I assume that there will be built in Bluetooth to enable personal audio via Airpods.
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.
What We Know About the Apple Vision Pro Hardware So Far
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't disagree with what you've mentioned. However, most people are not going to be using these devices on the go or working out with them on very often. The majority of the time these will need to be plugged in due to the 2 hour max battery life. Imagine working out with this thing on all the time. It would be nasty and hot on your face. I'd wager that the vast majority of users will be using them stationary the majority of the time. With all of the gyms, diet programs, medications, etc. we have available to us, obesity is still on the rise in the US. Sad.
Last edited:
For those ppl complaining on price - this is more so a developer version for the most part till second gen shows up. Has anyone seen the pricing of microsoft's hololens - https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/hololens/buy eek.
The people's hands are free in my Wall-E example too... free to hold junk food!
There is no way a device like this is going to make people 'more' active.
Long term it's going to decimate human social skills and relationships.
If this is successful it will be even worse than the damage caused to society by smartphones.
Birth rates, creativity and mental and physical health will all plummet even more than they have already.
Kid's eyesight will be destroyed.
Watching tech journalists gushing about the realism of this is terrifying.
You know what else is realistic... reality ...and it's free.
People please get this rubbish off your head, go outside, breathe the fresh air...
...and get a damn girlfriend that isn't made from pixels.
The future needs you!
The video from Apple of the woman in the airplane shows her wearing AirPods.
MicroLED isn’t the same as MiniLED? Thank you, Captain Obvious.
Have you ever experienced a MicroOLED display? How about a MicroLED display? I’m sure a number of factors went into choosing the display type — availability at scale, power consumption, latency, etc. Do you know how these differ in that regard? I am confident that Apple has chosen the best display available for the best experience. If you don’t agree, then don’t buy the device.
Last edited:
During the demo I could see only one mac screen virtualized. Could you show me where you saw multiple mac screens? And the wifi bandwidth is somehow true. Keep in mind that we’re talking about a 3-4K monitor with a refresh rate of 60hz. That’s a lot of bandwidth and also a lot for the headset to process.False. In fact I think the demo showed multiple separate Mac screens at the same time, but regardless of that, your bandwidth argument is incorrect. It's conceptually (though not in implementation) like foveated rendering: you don't bother to update as often the windows that don't have the user's eye focus. You could probably get a reasonable result just discarding frames, but I bet they do something slicker.
Logic might, but not math.You mean 33%.
I don't know this for sure but I suspect the issue is display power, not GPU power. 120Hz requires more juice than 90Hz. ...although, come to think of it, latency issues might be even more of a limitation here. Irreducible latency in the camera pipeline might be putting a hard limit at 90Hz. That could even explain the "special" 96Hz movie mode - with movies you're presumably darkening the environment and not observing it much, so latency problems getting to 96Hz may be ignorable. You don't get motion sick if you can't see the environment not moving properly.
Think about it: higher refresh rate always needs more gpu power. Games, videos, and even a smoother desktop interface require more gpu power to run. When things get glitchy is because of lack of gpu power.
There is just not enough computing power, and/or display technology yet, or its price would have been just to much. Give it a few years and we’ll get there, though.
I‘m not confusing mini and microLED. I just don’t think microLED would be as pitch black as OLED. Color degradation is another story.
I think it’s a processing power issue. Running two 6K displays at 120hz along with Apps and the operating system is probably something the M2 cannot withstand.
edit: it’s actually more like two 4.5K displays, but my argument doesn’t change. Still too much computing power if combined with 120hz tech.
Last edited:
I’m very curious what the specifications of the 3D video format is going to be. If it’s two 4K videos playing per eye… yikes on the file size. I still don’t even use 4K on my phone because it eats up storage too fast.
Reminder that whatever number you quote here is doubled. 90hrz means it has to render 2 frames 90 times per second, meaning 180. 120 is 240, 240 is 480. At 4.5k per eye, in 3D at all times. That is a very huge ask with current technology no matter the expense when you factor in power draw and heat.
Yeah plus battery tech isn’t to the level it needs to be yet. Give it a few years
No man, I think you got that wrong. Each screen is 90hz. That’s it. There is no need to double the frame-rate, nor alternate the frequencies between the displays.
That is true. Before mobile, people used to watch the band playing music in concerts. Now, people pointing mobile at the stage in concerts. People should be dancing, shouting, singing in concerts, not making movies.
Each screen renders the scene from a different perspective in order to show a stereoscopic image. That's two separate 4.5k images. From the perspective of computational power, it is indeed functionally double the framerate.
I'm telling you, every time I see that glowing chipset picture of the headset, all I can think about it how painful it will be should they ever short and explode right over your eyes.
Aren’t batteries usually the part of electronics that explode?
No kidding; the rumors were that this device would have it, and those rumors turned out not to be true.
You are confusing them. MicroLED is like OLED, in that each pixel is lit separately. Unlike miniLED, which is what you were talking about, there are no backlights. Unlit pixels are completely unlit. So of course it's as pitch black. Not to mention more energy efficient than OLED, which seems like it would be especially important for a headset.
It didn't appear to be obvious to you (and most other commenters, apparently, whenever the subject comes up). Not many people have experienced it since it hasn't really been used in consumer technology yet due to the difficulty involved in production. I already said I wasn't buying the device, and of course Apple is using what's available now. That's the whole point. OLED's fine if you're into disposable technology; I'm still using a couple devices from 10+ years ago that work well and have no need to replace them. I like screens that don't degrade, thanks (and yes I've seen OLED screens, which is why I brought this up in the first place...microOLED isn't magic just because the pixels are smaller).
Maybe you should have tried reading what I wrote — I clearly was asking your opinion about MicroOLED vs MicroLED — I never mentioned MiniLED.
And you say that “Not many people have experienced it since it hasn't really been used in consumer technology yet” — exactly right — so why are you spewing out anecdotal nonsense about a unreleased product using technology you haven’t experienced?
WIRED hit the nail on the head. My emphasis, something I posted previously.
apple.news
Apple’s Vision Pro Isn’t the Future — WIRED
The new mixed-reality headset is an alarming misfire. Has Apple lost its innovation mojo?
Has anyone considered this might be a "Pro" version and maybe a less expensive version is in the works?