Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I'll still have my Developer Kit, and will keep on developing my game--on my Mac! Release of my game may be delayed by this, but production of it need not be. Unless Unity loses what Mac VR support it has had.

It's a shame, but my top priority is to see VR finally take off. If this is a smart early decision to make at launch, I can accept a little delay.
 
Okay, I'm a pretty crappy developer, but wouldn't an Application created in Unity and compiled for OSX still run? I might have to play around with the new 0.6 beta at least to give it a shot.

Yep! I'm using a Mac to build cross platform content in Unity at the moment. I think it will be more at the driver layer, where new features, better performance, etc., is available on Windows. We're also using a Razer Hydra for hand input, and it's the same deal.

I'll still have my Developer Kit, and will keep on developing my game--on my Mac! Release of my game may be delayed by this, but production of it need not be. Unless Unity loses what Mac VR support it has had.

It's a shame, but my top priority is to see VR finally take off. If this is a smart early decision to make at launch, I can accept a little delay.


No comment, just kind of pinging you as someone doing Unity dev on OSX (I'm also working with the Unreal engine on 4.7.x, pretty awesome)
 
To Our Friends at Oculus,

On behalf of all Mac users who don't want to look like as big of a tool as the guy in that video, we thank you.

Signed,

Those Who Have More Style Than a Windows User
 
This is not surprising news whatsoever. A good move by Oculus, you want to focus on getting it right with as few dependencies as possible first. Then you can expand features and support later.

The Mac does not support gaming in any credible way. Apple's graphics drivers are horrible, the GPUs they offer are ancient or garbage. The gaming experience on a Mac is shockingly bad.

I waited a long time for Apple to get their act together. Owned Mac Pros and flashed PC video cards in, dual booted, did what it took to make it work within the Apple ecosystem. What I wanted and what Apple was offering were never aligned. With the 2013 Mac Pro release I realized that we simply were never going to get a Mac that was any good at gaming. So I threw in the towel, built a gaming PC, and haven't looked back.

I use a 15" rMBP alongside it as my main machine. I use the PC for 3D modeling/rendering and gaming. Really it is a good setup because both are doing what they are best at.

Make note, the current Mac Pro uses very old GPUs and the CrossFire solution is unreliable. The iMacs have always used top-end mobile grade GPUs which are not that fast. The laptops have always used mid-range mobile GPUs.
 
Oh no, I won't be able to wear a TV helmet on my head like a tech-obsessed shut-in.
 
I don't know, but imagining people using these things triggers dystopian fantasies in my head, like people literally staring into boxes all day, completely dislodged from reality. I don't know exactly why, but this is sort of where I draw the line. This is the point where technology is nothing but some sad kind of escapism. I know I shouldn't think this and I will look pretty stupid for ever thinking this in ten years when it's an established technology. The thought of seeing people sitting on a couch with these things on instead of looking at each other gives me the creeps. Technology should integrate with real life, not be a substitution for it. I already hate how everybody runs around staring at their smartphones all the time.

I'm probably already on my path to become that old guy complaining about young people and technology. I'm probably never going to use this as this sort of stereoscopy gives me headaches anyway.
 
Oh no, I won't be able to wear a TV helmet on my head like a tech-obsessed shut-in.

You clearly have no experience with a Rift. You should really try it before you start writing crap about something you have no idea about.
 
This is not surprising news whatsoever. A good move by Oculus, you want to focus on getting it right with as few dependencies as possible first. Then you can expand features and support later.

The Mac does not support gaming in any credible way. Apple's graphics drivers are horrible, the GPUs they offer are ancient or garbage. The gaming experience on a Mac is shockingly bad.

I waited a long time for Apple to get their act together. Owned Mac Pros and flashed PC video cards in, dual booted, did what it took to make it work within the Apple ecosystem. What I wanted and what Apple was offering were never aligned. With the 2013 Mac Pro release I realized that we simply were never going to get a Mac that was any good at gaming. So I threw in the towel, built a gaming PC, and haven't looked back.

I use a 15" rMBP alongside it as my main machine. I use the PC for 3D modeling/rendering and gaming. Really it is a good setup because both are doing what they are best at.

Make note, the current Mac Pro uses very old GPUs and the CrossFire solution is unreliable. The iMacs have always used top-end mobile grade GPUs which are not that fast. The laptops have always used mid-range mobile GPUs.

I hope that Vulkan (the followup to OpenGL) will help the driver part. It's one thing that Apple doesn't offer the latest and greatest graphics hardware in their computers, but at least it would be nice if performance was on part with Windows.
 
Sad that your hackintosh is running OS X and Occulus won't be available for it? OR Sad that your hackintosh's hardware specs don't qualify to use the gear?

If your Mac or Hack has the specs just install Windows on it. Problem solved.

Yes, I'll be using Windows, I have a GTX 970 in it –– better than anything Apple itself uses except the Mac Pro (and those aren't gaming cards anyway).
 
This could potentially be a bit of a downfall for them depending on pricing of the unit. Apple users historically pay good $$$ for their gadgets ... Windows environments feed on the cheap. Will be interesting when they come up with pricing to see if Windows users balk ....

In my opinion, they should make console versions of this ... why limit to one environment ...
 
I remember reading somewhere that only about 10% of steam users use OS X , they are not shooting themselves in the foot. They are making the right decision to target the majority of the markert.

I said development, not players. I'm actually surprised that you found so many users on Steam use OS X.

I think developers are more important for the VR systems than the users, right now. Nobody is using any VR system, because none of them are out yet. If a VR system can't get developers on board, it won't have games for it, and so users won't buy it.

I have a game I'm working on. I was considering making it work with Rift. Now that Rift has announced they won't support the OS that I develop the game on, I won't. I imagine there are other game developers who think the same way (particularly the non-professional ones.) So they've shot themselves in the foot.
 
Totally not surprising that OS X and Linux got back-burner'd here. Game developers are in love with DriectX (arguably for good reason). If you are a gamer I urge you to just try installing Windows on your mac and playing the same games in windows as you were playing on your Mac (easy if you have Steam) and you'll notice how much further your hardware will go. I play CS:GO and for a long time I thought it was perfectly fine in OS X, then I decided to try it in BootCamp (win7) and I can set the settings much higher and it plays at a higher fps with lower latency.

Games and Enterprise apps - the only reasons to run windows.

It will be interesting to see how VR ultimately shakes out Playstation's Project Morpheus might just come out on top, HTC's Vive is an interesting option but I can't imagine powering one of these from a smartphone (and will it even work on iOS?) and the original: Oculus Rift.

I'm getting one of these VR solutions but will watch how it unfolds before I decide.
 
This is not surprising news whatsoever. A good move by Oculus, you want to focus on getting it right with as few dependencies as possible first. Then you can expand features and support later.

The Mac does not support gaming in any credible way. Apple's graphics drivers are horrible, the GPUs they offer are ancient or garbage. The gaming experience on a Mac is shockingly bad.

You're taking that about 10 steps further than it needs to go. Seriously, just stop because gaming on a Mac is not "shockingly bad" neither are the GPU's "garbage". :rolleyes:
 
Lame..

I tried out a DK2 and liked everything but the resolution. Needs retina.

Unfortunately that's not a reality for stereoscopic gaming currently. I've run stereoscopic gaming for many years (mostly via. TriDef), and the overhead is simply massive. Frame-rates are 1/2 to 1/3 what they are outside of stereoscopic mode - usually closer to the 1/3 value. Thus, if you want to design a rig capable of playing a game at a minimum of 30fps in any given game, you have to build a rig capable of maintaining 90fps as a minimum outside of stereoscopic mode! Overhead is largely CPU bound as well, so simply increasing the GPU power is not as big a help as it it would seem. The overhead also scales considerably with AA and resolution. There are a host of other issues associated with stereoscopic gaming in current form, that the developers of the Rift are working to overcome (IIRC, they need a minimum of 90fps to feel "real" enough, otherwise sufficient input lag is introduced to make many users sick). The process of converting to stereoscopic mode also introduces a TON of extra realism and detail to a scene. Go play a game like DAO or Skyrim in "2D" mode, then look at the same game, with the same settings, but in stereoscopic mode. The amount of detail and realism gained is downright amazing. So running in "retina" mode (4K, etc.) really isn't necessary as there is already a significant increase in perceived resolution and detail.

While it's sad to see the Rift go "Windows-centric" for now, it's not surprising. What with basically every machine built capable of running Windows, and the performance advantage of Windows over OS X / Linux in most games, it makes a lot of sense. Those running a Mac OS X or Linux box can, if desired, install and run Windows for gaming with the Rift. Not at all a bad solution in the short-term.

EDIT: Here is some good technical info about the issues: https://www.oculus.com/blog/powering-the-rift/

It's worth noting that pretty much NOTHING in the Apple world can come close to meeting the specs. I think a big part of that is the refresh rate / frame rate needing to be SO high for a head-mounted display. If you wish to get into stereoscopic gaming on a reasonably budget it is possible on normal 3D displays (personally, I use a TRUE 720p DPL so I can run in 720p mode with no pixel-scaling) where as long as you maintain a minimum of 30fps you are generally fine. You want to avoid traditional 1080p displays for now, because your choices are all bad once you have a 1080p display: Lock to 24fps to match refresh rate, or experience so much tearing you will hurl. Or upscale from 720p/60 to 1080p; which looks like total poo. You're better off buying a much cheaper 720p DLP, which means you only have to push 720p from your GPU, so all-in-all a budget way to get into stereoscopic gaming. Also, nVidia's solutions, unfortunately, do not support full-resolution rendering in the industry-standard 3D modes; you must select between a host of picture-quality-reducing modes. So, despite being in the stereoscopic gaming-industry a shorter time, you're probably better off going with an AMD solution so you can enjoy full-quality rendering.

It will be interesting to see how the Rift deals with translating older games into stereoscopic games. The only real player in that game currently is Tri-Def, and I know they are having financial issues currently. But people are going to want to (already ARE) playing a host of older games in perfect stereoscopic mode. (Skyrim, despite being a crappy and boring game, is truly breathtaking on a stereoscopic display).
 
Last edited:
Yes, I'll be using Windows, I have a GTX 970 in it –– better than anything Apple itself uses except the Mac Pro (and those aren't gaming cards anyway).

I can't remember since the late 90's to early 2000's that Apple ever claimed their Macs to be gaming machines. Some of you guys here act like they do. They don't.
 
I have a game I'm working on. I was considering making it work with Rift. Now that Rift has announced they won't support the OS that I develop the game on, I won't. I imagine there are other game developers who think the same way (particularly the non-professional ones.) So they've shot themselves in the foot.

You will be shooting yourself in the foot, nobody else. Those of us who adopted stereoscopic gaming do not, generally, go back (it's kind of like going back to flat-polygon games after playing games with texture-mapping; it's just not a good experience except for "retro" experiences.) Making a game which doesn't support stereoscopic gaming will be, very shortly, a guaranteed way to be sure your game doesn't sell well... It's been a long time coming, but stereoscopic gaming is finally just about here for the masses, not just the "early adopters" (I've been stereoscopic for more than 5 years now.)
 
I've been following VR headsets since Virtual IO released the i-Glasses in 1995

Every single time, from then till now, the experience has always been the same. It makes for an AWESOME demo. It is THRILLING in every way. It feels like the future, and that you can be on the cutting edge!

Then you buy one, and those dreamy moments of the demo are replaced with reality.

You want that same experience that the demo had, but not with the demo software, with the software that you actually like...but the headset doesn't support it. So you mess around with the handful of software it does support. Unfortunately it's not what you really wanted, and it gets old fast. The first twinges of regret start to appear, but they are easy to ignore at this point.

You tell yourself that there's a more basic compatibility mode for ALL games, including those that don't support the API directly...but it's just a hollow marketing gimmick because using that mode sucks.

You genuinely believe the promises that better support and more software is coming. And it does...sort of...in small spurts. It's still not what you wanted, and even that peters out quickly. The headset spends more and more time tucked away under the coffee table until one day you find it and realize it's been months since you've used it.

Then there's the social outcast experience, which is a real thing. Actual life is going on around you, and it's weird. You hear people walking around, talking doing things, and not only does it break the immersion, but you feel left out in a weird way. You feel awkward around them and they feel awkward around you. The VR headset is a real barrier between you and them.

You have friends over to use it, but other than demos, you don't do much with it. Everything thinks its cool, but then you sit on the couch and play Nintendo, Xbox, whatever.

And every time, EVERY time there's been another headset, there's that hope that this time it will be different. The resolution is better! It weighs less! The refresh rate is higher! Head tracking actually works! It's supported by a big, rich company like SEGA/Sony/Google/Samsung/Facebook! So lots of games are going to support it!

The Rift is no different. At all. I know the Rift "wows" everyone, but those "wow" moments have always been there. The problems with mass market appeal were never due to poor resolution, or head tracking, or any other "specification on the box".

IMHO the Rift will release and thousands of people will buy them. They will have a great time with them for a short period of time. But much quicker than they expect, the magic will be lost. And one day they'll forget about it... and instead they'll be playing Clash of Farmsville 3 or Call of Battlefield 9 instead.

Then a couple of years later there will some other new VR headset, and they'll explain why it's really better this time, and the cycle will repeat.

Eventually I do believe we'll get to mass market adoption, but I see absolutely nothing about the Rift that fixes the real problems with mass acceptance of VR headsets.
 
Take a look at this application for the Rift, called Virtual Desktop. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JynN5mmZ0KQ

This doesn't look compelling to me until he gets to the actual VR game (and I'm not a gamer so even that isn't that interesting).

Certainly in the initial iterations with a large-ish pod strapped to your head, it's definitely not compelling to me. How do I look out the window? How do I see the keyboard, how do I eat my lunch at my desk with this thing on? So many things become a giant pain to do with this thing strapped to your eyes blocking your vision from the real world. It would be a case where you put it on for a particular purpose, do that activity, then take it off and rejoin reality.

Once things get smaller, maybe it becomes better. I would think you'd need to block your peripheral vision for the VR effect not to be disjointed.

I have to wonder if holographic type projection won't be a better way forward.
 
Every single time, from then till now, the experience has always been the same. It makes for an AWESOME demo. It is THRILLING in every way. It feels like the future, and that you can be on the cutting edge!

Then you buy one, and those dreamy moments of the demo are replaced with reality.

You want that same experience that the demo had, but not with the demo software, with the software that you actually like...but the headset doesn't support it. So you mess around with the handful of software it does support. Unfortunately it's not what you really wanted, and it gets old fast. The first twinges of regret start to appear, but they are easy to ignore at this point.

You tell yourself that there's a more basic compatibility mode for ALL games, including those that don't support the API directly...but it's just a hollow marketing gimmick because using that mode sucks.

You genuinely believe the promises that better support and more software is coming. And it does...sort of...in small spurts. It's still not what you wanted, and even that peters out quickly. The headset spends more and more time tucked away under the coffee table until one day you find it and realize it's been months since you've used it.

Then there's the social outcast experience, which is a real thing. Actual life is going on around you, and it's weird. You hear people walking around, talking doing things, and not only does it break the immersion, but you feel left out in a weird way. You feel awkward around them and they feel awkward around you. The VR headset is a real barrier between you and them.

You have friends over to use it, but other than demos, you don't do much with it. Everything thinks its cool, but then you sit on the couch and play Nintendo, Xbox, whatever.

And every time, EVERY time there's been another headset, there's that hope that this time it will be different. The resolution is better! It weighs less! The refresh rate is higher! Head tracking actually works! It's supported by a big, rich company like SEGA/Sony/Google/Samsung/Facebook! So lots of games are going to support it!

The Rift is no different. At all. I know the Rift "wows" everyone, but those "wow" moments have always been there. The problems with mass market appeal were never due to poor resolution, or head tracking, or any other "specification on the box".

IMHO the Rift will release and thousands of people will buy them. They will have a great time with them for a short period of time. But much quicker than they expect, the magic will be lost. And one day they'll forget about it... and instead they'll be playing Clash of Farmsville 3 or Call of Battlefield 9 instead.

Then a couple of years later there will some other new VR headset, and they'll explain why it's really better this time, and the cycle will repeat.

Eventually I do believe we'll get to mass market adoption, but I see absolutely nothing about the Rift that fixes the real problems with mass acceptance of VR headsets.

I disagree that previous VR headsets were not successful due to specs.They were totally dire, often only display games in one color such as red. The head tracking and latency were so high they physically made people sick. There were a lot of issues that are now resolved. We can have good looking games that don't make people sick, and it offers a genuinely better gaming experience than can be achieved on a monitor.

Have you actually tried the Rift yourself ? if so, in the years i've been following it, you'd have to be one of only a couple of people who have sat down with it for a few hours or more to try it and genuinely doesn't like it.

This doesn't look compelling to me until he gets to the actual VR game (and I'm not a gamer so even that isn't that interesting).

Certainly in the initial iterations with a large-ish pod strapped to your head, it's definitely not compelling to me. How do I look out the window? How do I see the keyboard, how do I eat my lunch at my desk with this thing on? So many things become a giant pain to do with this thing strapped to your eyes blocking your vision from the real world. It would be a case where you put it on for a particular purpose, do that activity, then take it off and rejoin reality.

Once things get smaller, maybe it becomes better. I would think you'd need to block your peripheral vision for the VR effect not to be disjointed.

I have to wonder if holographic type projection won't be a better way forward.


Yeah you're pretty much right on most of those things. They're all genuine problems. One of the most promising things is a combination of RGB, depth sensing, time of flight and SLAM cameras to recreate the real world and overlay it into your virtual world. You'll know where you keyboard and cup of water is exactly, because the headset will recognise them and where they are and overlay them into the virtual world as objects within that virtual world. It's really hard to do and they aren't there yet, but expect to see that kind of thing in 3, 4, 5 years time. As for looking out the window, well that might be a tricky one to solve. But your desk will be placed on the middle of a beautiful beach in Hawaii, so you won't want to look out your window :p

Though think how much people use headphones, despite the fact it stops you from hearing your door bell, people speaking to you etc.
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.