Oculus Rift Support for Macs Not 'Currently on the Roadmap'

[AZREOSpecialist]

In the meantime, Sony offers VR w/ Playstation 4, and Samsung and Google offer VR using their smart phones... Sounds like Oculus has a pretty inefficient or bad system. Perhaps they are just lazy coders who want more robust hardware to make up for their lack of programming/optimization skills.

 

[LordVic]

In the meantime, Sony offers VR w/ Playstation 4, and Samsung and Google offer VR using their smart phones... Sounds like Oculus has a pretty inefficient or bad system. Perhaps they are just lazy coders who want more robust hardware to make up for their lack of programming/optimization skills.

The problem is that Apple doesn't currently have a single product in their lineup that can meet the requirements for VR. This isnt' some magical "lazy programmers" thing. this is a fundamental performance issue.

VR isn't some lightweight thing. Especially if you're talking about PC Gaming and providing AAA quality graphics for it.

Using the HTC VIve for technical specifications:
Each eye for the Vive is 1200x1080. Each frame must be rendered twice at 1200x1080 (one for each eye). and must be rendered at 90FPS or higher.

this essentially requires a GPU with the capability of rendering 2,592,000 pixels per frame. 90 times a second for a total pixel count of 233,280,000 pixels per second. Essentially, the requirement is that the GPU is capable of a minimum of 1440p @ 90FPS.

There is not a single current Apple device that has a GPU capable of this performance.

the iMac's, even the highest end ones, ship with mobile GPU's. The Laptops all ship with integrated GPUs, or low end Mobile. The Mac Pro is 3+ years old, and already shipped with 4+ year old GPU tech.

You cannot blame the developers of the programs, or Vive, or Occulus, for Apple's inability to offer modern compute performance with their computers.


As for the other VR solutions: Like the PS4, Requires additional processing components (there's a USB based addon box that ships with the VR kit), and also features a different component architecture and setup from traditional computer. Or the Gear VR, which doesn't do high resolution VR. (each eye is only 1280x1440), and also features far lower resolution / texture graphics than modern PC high end titles.

Sure, Apple could probably ship VR that works on Macs, But it would have to be more like the Gear VR style graphics and quality, and not the Rift/Vive quality

 

[BlargKing]

In the meantime, Sony offers VR w/ Playstation 4, and Samsung and Google offer VR using their smart phones... Sounds like Oculus has a pretty inefficient or bad system. Perhaps they are just lazy coders who want more robust hardware to make up for their lack of programming/optimization skills.

1) VR works on the Playstation 4 because consoles get heavily optimized software. The PS4 VR system also includes and external box that goes between the VR headset and the PS4 that handles a lot of the view splitting and other VR associated tasks. And even at the end of it, PS4 VR games are far simpler graphically than the games you find on a PC VR system.

2) Samsung's Gear VR only works on Galaxy S6 and S7 phones, meaning Samsung also benefits from tight hardware and software optimization. And its still not even close to being on the level of a Oculus/Vive.

I'll also add, the Gear VR was made by Samsung collaborating with Oculus.

3) Google cardboard, which runs on most smartphones made in the last few years, offers a tiny fraction of what PC VR can do. At most theres a couple very simple, minimal graphics "games" that run on a phone, and they barely scrape 30 FPS, which isn't near whats needed for a smooth, immersive VR experience.

Meanwhile, the Oculus and Vive both use TWO 1080p displays running at 90FPS. This is well above the typical single 1080p and 60FPS standard for games, not to mention the overhead for interpreting and rendering player movements smoothly and without noticeable latency. Not to mention PC VR games visually are far more impressive than any other platform.

So yeah. Its not Oculus's or HTC's fault the hardware requirements for PC VR are so high. Considering what the Oculus does on pretty cheap hardware, I would say their optimization skills are pretty good. And considering your very obvious lack of knowledge about VR, you're opinion carries little weight.

 

[Stella]

Would people really buy an expensive Mac Pro just to play virtual reality games?

If they do, then they are dumb. A $1K PC would do just fine.
[doublepost=1488483650][/doublepost]Would they be using Macs to develop the VR applications, or instead using Windows / Linux ( support is coming ) that have actual VR support for the OS they are developing on? They'd probably be developing on a Windows machine, not a Mac.

And don't forget, it isn't the "general public" buying expensive high-end Macs like the Mac Pro towers, either. It's going to be your software developers (who have a vested interest in learning to code for VR in some cases, so they'd buy one), and your "power users" who have the financial means to invest in the technology they love and use heavily.

 

[Swift]

Remember the old-time diving suit? Lead shoes to stick to the bottom, little porthole to look through, stubbon hose to the surface? That's the Oculus Rift. Also, it makes about 20% of its users sick to their stomach.

 

[BlargKing]

Cost to build a VR capable PC (prices in CAD):

Core i5 6500 - 270$
MSI H110M Pro-VD motherboard - 75$
8 GB of Crucial DDR4 Memory - 73$
EVGA GeForce 1060 6GB - 315$
1TB WD Blue HDD - 65$
EVGA 500 watt PSU - 55$
NZXT Source 210 case - 50$

905$ total, and thats with the weak ass Canadian dollar. Could probably knock 100-200$ off that for American pricing.
Basically, anyone who can afford an iMac could easily afford a VR capable PC.

 

[Apple 26.2]

But hey, they're pro machines... amrite?!

 

[LordVic]

Cost to build a VR capable PC (prices in CAD):

Core i5 6500 - 270$
MSI H110M Pro-VD motherboard - 75$
8 GB of Crucial DDR4 Memory - 73$
EVGA GeForce 1060 6GB - 315$
1TB WD Blue HDD - 65$
EVGA 500 watt PSU - 55$
NZXT Source 210 case - 50$

905$ total, and thats with the weak ass Canadian dollar. Could probably knock 100-200$ off that for American pricing.
Basically, anyone who can afford an iMac could easily afford a VR capable PC.

and consequently, these being retail prices, sure as hell guarantees that Apple, if they want to, could provide a VR capable gaming computer for reasonable prices and still be profitable.

and yet. ALl of their computers are more expensive, and all of their computers don't meet the minimum requirements for VR.

that is a huge "tell" about the state of computers and how much Apple's current leaderhip understands about computers

 

[mi7chy]

Would people really buy an expensive Mac Pro just to play virtual reality games?

People forget or don't realize that a capable dGPU is not only for VR or gaming but also for AI, computer vision, accelerated video encoding, rendering, bitcoin mining, password/hash cracking and more but perhaps the typical Mac user just cares about surfing Facebook and nothing else.

 

[Askolan]

Lets face it. These recent macs are not up to par for something as graphically intense as VR. Do what I did and just buy a Playstation 4. Its absolutely beautiful and works well if you're interested in great console gaming and don't want to touch Windows. My mac handles everything else just fine.

 

[LordVic]

Would people really buy an expensive Mac Pro just to play virtual reality games?

Yes

The PC gaming industry (not prebuilt computers, but components and self built / custom built) in 2016 was estimated to be approximately 35 Billion dollar industry.

This was helped by a LOT selling GPU's for $500-$1000 just for a single card.

gamers are willing to spend a lot of money to meet their own desired performance goals. If Apple provided a computer that offered that performance, There'd be a market for it.

Heck, you know what I would love? The Mac Pro tube in "gaming" format. Put in a consumer i7 instead of Xeon. Put in a Single Consumer grade GPU, with option to add a 2nd. Make them modular so that they're upgradable with newer gen GPU's, and the "Mac Pro" would have been the ultimate "Mac X"

Why the Mac Pro was a "failure" was it was giving to "professional" market, a device that could have been aimed at the "enthusiast" market.

the Professional market, tends to be geared towards earning money with compute power. This often comes with high storage demands, expandibility demands to keep up to date and profitable. But it often doesn't require "looks". In fact, the people who use their compute power to the fullest for their livlihood are going to generally care a lot less about the look of the tower, as long as the tower performs how they need it to, and can be kept up to date

Gamers on the other hand genreally have lower storage demands (they don't tend to keep all their games installed all the time, and will only keep their most played and current games installed), making the smaller form factor with single drive more ideal for gaming than enterprise professional work. They also tend to replace most of their parts a little less. Where a professional might need to upgrade CPU's, RAM or storage frequently, in gaming, GPU's are really the only thing that gets ugpraded semi regularly.

Gamers are also a lot more concerned with quiet, as noise distracts from gaming, or makes it harder to compete. Professionals? sure they might not want a jet engine, but they're far less likely to sacrifice performance for noise. Gamers are nuts for noise.

again: the Mac Pro was a lousy Professional workstation. But it's nearly ideal form factor and design for a decent gaming computer.

the Macpro is just another piece of evidence that showcases to me that while Cook might understand iPhone market and how phones and iphones fit into the world. He hasn't the foggiest thing about Computers.

 

[phoenix155]

As long as Apple pushes integrated GPUs and uses obsolete Open GL standards, I don't see this trend reversing. Ever.

And what standard should they be using? DirectX??

 

[rmariboe]

None the less this guy has it running successfully on the 460:

https://www.quora.com/Is-the-2016-MacBook-Pro-fast-enough-for-Virtual-reality-or-the-Oculus-Rift

Playing Fallout 4 @ 2560x1600, Ultra without studder on my 460 leads me to believe that the lower combined resolution of the Oculus combined with a lower quality setting would make it quite playable in VR, too

 

[Stella]

Currently, given the form factor of their MBP's, that would only be possible via external boxes. It's impossible to have a decent (and not throttling) GPU in such a thin device. Just look at the GTX-1060 dedicated gaming notebook monsters: thick and heavy...

Define "thick and heavy"... the razer isn't bad.
https://www.razerzone.com/ca-en/gaming-systems/razer-blade

Realistically, your not taking your gaming laptop to a coffeeshop and start playing games.

 

[Synchro3]

No big deal. Oculus works with my Mac Mini (in Windows): https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/building-external-gpus-on-mac-egpu.1893792/page-9#post-24131181

 

[TheFluffyDuck]

Because macs have shipped with integrated graphics and fisher price hardware for a decade or more. But hey, at least we have the most racially and gender diverse emojis. Cant wait for a new pack of stickers justifying a new OS bump.

Windows is looking better all the time.

 

[LordVic]

None the less this guy has it running successfully on the 460:

https://www.quora.com/Is-the-2016-MacBook-Pro-fast-enough-for-Virtual-reality-or-the-Oculus-Rift

Playing Fallout 4 @ 2560x1600, Ultra without studder on my 460 leads me to believe that the lower combined resolution of the Oculus combined with a lower quality setting would make it quite playable in VR, too

it's not the resolution thats the concern: in VR you need to render every scene twice. since each eye has a slightly different perspective. In addition that the VIVE and RIFT have stated that the minimum requirements for their testing to avoid motion sickness in fast moving titles is 90FPS.


and if you did read the very article you linked, you'd also see that he doesn't recommend doing it, and if you're looking for an actual VR ready laptop to buy the Razer product that is VR ready with a 1060 in it.
[doublepost=1489510902][/doublepost]

No big deal. Oculus works with my Mac Mini (in Windows): https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/building-external-gpus-on-mac-egpu.1893792/page-9#post-24131181

while this is really cool! it's not very practical for most users.

And if anything further emphasizes the point many people make about Apple's lack of upgrade path for average users.

if Apple just made a computer that out of the box would support PCI-E GPU upgrades, we'd not be having this discussion. But they don't. They wont. Instead all their devices are shipping with non-vr capable hardware, and unless you're willing to jury rig something (liek you have), there's no choice in apple computer for VR