Well $299 6-degree inside-out VR shells (better than oculus) are coming to Windows PC's soon , not sure why Macs are not powerful enough . Perhaps its just old tech. Gaming s hard I think its telling apl does not game .
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.
Oculus Rift Support for Macs Not 'Currently on the Roadmap'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No they still wouldn't because it would be a $5000 computer that very few would buy
Starting today, Oculus is dropping the price of the Rift and Touch controllers by $100, dropping the price to $598 for both products, a much more affordable price point. Individually, the Rift is now priced at $499 and the Touch controllers are now priced at $99.
Article Link: Oculus Rift Support for Macs Not 'Currently on the Roadmap'
"A much more affordable price point" - the only explanation for this statement is someone is spending too much time in the virtual reality. I MIGHT pick one up at $4.99 and $.99.
While Apple are pushing low powered GPUs in their PC range, why would Oculus be interested in supporting a Mac?
What a coincidence. I was just thinking about how I could choose to retreat from the world completely, or perhaps try living, and decided on the latter. I guess it all worked out then for all parties.
Yes. Folks seem to be going apoplectic about this, but why do I think that Apple isn't losing out on vast dollars from a vast group of gamers who have vast discretionary income to spend a vast amount of money on a gadget with a sliver of value?
Yup. I generally don't mind watching friends and people get excited about the 'new thing', but I have rather enjoyed destroying some of my friend's optimism about the future of VR. No one wants to wear all of that **** for extended periods of time.
Who really cares? Not your average PC user or consumer that's for sure, considering the abysmal sales of the Oculus platform. If any did, PSVR is a lot more accessible, has a better ecosystem, and a much lower barrier to entry, and has been a lot more successful in the marketplace.
IMHO VR is a fad, and will not catch on with the mass market. (I could be completely wrong, but I don't think most end users want to wear a helmet-like-device while using their tech).
So best of luck Mr.Oculus, you're going to need it IMHO
EDIT>>Apple doesnt need Oculus; Apple makes more than enough money. Mac users dont need Oculus, they can buy a PSVR.
IMHO VR is a fad, and will not catch on with the mass market. (I could be completely wrong, but I don't think most end users want to wear a helmet-like-device while using their tech).
So best of luck Mr.Oculus, you're going to need it IMHO
EDIT>>Apple doesnt need Oculus; Apple makes more than enough money. Mac users dont need Oculus, they can buy a PSVR.
Last edited:
I don't know that I care that much about Oculus Rift but for graphics in general I wish that Apple would move away from 2010 era graphics ability. I'm not looking for a killer game machine but most software today is graphically more intensive than it was just a few years ago but Apple is stuck because of their thinness versus modern graphics cards power and heat dissipation requirements.
If Apple REALLY wants to prove that they advance computer and tablet design then make a high end GFX card fit AND work in something close to their products current form factor, without needing to throttle the cards performance.
If Apple REALLY wants to prove that they advance computer and tablet design then make a high end GFX card fit AND work in something close to their products current form factor, without needing to throttle the cards performance.
Is Oculus even the leader anymore? It seems to me that Vive ,and maybe also PSVR, is far more popular than Oculus.
Edit: I found some numbers in an article from earlier this week:
http://www.ibtimes.com/psvr-vs-vive...most-one-million-playstation-vr-units-2498352
Oculus: 243K
Vive: 420K
PSVR: 915K
So yeah - Oculus is in dead last. They're not the leader at all anymore. And I guess a lot more people have PSVR than I had thought.
Last edited:
Did you think People would pay $800 for a slab you have to charge daily? Seriously?
VR has some use cases and IF they compelling enough it'll become as pervasive as the daily charge slabs you buy and carry now. I think many would like to sit in French cafe a break and sip coffee , one example. I can see many once VR get going replacing their $800 slabs with a more compelling experience.
Its not like SmartPhones are the "end all be all" of tech , they are transition phase like any other tech
What I can tell you that current Mac Pro's are something to laugh about when it comes down to professional workstations. Apple knows that but they are more interested in making everything thin and small than something that can truly put food on the table.
You mean a laptop designed for mobility is a poor fit for gaming? Color me shocked.
When was the MacBook Pro or its predecessor, the PowerBook, ever, ever, ever intended for gaming?
We're talking a bizarre slice of the market. Gamers (not a lot of people) who buy near-$1k VR gear (fewer people) and want to play on a Mac (far fewer people yet), on a laptop (um, anyone left?).
Yeah, it's puzzling that Tim Cook would rather focus on the iPhone. Puzzling.
Same here. Sadly, the myth that you need a super computer in addition to $900.00 worth of GPU power is still alive and well. Over the holidays, I bought my first Windows box in 20+ years. I spent about $1100.00 on a new i7 computer with 16GB or memory and a GTX1070. I'm very prone to motion sickness, but so far, so good with running purchased apps and developing with Unity3D. I hate the Win10 interface, but the thing is stable and anti-malware software is not the system hog it once was.
They completely failed, despite the big pickets of their parent company Facebook.
They better focus on righting their ship and embrace Apple products, as it's the only demographic that has the money to sustain VR.
But they won't, and will be completely buried into oblivion by Apple's AR offering in 2018.
They better focus on righting their ship and embrace Apple products, as it's the only demographic that has the money to sustain VR.
But they won't, and will be completely buried into oblivion by Apple's AR offering in 2018.
Then it sounds like Oculus has developed their way out of ANY platform, as far as "off-the-shelf" computers go, haven't they?
Note: If your add-on product requires a more powerful computer than 99% of the population of the planet has in their possession, your add-on product WILL fail.
Of course they're not. Is anyone surprised? People barely make games for Macs. (Slight exaggeration…I know)
Yes I did think people would pay $800 for a slab you have to charge daily. Why the difference? Said slab is a lot less "invasive" and fits in organically with everyday life than a VR-helmet.
Mind you, I do not have a crystal ball, and I could be totally wrong. It's just my opinion and gut instinct. They didnt think everyone would have/use a "personal computer" either. What changed was that computers changed enough to "fit into" people's lives instead of the other way around (not to mention the value proposition). With VR I dont see any of that happening.
Let me chime in as both a die-hard VR user (Vive, desktop and Samsung's mobile Oculus) and someone that has purchased an external Thunderbolt graphic card enclosure for his MacBook Pro.
First, what the guy has stated is perfectly true. For VR at current resolutions, you MUST have a GTX 1060 or an RX 480 for the Vive. Not anyhing less for the Vive. The Oculus has a bit lower resolution, making the GPU needs somewhat less stringent, but I wouldn't bother with lesser cards. Mobile GPUs (except for Nvidia's 1060+-series, but that's only available in dedicated gaming notebooks) are a no-no.
The latter also means not a single Apple Mac is capable of driving VR helmets properly. Not a single one. And this won't change - again, you need at least a mobile GTX-1060 for proper VR support, and it's simply impossible to put a card in a sleek, thin current MacBook Pro. (Again, only thick and heavy gaming notebooks have a mobile GTX-1060, nothing else.)
Second, there is a solution: external GPU's. But, as
- MacBooks no longer have PCI Express cards (RIP 17" models - the ones that, in the end, kept having it) making the, in every respect, much more expensive Thunderbolt the only connection option and
- Thunderbolt enclosures are both prohibitely expensive and pretty incompatible with MBP hardware (particularly Bootcamp),
there are very few people currently using eGPU's with their MacBooks.
I'm very active in the eGPU community (see for example my posts at https://egpu.io/forums/activity/menneisyys/ ) and I can tell you there are only some hundreds or thousands of us having Thunderbolt eGPU's and even fewer that do possess VR hardware.
Why would Oculus bother catering for so few users? Particularly as the Oculus people also know Apple
- is unlikely to introduce its own desktop GPU for MBP's (via, say, Apple-branded or at least endorsed eGPU enclosures or full, all-in-one external boxes)
- will keep on making eGPU users' life VERY hard. Again, currently, using an eGPU with an MBP, particularly under Bootcamp, is a very complicated affair particularly because of Apple's trying to disable using eGPU's. For example, while I can already use my AKiTiO Node + RX 480 combo under MacOS, I, after countless hours of hacking, still have problems doing the same under Bootcamp. It's currently definitely not a plug-and-play solution and this will unlikely to change, particularly with Apple's latest steps making it even harder to use AMD-manufactured GPU's with Thunderbolt 3(-only) computers.
First, what the guy has stated is perfectly true. For VR at current resolutions, you MUST have a GTX 1060 or an RX 480 for the Vive. Not anyhing less for the Vive. The Oculus has a bit lower resolution, making the GPU needs somewhat less stringent, but I wouldn't bother with lesser cards. Mobile GPUs (except for Nvidia's 1060+-series, but that's only available in dedicated gaming notebooks) are a no-no.
The latter also means not a single Apple Mac is capable of driving VR helmets properly. Not a single one. And this won't change - again, you need at least a mobile GTX-1060 for proper VR support, and it's simply impossible to put a card in a sleek, thin current MacBook Pro. (Again, only thick and heavy gaming notebooks have a mobile GTX-1060, nothing else.)
Second, there is a solution: external GPU's. But, as
- MacBooks no longer have PCI Express cards (RIP 17" models - the ones that, in the end, kept having it) making the, in every respect, much more expensive Thunderbolt the only connection option and
- Thunderbolt enclosures are both prohibitely expensive and pretty incompatible with MBP hardware (particularly Bootcamp),
there are very few people currently using eGPU's with their MacBooks.
I'm very active in the eGPU community (see for example my posts at https://egpu.io/forums/activity/menneisyys/ ) and I can tell you there are only some hundreds or thousands of us having Thunderbolt eGPU's and even fewer that do possess VR hardware.
Why would Oculus bother catering for so few users? Particularly as the Oculus people also know Apple
- is unlikely to introduce its own desktop GPU for MBP's (via, say, Apple-branded or at least endorsed eGPU enclosures or full, all-in-one external boxes)
- will keep on making eGPU users' life VERY hard. Again, currently, using an eGPU with an MBP, particularly under Bootcamp, is a very complicated affair particularly because of Apple's trying to disable using eGPU's. For example, while I can already use my AKiTiO Node + RX 480 combo under MacOS, I, after countless hours of hacking, still have problems doing the same under Bootcamp. It's currently definitely not a plug-and-play solution and this will unlikely to change, particularly with Apple's latest steps making it even harder to use AMD-manufactured GPU's with Thunderbolt 3(-only) computers.
Millions of people play games and want to do more on Macbook other than sipping starbucks and browsing the web.
The hell? No, VR does not require a "water-cooled" box. That sounds like a really terrible idea. It also doesnt require a liquid cooled box. Also, it not only doesnt require DUAL video cards, but that would actually be pretty dumb for gaming. Just a decent processor and a 9-series or better GPU.
My i7 and 1080 run my HTC Vive just fine, no "water cool" or second GPU needed