As others have pointed out, this is confusing and probably an error. It takes four 4K displays to total 8K resolution, not two.4K micro OLED displays with an 8K total resolution
As others have pointed out, this is confusing and probably an error. It takes four 4K displays to total 8K resolution, not two.4K micro OLED displays with an 8K total resolution
i think its microOled...since microLed is very very very hard to shrink down so many pixelsOLED or mini LED? I am not sure how long OLED will burn in 5000 nit...
thats the question,,,are we talking about 2 displays? or just 1 from one end to another...and some rumors said there are 3 or 4 displaysAs others have pointed out, this is confusing and probably an error. It takes four 4K displays to total 8K resolution, not two.
I’ve been to a convention before. Trust me, you don’t want to see anything “down there” in 4K.imagine porn in this thing
A VR headset takes up more of your field of view than a TV, so higher brightness is more useful compared to a TV used in the dark.Why does a display that's right in front of your eyes need 5,000nits of brightness when the TV across the room from you tops out at maybe 1,500nits? Laughable.
For those who aren’t aware, VR uses low persistence displays—otherwise the image would smear when you move your head. That means the display is only on for a fraction of the frame time. So if you had a 90Hz display, and 1ms frame time, the screen is on for less than 10% of the time, which means the perceived brightness is less than 10%. And the lenses lead to losses in efficiency as well.Worth noting that headsets have pretty hefty optical paths in front of their displays, and I’d imagine any supply-chain rumours are only looking at the panel itself. ‘Pancake’ lenses, which are recently popular for their slim size and edge-to-edge clarity, are from what I’ve read typically 10-20% efficient.
I’m also not sure what the latest theories around frame persistence are, and how that impacts perceived brightness.
To be fair, the writers of the article don’t understand how panel brightness is related to the brightness of the image when it reaches the viewer’s eyes.Ah, someone who doesn’t understand anything about lenses and VR. Embarrassing comment.
I've never seen anything to suggest that is the plan. Where do you get your info? Did Apple suddenly pivot this week, realizing it's just not ready for prime time, and is changing the "rumors?"There’s nothing to “believe”, that has always been the plan. Next year they’re planning on releasing a consumer version for half the price.
I guess you're kidding, but I'd switch to a 2" iPhone in a nanosecond, and I'm not kidding at all.I’d buy a 1.4” iPhone.
I've never seen anything to suggest that is the plan. Where do you get your info? Did Apple suddenly pivot this week, realizing it's just not ready for prime time, and is changing the "rumors?"
This article should be retracted. Comparing the panel brightness of the Apple headset with the final brightness of the Quest Pro/2 (there is no headset called the Quest Pro 2) and the PS VR2 after low persistence and lens inefficiency gives a wrong impression of what to expect.I want to clarify that Ross Young deleted his original tweet. I asked him about it, and he has since told me that 4000:1 was a mistake. I've taken out that information.
ok. not necessarily doubting you, but gaslighting defines the modern world. i guess i need to go back to reading school. or something. 🤔Every price rumor for the last three years has mentioned this. Obviously nobody knows until the event but noone believes a $3K display is for the casual vr gamer.
Yes, but it features Safari… so the web will supply! 👍🏻Not allowed on a new Apple device like this.
Cars have been around for 100 years so we've developed so many standards and sub categories for comparison. VR/AR is still new so the only comparison you get is between the latest and the coming soon models.Interesting stuff, but I find it constantly weird a MASSIVE spec is quoted and then something like the Meta Quest 2 is talked about in comparison.
I mean, you don't find reviewers of cars saying:
"So this new $750,000 Ferrari with 1500bhp can do 230 mph, whereas the Ford Focus only manages 130 bhp with 120 top speed"
Yes they are both cars, but they are priced for totally different markets and that does not make the Ford a bad car.
You could focus on how Amazing the Meta Quest 2 is for it's price instead,
Really don't understand why reviews pick something not as good about a product 7 times cheaper and make it sound a negative towards that more affordable product.
Consume sports or to play sports? Imagine fantasy baseball leagues where fans are actually hitting against MLB pitchers.What is it for? Some of the things Jason Snell mentioned on Gruber’s podcast (mostly around sports) didn’t seem very compelling. I can’t imagine many people will want to wear bulky googles to consume sports.
Nits and contrast ratio numbers do not correlate that way. And the 1,000,000:1 ratios are all marketing nonsense.Hmm I wonder why that contrast ratio is so low then. OLED/microLED displays are usually have at least 1,000,000:1 contrast ratio.
No one in the position to verify this has been left with the ability to communicate due to recent blindness.Where does this 5000 nits rumor come from? Is this just speculation?
Don't you also use a jet engine to churn ice cream?4k ppi...that's just incredible
>5k nits seems too much, unless it's some weird use case
But at least you can't see that you have no legs.So, a headset that blinds users, is impossible to wear and can’t operate.
Well done Mark, can’t wait.
There was just a display trade show that showed 4K microOLED panels of similar brightness, so it’s at least plausible.Where does this 5000 nits rumor come from? Is this just speculation?
But these would be square displays, so two 4000*4000 pixel displays would be roughly equivalent to the number of pixels in an 8K television.As others have pointed out, this is confusing and probably an error. It takes four 4K displays to total 8K resolution, not two.