Sidebar Sidebar
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'

Honestly, how many companies are developing new gear for the Mac?
The sentiment shared by members of MR is shared by the world. The future of the mac looks grim... Oh wait- but there's great products in the pipeline....
 
now i see it said:
Honestly, how many companies are developing new gear for the Mac?
The sentiment shared by members of MR is shared by the world. The future of the mac looks grim... Oh wait- but there's great products in the pipeline....
Click to expand...

As any computer buff knows, Osborne Computer was founded in Silicon Valley in 1981 The company quickly won a cult-like following, especially in California and Europe, with its expensive ($1,795) but well-equipped machine. Osborne amassed $104 million in revenue in the 12 months ended May, 1983, and sold about 120,000 of the original computers and almost 20,000 copies of a successor model, the Executive 1.In any event, U.S. sales collapsed and the firm found itself with debts of $42 million against realizable assets of perhaps $15 million when it sought bankruptcy court protection in September, 1983.

Seems Mac is taking the Osborne path, why still onboard? Seriously.
If anything ...true computer geeks are smart enough to see this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: simonmet
AdonisSMU said:
Wearing goggles and sipping coffee in a shop is not my idea of a great experience. Its called asking to be robbed.
Click to expand...

You probably wouldn't be using your Oculus in a coffee shop in the first place :-\

Some people really do think of weird scenarios these days...
 
BoltmanLives said:
As any computer buff knows, Osborne Computer was founded in Silicon Valley in 1981 The company quickly won a cult-like following, especially in California and Europe, with its expensive ($1,795) but well-equipped machine. Osborne amassed $104 million in revenue in the 12 months ended May, 1983, and sold about 120,000 of the original computers and almost 20,000 copies of a successor model, the Executive 1.In any event, U.S. sales collapsed and the firm found itself with debts of $42 million against realizable assets of perhaps $15 million when it sought bankruptcy court protection in September, 1983.

Seems Mac is taking the Osborne path, why still onboard? Seriously.
If anything ...true computer geeks are smart enough to see this.
Click to expand...


Using others' writing as your own, as you have above, is really bad form. At least put the text in quotes to let readers know that is not your writing, and preferably crediting the source since it is so readily available. In this case that would be Donald Woutat of the Los Angeles Times.
 
macsplusmacs said:
Well after their current legal loss and their upcoming one, and the lousy sales figures of VR games in general, Occulus themselves may not be on the Occullus roadmap.

heck of a job Facebook.
Click to expand...


I’m not picking sides between VR platforms but Facebook invests a heck of a lot in the development of VR. I dare say more than any other company out there.
[doublepost=1488421647][/doublepost]Macs ARE capable of VR just not high end quality such as the Rift. If Oculus wanted to they could. They’ll probably have to develop a product for iOS and a mid-tier product step above mobile VR experience for Macs. Odds are Oculus is waiting for Apple to step up their game so they can create Rift support.
[doublepost=1488421968][/doublepost]There are two kinds of people, those who bash VR and those who have tried the Vive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Menneisyys2
JOLoughlin said:
I’m not picking sides between VR platforms but Facebook invests a heck of a lot in the development of VR. I dare say more than any other company out there.
[doublepost=1488421647][/doublepost]Macs ARE capable of VR just not high end quality such as the Rift. If Oculus wanted to they could. They’ll probably have to develop a product for iOS and a mid-tier product step above mobile VR experience for Macs. Odds are Oculus is waiting for Apple to step up their game so they can create Rift support.
[doublepost=1488421968][/doublepost]There are two kinds of people, those who bash VR and those who have tried the Vive.
Click to expand...
Trying the Vive is one thing - how long did you actually use it (or any VR headset) for? Having a headset strapped to your face for over 30 minutes is not ideal. Hardcore gamers typically play for sessions greater than 30 minutes at a time. Conceptually I find VR interesting, but it is lacking in the practicality department on several fronts still (price, hardware barrier to entry, etc.).
 
It's rather clear that the majority of VR contrarians on here have actually never tried it.

Also, folks claiming PC gaming is dying? Really? Is that why Steam is doing so well?

Apple fans, clearly live "in a bubble." Get out of the Apple ecosystem once and a while, you might find something you like and learn something. The world ain't "just about Apple."
 
  • Like
Reactions: emm386, tech4all, Menneisyys2 and 2 others
citysnaps said:
Using others' writing as your own, as you have above, is really bad form. At least put the text in quotes to let readers know that is not your writing, and preferably crediting the source since it is so readily available. In this case that would be Donald Woutat of the Los Angeles Times.
Click to expand...

Its a post not a news story
 
so this one product with one platform that happens to have millions of $$ behind it from a different biz venture [*ahem* facebook*] but with no real substantive marketing saturation or user base but now says it works on most modern CPU/GPU systems says "we're not focused on the mac platform." - this to me showing that they realize their own user base in minuscule in actual user metrics and thus not profitable on its own. so obviously they're not going to focus on a team making it avail to an even smaller segment of the mac os user base.

yes, apple could update its mac pro, MacBook pro line up to be oculus [and other VR] ready. that fact aside, the oculus issue doesn't seem to be about Apple, but about oculus not being able to create a product people want to spend money in (a marketing specific targeted volume) volume enough so support in an ongoing fashion.

oculus and apple in this case both have to up their game to get a VR system to the masses in both usable and affordable and tangentially - mass marketable form.
 
The Mac is totally capable of VR up to a certain level. Back when Windows 10 updates broke the Rift DK2 I was forced to demo it on my sodding 2011 iMac with a slow mobile 512MB GPU running Windows 7.. As long as you ramped down the graphical detail and didn't go silly and try to play high end stuff it worked smoothly. A lot of games and demos are stylised and quite low poly - as they're also developed with Mobile VR in mind.

The problem is somewhat down to osX's shoddy graphics drivers and nobody wanting to optimise for it properly.. Which is a chicken/egg situation. Compare things like ARK's performance in osX to it's performance in Windows on the same computer - it's just bizarre.

You actually only need a pretty average gaming PC to run VR well.. Mine is technically not up to the recommended spec ("weak" AMD FX 8320oc falls below min spec, GTX970 - the baseline recommended min GPU) Apple really need to make a decently powerful mid-high end Mac again though.
 
BrianKonarsMac said:
Trying the Vive is one thing - how long did you actually use it (or any VR headset) for? Having a headset strapped to your face for over 30 minutes is not ideal. Hardcore gamers typically play for sessions greater than 30 minutes at a time. Conceptually I find VR interesting, but it is lacking in the practicality department on several fronts still (price, hardware barrier to entry, etc.).
Click to expand...
I actually have both the Vive and Rift but I understand what you mean. There is a problem with VR in that too many developers are focusing on roommscale or standing (high physical bandwidth) rather seated facing relatively in one direction (low physical bandwidth). I think a VR specific controller like the Touch or Vive’s wands offer a lot but again high physical bandwidth. Gamepads need more love I think.
 
JOLoughlin said:
I’m not picking sides between VR platforms but Facebook invests a heck of a lot in the development of VR. I dare say more than any other company out there.
[doublepost=1488421647][/doublepost]Macs ARE capable of VR just not high end quality such as the Rift. If Oculus wanted to they could. They’ll probably have to develop a product for iOS and a mid-tier product step above mobile VR experience for Macs. Odds are Oculus is waiting for Apple to step up their game so they can create Rift support.
[doublepost=1488421968][/doublepost]There are two kinds of people, those who bash VR and those who have tried the Vive.
Click to expand...

I tried the Vive and Hololens, the Vive made me discombobulated after Hololens did not..truthfully both were amazing. Were either for me ?..no.. which has more potential: HoloLens its obvious from an Enterprise perspective, who is VIVE good for ..gamers who want immersive games. Is there a future in this tech..absolutely. better than 3D TV or 4k..by an order of magnitude

I got bored in the Vive (as well as the biggest sensory rush) it was like a cool disco tech then done..bored no real desire for more. Hololens I would have liked to experience in private over an extended time alone like with my computer. Not bashing VR but its only for certain people certainly not for everyone. Hololens is potentially for anyone who uses a computer and is cool.
 
Last edited:
NoNothing said:
"Hardware requirements for the Rift became less stringent in October thanks to software advancements and will now run on any machine equipped with an Nvidia 960 or greater, an Intel i3-6100 or greater, or an AMD FX4350 or greater. With the changes, some Macs, including the latest MacBook Pro, could potentially work with the Rift, but Oculus isn't yet prepared to delve into Mac development."

You mean you were unable to read the actual article before you complained about stuff (apparently) you know nothing about? Color me shocked. What I find interesting is after software improvements, Occulus was able to support lower-end hardware. So, basically, they had high end spec requirements because of incompetence in original design.
Click to expand...
LOL. You just called Carmack incompetent. Please post your own math/software credentials, so that we can marvel. Oculus has been working very hard and doing very difficult things to improve the efficiency of their software. Just because they do something very clever to improve performance does not mean what came before was incompetent. If you don't see that, you're a poseur.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back