed. Which, when looking at the GPU released in the iPhone X - Apple has leapfrogged long standing mobile GPU competitors. So take that a step or two forward, over two generations, big die-shrink and what could their in-house chip design could accomplish when targeting a GPU that could be much bigger, use more power and have a larger thermal envelope?
The high end VR market is slowing down and the $199 Oculus Go was just released that works independently of PC or phone.
https://www.oculus.com/go/
Apple VR will be late to the market, overpriced and end up like the Homepod.
https://www.oculus.com/go/
Apple VR will be late to the market, overpriced and end up like the Homepod.
I see people making jokes about the price, but the technology for this is nowhere in the future for any cost. Certainly not 2020.
What gpu would they use? It’s have to be a bunch of gpus. There is nothing upcoming that would support 2 8k displays. Nothing exists that would even display 120fps on a single screen now and that is the rate you need for non-headachey vr.
Still, nice to finally hear crazy tech rumors from Apple again.
[doublepost=1525386839][/doublepost]
Not even possible even by 2020 for any price. No gpu can do 120fps on 2 screens. The tech doesn’t exist, even in a roadmap.
What gpu would they use? It’s have to be a bunch of gpus. There is nothing upcoming that would support 2 8k displays. Nothing exists that would even display 120fps on a single screen now and that is the rate you need for non-headachey vr.
Still, nice to finally hear crazy tech rumors from Apple again.
[doublepost=1525386839][/doublepost]
Not even possible even by 2020 for any price. No gpu can do 120fps on 2 screens. The tech doesn’t exist, even in a roadmap.