Very smart decision by Oculus Rift. Why waste resources to make their products compatible with OS X while Apple is no longer making computers anymore?
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
Sure! They're lovely - assuming they do work. On my particular 15" early 2013 i7 MBP, I still wasn't able to make to work it under Bootcamp. Under MacOS, it's WONDERFUL for both gaming and speeding up image / video editors.
My Node + RX 480 combo, for example, makes Capture One Pro image exporting about two times faster than the default no-eGPU case.
Um. There is proof that these new laptops are MORE cool and have BETTER cooling than the previous models.
They probably aren't making the Rift for Chrome Books either, so at least we are in good company!
The end of literacy is coming. With books, the cost of the hardware is trivial. It hasn't really advanced much since Gutenberg. Well, the pop-pup book. Or the book where you pull a string and Howdy Doody says hello. But really, the trick is, you read it. The software, and all the universal application, the soul of mankind, is inside you. No fancy chips, no water-cooled stuff, and all of human history and intellectual pursuits is inside your head. Versus, you play a shoot-'em-up game and zap monsters. Ho-hum.
On what kind of hardware do you want to play 3D games with non-minimal settings? Even the latest 2016 MBP's can only use minimal settings with Full HD game resolution...
You'd think that with that huge Aluminum (Aluminium for those not in the US) case, that would be an ideal heat sink for it. All that would be needed is a way to conduct the heat to it, whether it was a fluid path (ideal, like a thermocycling fluid with no need for a pump) or a proximity placement to the back.
Oh well...
The most precious thing in this world is time. Our lives go by quickly. So when I see yet another way to detach from the real world, it saddens me that so many people are withdrawing from real life. At a time when we need strong good-willed people to lead, get in relationships and have children (whites...everyone else seems to be doing fine), the only ones that WANT to lead are precisely the ones who should not. And when the electricity goes off....who has the skills to rebuild society?
I'm sure those millions of people looking to buy an $600 Oculus (where are those sales BTW?) can also afford a gaming PC to go along with it if that is there desire. Those people at Starbucks with their Macs I'm guessing are either doing actual work or relaxing, same as those with a PC laptop. They seem content when I occasionally pop in -- but not with my Mac.
But my original comment here was exclusive to my own buying plans, no one elses. Again though, if someone wants it they will not let the fact it only runs on PC stop them. I once had a slew of Philips Pronto remotes. The programing software only ran on Windows. I only owned Macs. I ended up buying a cheap PC just to program and update them. Problem solved.
Of course it isn't.
That would be innovation. Can't have that under Tim Kook.
That would be innovation. Can't have that under Tim Kook.
I want a massive amount of GPU without the need for water cooled boxes. GPU doesn't seem to have evolved the same way CPU has in terms of size and efficiency. Certainly not in terms of driving an decent VR experience.
I think we'll have to wait for the next generation of consoles.
Last edited:
The Mac Pro isn't about stuffing a machine full of graphics cards for games. You're always going to be disappointed in the graphics cards of these machines as they're targeted at the pro market which has far different needs from their graphics cards than those of gamers.
Definitely. Not even the 2016 MacBook Pro's dGPU can constantly drive a VR headset for prolonged periods. Currently, that's only possible via external (Thunderbolt) GPU's.
You aren't going to get good results with either of them.
6GB 1060 is better - 3gb is going to be a bottle neck.
RX480 tends to be a mixed bag.
Actally gaming PC sales have been much higher than expected and is a growth market. Gaming PCs are getting more popular.
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2017...-gaming-pc-market-grows-faster-than-expected/
$1k can buy you an excellent rig, especially if you build it yourself, which is not hard. Or get a local computer shop to do so.
6GB 1060 is better - 3gb is going to be a bottle neck.
RX480 tends to be a mixed bag.
[doublepost=1488409434][/doublepost]
Actally gaming PC sales have been much higher than expected and is a growth market. Gaming PCs are getting more popular.
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2017...-gaming-pc-market-grows-faster-than-expected/
$1k can buy you an excellent rig, especially if you build it yourself, which is not hard. Or get a local computer shop to do so.
Last edited:
They say a single GTX 970 is the requirement. Pretty sure the latest Mac Pro is capable without additional modifications. And other Macs might be capable if you put a 970 or better in, though Apple doesn't support that.
Also, "proper" and "water-cooled" don't belong together in a sentence. A modern Intel i5 CPU is the other requirement they list, not an overclocked i7 or whatever.
Last edited:
That's what I like to see... Positively moving technology forward.
You idiots.. Riding around in wheeled automobiles! You look pathetic!
The ability to stick commodity GPUs in a non-Apple PC is what makes them so suitable. Yes, you can already do that with Macs, and I have, but it's kinda sketchy, and Apple doesn't support it.