DigiTimes: Apple Partnering With Valve to Develop AR Headset

krazzix

macrumors member
Jun 15, 2010
97
100
Netherlands
Stream any Steam game from your computer to your AR glasses on any virtual screen size you like, anywhere in your home = win.

The only problem is most games are Windows only. If they work together to work on that, that would be groundbreaking. But possibly nearly impossible.
 

millerlite

macrumors regular
Oct 16, 2007
130
142
What I think we should see is an Augmented Reality set of glasses that have some sort of shutter or attachment that turns them into Virtual Reality glasses. And you don't need a computer to run anything, it's all in the glasses. Probably 10-20 years away, but that would be worth it, to me. Everything so far has been gimmicky.
 

69Mustang

macrumors 604
Jan 7, 2014
7,057
12,815
In between a rock and a hard place
What I think we should see is an Augmented Reality set of glasses that have some sort of shutter or attachment that turns them into Virtual Reality glasses. And you don't need a computer to run anything, it's all in the glasses. Probably 10-20 years away, but that would be worth it, to me. Everything so far has been gimmicky.
The tech for the screen portion of your desired device has existed for years. Transparent OLED. Transparent OLED displays would obviate the need for a shutter or attachment. Computer running everything on the glasses also wouldn't need a decade or two, that's probably capable now or at least within the next 2-3 years. Battery tech is the big hurdle for independence. Longevity and weight.
 

M3gatron

macrumors member
Sep 2, 2019
67
62
Spain
Anyway the fact that Apple is developing these AR glasses with Valve doesn't inspire confidence. Not that Valve is a bad company or anything but why would Apple need their help? Valve is a PC gaming oriented company.
 

Vanilla35

macrumors 68040
Apr 11, 2013
3,236
1,215
Washington D.C.
LOL. Smoking the good stuff?

Macs don't have great graphic cards for starters which hampers good gaming performance. Windows PCs will always be the better games platform - far better value for money - costing far less for a more powerful gaming rig than any Mac can offer. My gaming PC has been rock solid, in terms of stability.
eGPU?
 

star-affinity

macrumors 65816
Nov 14, 2007
1,075
412
Not true, macOS is a better platform for gaming the Windows thanks to Metal and stability.
In what way is Metal better than Direct3D for gaming?
In what way is macOS more stable than Windows when it comes to gaming?

How can macOS be a better gaming platform than Windows when the graphics card vendors (AMD and Nvidia currently) are focusing so heavily on driver optimization even for specific games?

It sounds to me that you mean macOS has the potential to be a better gaming platform than Windows, but it currently sure isn't. :)
 

Pakaku

macrumors 68020
Aug 29, 2009
2,198
2,197
Anyway the fact that Apple is developing these AR glasses with Valve doesn't inspire confidence. Not that Valve is a bad company or anything but why would Apple need their help? Valve is a PC gaming oriented company.
Valve has a very heavy investment into the VR scene, so they have the VR hardware expertise that would make them great partners to collaborate with. The only thing I'm confused about is how Valve's VR and Apple's AR will mesh together in a successful partnership.

They have also focused on non-Windows support for a relatively long time with things like porting their games, or Steam Proton, so they're not strictly PC gaming per se... but the only catch is they tend to focus more on Linux rather than OSX these days
 

Doomtomb

macrumors 6502
Jul 14, 2011
273
273
Austin, TX
I believe this could happen but it is doubtful whether it is prime-time for a consumer product. Maybe developers only.
 

Smartcom5

macrumors newbie
Apr 8, 2008
25
4
Not true, macOS is a better platform for gaming the Windows thanks to Metal and stability.
It's just us missing the joke here or are you actually serious?
If the latter, it begs the question what the very reason are, which led you believe it would be even remotely reflecting reality? The Mac OS macOS itself can't be it, since it lacks many of the fundamental basics for a system you could attribute such benefits towards to.

Just have the permanent forced Apple-typical update-cycle on application-software, which always was a matter of sink or swim for their customers, to not only stay up-to-date but even have the most basics things remain functioning (as Apple obviously loves to either break things completely or remove features altogether the recent years).

And that's all well prior to feeling the grip to overcome Apple's continuous ******** on their customers by degrading quite new a year old hardware to not get the latest system on purpose, »… Because **** you! We're Apple and we command you to either buy the most recent stuff every god-damn year all over again – or alternatively get lost on your second year's old pile of legacy-shice. Since _we_ decide who's participating within the pinnacle of fancyness!«.

So what's next? Metal?
That proprietary API which again is doomed to fail since Apple saw it fit to get rid of OpenGL altogether (and with that, break every backwards-compatibility, again) just to get incompatible to everything else on purpose again, despite it's virtually some Vulkan-flavoured copy-pasta anyway?

Then again, just look on how Apple always prevented their user-base to have any decent graphics ever since by either shipping some age-old mid-range graphics-cards which have become such a joke over time or even expecting them to get after external GPUs (which are crippled using the way they're connected anyway). It's a tragedy for sure.

And no, I haven't forgot about their surrounding software-stack when it comes to graphics. It's just that is has become that abysmal and worse over the course of the years, it isn't even worth mentioning.

So why is that you ask?

See, game-developers ain't notoriously famous for targeting end-user's possibly existing contingencies that special equipments might be available at the targeted user-base. They ain't and they never were – since it's imposing a high potential risk that they ain't going to sell any greater numbers of copies of their product first and foremost (due to a rather non-existing sales market in the first place).

They always aiming for the least common denominator within the target's market – to widening their possibly existing clientele of end-users to the maximum possible. Since every condition which needs to be necessarily in place prior for their games to be played in the first place (and thus, bought), accidentally narrows their targeted audience and resulting clientele of potential buyers even more. Possibly existing op·tion·al hardware like external decent graphics-cards aka eGPUs on a consumer's Mac ain't necessarily counting towards that, but a dedicated one alone and exclusively.

Who would've thought that? Your point again?

The thing is that Apple throughout the years tossed every effort of game-developers to find that common denominator again by steadily rising new techniques and killing the next one over and over again – well, apart from giving a darn shice about their OS's performance in the first place anyway, I might add. *cough Finder!

The issue is market share and bad porting.
Yes, the issue is porting, exactly. … and no, it isn't market-share!
It it were, we woulnd't've had witnessed the classical Mac OS or even the earlier versions of Mac OS X (up to 10.4 Tiger) sporting greater numbers of triple-A franchises and others titles as we see today when the Mac as a platform even had a smaller market-share.

It's the very attractivity for de·vel·op·ing towards that very platform, which makes it worthwhile – and eventually financially reliable enough to code for. Since curiously enough, even coders can't live on love coffee alone, even if they may code in Java.

… and speaking about money, Apple's everlasting arrogance for having to pay for even being allowed to develop for the Mac in the first place, is hard to beat when it comes to any decadency – though it always was that way, even back in my Macintosh-days with the god-awful MPW.

However, Apple has done everything in their power to kill off every darn effort of developers to develop games for their platform (the Mac OS) by crippling their architectures with laughable performance-advancements Gen to Gen, preventing graphic-cards vendors doing their jobs (by demanding the sovereignty of given drivers to be released on their platform) and whatnot.

For instance, it came as no surprise that AMD/nVidia after a while just said „You know what? We've enough from your shenanigans. Make your graphics and especially the drivers for them on your own if you're so damn keen about it“.

But this is gradually going to change.
This has been said since like 1998 when the iMac came out.

Funny enough, the Mac OS was decent and could be seen as a smaller major game-platform the developing of even bigger games was more than lucrative for. That was the case as long as Apple didn't **** on backwards-compatibility every few months again and kept on dividing their customer-base hardware-wise.

We even had that golden times where most major triple-A franchises like Battlefield, Quake, Call of Duty, Command & Conquer, Warcraft, Age of Empires, Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon, Sid Meier's Civilization, F1 Championship and other racing games, Fallout, Splinter Cell, Diablo, MaX Payne, Doom, the Total War-series and ailke (just to name a few prominent ones) were released for the Mac. It was a time when even ultra-niche game-developers like Paradox saw a market on the Mac as a platform and released Europa Universalis or Victoria, yet even the U.S. military saw the Mac as some major platform it's worth developing for when they developed Armerica's Army for it. Many titles even were Mac-exclusive.

It was at a time where there wasn't the question if some triple-A title will come to the Mac, but just when.
People enjoyed that times greatly, whereas Apple saw it likely with pure disgust.

Apple killed that as they saw it with ever-increasing disgrace that more and more people could afford a Mac and were keen to even play on those. That were the early years of Mac OS X. Heck, even the classical Mac OS like System 6 through Mac OS 9.2.1 saw more games than Mac OS macOS is seeing now.

tl;dr: Apple (alone) continuously kills gaming on a Mac, and no-one else – and they ever had.
          In addition, developing games is a business-decision, it always were.
 

Rotten_Apple_

macrumors newbie
Oct 10, 2019
6
2
Not true, macOS is a better platform for gaming the Windows thanks to Metal and stability.
Yep. My MacBook Air can emulate N64/PS1 games better than a PC with a dedicated GTX 1080 GPU. It's a shame Apple doesn't allow for it, tho.
 

Lalatoon

macrumors 6502
Jul 8, 2019
301
241
Not true, macOS is a better platform for gaming the Windows thanks to Metal and stability. The issue is market share and bad porting. But this is gradually going to change.
Check MrMacright YouTube channels:
I've made a video buy myself about eGPU gaming, it is in Italian anyway:
platform for gaming? no NVIDIA support...
 

star-affinity

macrumors 65816
Nov 14, 2007
1,075
412
It's just us missing the joke here or are you actually serious?
If the latter, it begs the question what the very reason are, which led you believe it would be even remotely reflecting reality? The Mac OS macOS itself can't be it, since it lacks many of the fundamental basics for a system you could attribute such benefits towards to.

Just have the permanent forced Apple-typical update-cycle on application-software, which always was a matter of sink or swim for their customers, to not only stay up-to-date but even have the most basics things remain functioning (as Apple obviously loves to either break things completely or remove features altogether the recent years).

And that's all well prior to feeling the grip to overcome Apple's continuous ******** on their customers by degrading quite new a year old hardware to not get the latest system on purpose, »… Because **** you! We're Apple and we command you to either buy the most recent stuff every god-damn year all over again – or alternatively get lost on your second year's old pile of legacy-shice. Since _we_ decide who's participating within the pinnacle of fancyness!«.

So what's next? Metal?
That proprietary API which again is doomed to fail since Apple saw it fit to get rid of OpenGL altogether (and with that, break every backwards-compatibility, again) just to get incompatible to everything else on purpose again, despite it's virtually some Vulkan-flavoured copy-pasta anyway?

Then again, just look on how Apple always prevented their user-base to have any decent graphics ever since by either shipping some age-old mid-range graphics-cards which have become such a joke over time or even expecting them to get after external GPUs (which are crippled using the way they're connected anyway). It's a tragedy for sure.

And no, I haven't forgot about their surrounding software-stack when it comes to graphics. It's just that is has become that abysmal and worse over the course of the years, it isn't even worth mentioning.

So why is that you ask?

See, game-developers ain't notoriously famous for targeting end-user's possibly existing contingencies that special equipments might be available at the targeted user-base. They ain't and they never were – since it's imposing a high potential risk that they ain't going to sell any greater numbers of copies of their product first and foremost (due to a rather non-existing sales market in the first place).

They always aiming for the least common denominator within the target's market – to widening their possibly existing clientele of end-users to the maximum possible. Since every condition which needs to be necessarily in place prior for their games to be played in the first place (and thus, bought), accidentally narrows their targeted audience and resulting clientele of potential buyers even more. Possibly existing op·tion·al hardware like external decent graphics-cards aka eGPUs on a consumer's Mac ain't necessarily counting towards that, but a dedicated one alone and exclusively.

Who would've thought that? Your point again?

The thing is that Apple throughout the years tossed every effort of game-developers to find that common denominator again by steadily rising new techniques and killing the next one over and over again – well, apart from giving a darn shice about their OS's performance in the first place anyway, I might add. *cough Finder!


Yes, the issue is porting, exactly. … and no, it isn't market-share!
It it were, we woulnd't've had witnessed the classical Mac OS or even the earlier versions of Mac OS X (up to 10.4 Tiger) sporting greater numbers of triple-A franchises and others titles as we see today when the Mac as a platform even had a smaller market-share.

It's the very attractivity for de·vel·op·ing towards that very platform, which makes it worthwhile – and eventually financially reliable enough to code for. Since curiously enough, even coders can't live on love coffee alone, even if they may code in Java.

… and speaking about money, Apple's everlasting arrogance for having to pay for even being allowed to develop for the Mac in the first place, is hard to beat when it comes to any decadency – though it always was that way, even back in my Macintosh-days with the god-awful MPW.

However, Apple has done everything in their power to kill off every darn effort of developers to develop games for their platform (the Mac OS) by crippling their architectures with laughable performance-advancements Gen to Gen, preventing graphic-cards vendors doing their jobs (by demanding the sovereignty of given drivers to be released on their platform) and whatnot.

For instance, it came as no surprise that AMD/nVidia after a while just said „You know what? We've enough from your shenanigans. Make your graphics and especially the drivers for them on your own if you're so damn keen about it“.


This has been said since like 1998 when the iMac came out.

Funny enough, the Mac OS was decent and could be seen as a smaller major game-platform the developing of even bigger games was more than lucrative for. That was the case as long as Apple didn't **** on backwards-compatibility every few months again and kept on dividing their customer-base hardware-wise.

We even had that golden times where most major triple-A franchises like Battlefield, Quake, Call of Duty, Command & Conquer, Warcraft, Age of Empires, Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon, Sid Meier's Civilization, F1 Championship and other racing games, Fallout, Splinter Cell, Diablo, MaX Payne, Doom, the Total War-series and ailke (just to name a few prominent ones) were released for the Mac. It was a time when even ultra-niche game-developers like Paradox saw a market on the Mac as a platform and released Europa Universalis or Victoria, yet even the U.S. military saw the Mac as some major platform it's worth developing for when they developed Armerica's Army for it. Many titles even were Mac-exclusive.

It was at a time where there wasn't the question if some triple-A title will come to the Mac, but just when.
People enjoyed that times greatly, whereas Apple saw it likely with pure disgust.

Apple killed that as they saw it with ever-increasing disgrace that more and more people could afford a Mac and were keen to even play on those. That were the early years of Mac OS X. Heck, even the classical Mac OS like System 6 through Mac OS 9.2.1 saw more games than Mac OS macOS is seeing now.

tl;dr: Apple (alone) continuously kills gaming on a Mac, and no-one else – and they ever had.
          In addition, developing games is a business-decision, it always were.
While I agree with some things you say I think you're a little too negative here.
There certainly are many games available for MacOS now too to and I think Metal will get some love from developers especially since it's also used for iOS (and tvOS) devices. We'll see I guess.... :)

But Windows is definitely way ahead when it comes to gaming currently and I can't see that changing in the foreseeable future when we don't have any affordable desktops from Apple with powerful graphics cards (eGPU via Thunderbolt 3 seems to take a performance hit) and no support in MacOS for Nvidia's latest offerings plus the game focused drivers from AMD and Nvidia for Windows games. Etc.
 

brenton289

macrumors member
May 16, 2014
75
183
If you thought Apple wasn't already releasing unpolished, slapped together products, you sure will now with this new partnership.
 

confessJason

macrumors member
Oct 14, 2011
84
235
I hope this isn't true. Valve needs to support true innovators. Video games are Art. Yes. They are. They are also the highest form of Art. I learned so much about warfare from playing Call of Duty. Geo-politics from Metal Gear Solid. The Last of Us is the greatest work of Art of all time. It gave us the non-obvious message: A father will do anything for his baby girl. The Final Fantasy soundtrack is beyong anything Bach composed. Stanely Kurbick has NOTHING on Hideo Kojima--our Greatest Artist of the Modern Age. And Red Dead 2 has taught me a lot of survival skills including hunting and fishing.

As a professional Twitch streamer/post-modern Artist, I need companies like Valve to support real artists. For 5 years I have been working on my GOD-like time in Vice City, RE2, Castlevania, FF7, MGS3. I need the best possible rig. Also consider, I haven't spent a single US dollar on going to Europe or whatever. I pop in Bloodborne on my 75-inch TV and I AM in another world for 12 hours.

My wife's cancer lab is outfitted with iMacs. That's all it seems to be good for. I see them in a lot of science/medical labs. They are not good for Art.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Flint Ironstag

meetajhu

macrumors member
Apr 13, 2014
34
30
Just imagine Apple buying Valve and getting all those games and turning Steam into a part of Apple Arcade. This should be fun.
I think it’s the other way around Valve might buy Apple. Valve is one of the richest company in the world with no board members