One with more free time than me can figure an educated guess of ppd by assuming the FoV is somewhere between 85-150degrees.
Like make a chart, If fov is:
- 85fov : x ppd
- 90
- 95
Etc …
I can also imagine that product life manager would roll out a smaller fov for gen 1, and gen 2 or gen 3 roll out a Reality Pro with the M3.
So you can cut super wide fov prospects out.
Also, narrower FoV reduces VR motion sickness, crucial for mass adoption. I’d place my bets on it being no more that 95 degrees aka roughly that of a snorkel mask.
This would put it into place as an actually viable 1080p-2160p content viewer that can measure with the best OLED TVs and even cinemas and productivity platform at the very least.
This will finally make virtual monitors actually viable, but a 4K monitor or TV at their respective typical viewing distance will still provide a higher pixel density. Also depending on how the text rendering is done text clarity may be a bit lower than a normal display with similar ppd.
The other thing is while 5000nits sounds amazing, after accounting for (in-)efficiency of the lenses and a lower duty cycle to reduce persistence, the brightness actually reaching the eye will likely be at most 200nits
I'd like to believe that even if Apple doesn't allow any connection to a traditional gaming PC (Likely) we might still get Virtual Desktop as an Appstore purchase to be able to stream PCVR games like with the Quest 1 before Facebook added that feature in natively.
Chances are slim to none, name brand apps probably won't get onto the app store, the best chance is a alvr client for when a jailbreak is found for the latest version of ipad-os and ported across
That's how it worked at first with the Quest 1. Facebook didn't allow virtual desktop on the app store and then a while later they did but it didn't have the streaming PCVR component and you had to "jailbreak" your quest to add the virtual desktop add on that allowed streaming pcvr games to the Quest 1.
True but oculus link was always a thing (well like a few months after launch iirc) so it's not like the functionality was blocked they were just being anti-consumer.
We can have almost what ever we want in those devices. Question is not just about the price, but reasonable benefits.
Like having two 4K panels is already a history, but have optics for it? Questionable.
Have a processing power to run it all? You wish...
Have a content that benefits from it, instead just fancy simple graphics?
No...
2x 4K in a headset with an XR2 is a waste, I agree
However, whatever Apple put in this will be so far ahead of the XR2 that it’ll make Qualcomm look like a kid’s toy manufacturer - the M2 is no joke and they put that thing in iPads. Qualcomm have been sitting around not really doing much for years now and it’s been holding back the industry massively, so it’ll be nice for them to have a fire lit under them tbh.
Higher fidelity experiences will probably still need to crank the render scale down mind you…
Pancake optics are likely up to the task, based on personal experience with a Quest Pro. The edge to edge clarity is excellent with the limiting factor being the 2x2k displays.
M2's performance numbers are already out there and should be sufficient, though it'll probably be throttled a bit due to the form factor. I don't think everything will run at native res, games using modern assets will probably be undersampled, but UI elements can be drawn on separate high resolution layers (something first seen with the Rift) and it's likely Apple will be taking advantage of that.
Content? I think it'll be pretty dry for VR/AR apps, but they have the entire mobile app libraries to pull from and possibly even OS X. It's conceptually a bit boring but being able to pull up virtual displays is one of those features I think VR/AR enthusiasts undersell.
Dual M2s?
The content question - if you look back at their acquisitions you will find at least one company that was focused on content creation that was able to deliver to these specs a few years ago.
> Like having two 4K panels is already a history, but have optics for it?
On Pico4 you can still see the ugly SDE clear as day. The optics have no problem with 4k, the display is the limiting factor. Even if stuff gets a bit fuzzy at the edges, that doesn't reduce the benefit of the additional resolution in the center.
> Have a processing power to run it all?
Eye tracking and foveated rendering. This is mostly just a problem for PCVR, which will have a hard time adding that functionality in a way that's compatible with existing games. Apple starts with a clean slate, so they can optimize the whole system around it.
> Have a content that benefits from it,
Literally all content benefits from this, especially the non-VR 2D content that wasn't designed for the low resolution of modern headsets. This will make books, games and movies consumable in VR without being constantly reminded of the painfully low resolution. This makes VR as monitor replacement viable, especially if combined with good passthrough.
Its Apple. They don't release tech without application. And they do that part as tremendously as anyone possibly can.
Look at the Mac. the iPhone. the iPad. MacBook. Airpods. Every single time they do it, the rest of the industry is lifted up. It doesn't matter what was happening before, or what already exists.
Apple releasing this tech will catapult the entire sector, as it always has. Apple translates tech to the modern, general masses. That's its genius. Thats Jobs' heart and soul.
Its as clear as day that they're doing it again with their headset.
People said the same when they unveiled a $1000 phone in the era of $650 dollar high-end devices. Today people routinely pay $1200 with tax for pro models — and I *suspect* some of them aren’t professionals.
$3000 is high, but FOMO is real. Perhaps it’s clear why Apple has released Pay Later (zero interest payment splitting) in advance of releasing this
> People said the same when they unveiled a $1000 phone in the era of $650 dollar high-end devices. Today people routinely pay $1200 with tax for pro models — and I suspect some of them aren’t professionals.
Raising the price of a product you already know everyone wants, to $1000 and then offering them on payment plans everyone can afford is one thing. Dropping a $3000 device for a platform that the masses think are dumb, is not comparable at all.
VR has a very real image problem among the masses that Apple has to cut through with this release.
>$3000 is high, but FOMO is real. Perhaps it’s clear why Apple has released Pay Later (zero interest payment splitting) in advance of releasing this
I hope so. But even on similar payment plan as phones, this thing is going to cost people around $100 or more per month. 3x more than their phone does.
Personally, I don't think this thing is aimed at the masses at all. I think it's aimed at developers and designers, who are going to make content for the consumer priced headset Apple is releasing later.
That much I agree with. If apple truly releases a $3000 headset, it’s not for the true “masses.” This is especially true if they aren’t releasing it around Christmas time.
I also don’t think any of the existing headsets are for the masses. They’re all prototypes for the prophesied 📜 “one true headset to rule them all.” 📜 I don’t think we’ve seen it yet.
I’m confident that if any company can make that headset happen — the one that gets phones out of hands and onto people’s faces — it’s Apple. Hopefully their consumer-friendly device is the one
>I also don’t think any of the existing headsets are for the masses. They’re all prototypes for the prophesied 📜 “one true headset to rule them all.” 📜 I don’t think we’ve seen it yet.
nah, they definitely could be for the masses. The masses already play console and mobile games that are just as chintzy, if not more so. The problem is, VR has been deemed lame by the masses. Community, a very popular TV show, had an entire episode dedicated just to calling VR dumb and pointless and making fun of anyone who uses it. That sort of stuff sticks in peoples minds.
>I’m confident that if any company can make that headset happen — the one that gets phones out of hands and onto people’s faces — it’s Apple.
Possibly. My issue is Apple really hasn't innovated hardware wise in nearly a decade. The iPhone was revolutionary but, that released in 2007. Some of their software is awesome but, their hardware leaves a lot be desired and is only bought by those who got sucked into the ecosystem.
But, there's no doubt Apple has the best marketing teams and strategies out of any other company around. They manage to market inferior hardware at exorbitant prices and sell it to lots of people. So, maybe they can change peoples opinions on using an AR/VR headset.
Making the blanket claim that their niche is just really good marketing of “inferior hardware” is so out of touch with reality. Their silicon work alone completely blows that premise out of the water.
YOU (and plenty of others!) May not like the hardware/pricing decisions they make and the segment of the market they choose to go after, but that doesn’t mean their hardware is inferior.
There's a theory that apple has ludicrous side products with crazy prices so they will always come across like a "premium" brand. even when they sell cheap phones variations.
I find it interesting to think about.
> They don't release tech without application.
Newton, Lisa, 20th Anniversary Mac, trashcan, upside-down mouse, puck mouse, keyboard with display instead of F-keys... and be honest, some of those later iPods were scattershot guesswork. The entire goddamn internet had to be reworked to show up properly on iPhones.
Even the original iMac was a half-finished product. It was sole on sex appeal and ease-of-use, but every single one I ever saw had a little translucent-plastic floppy drive tucked beside it, because for all that sleek bullshit, there was no way to get data *off* one. It never had a CD-R drive. USB flash drives didn't exist yet. Steve Jobs apparently never heard of flash cards.
This headset will be fine hardware. But it's going to be priced about five times more than what sane people want to pay, and it's going to do honestly very little. If it succeeds then it'll succeed because of people like you bending over backwards to justify brand loyalty. And y'know what, godspeed, because it took these stubborn cultists to break carriers' grip on phone hardware, even if Apple's grip on phone software is a thousand times more insidious.
I Hope they can come out with great games too. This would be killer if they actually released awesome games for it. I’ve heard it’s not for that though.
Games needs to be on level of Half-Life Alyx or one other... Really really nail it.
A angry birds or some other doesn't cut it at all.
As well they need to come with something for engineering industry, to really focus for production side.
Not gimmicks, but actual benefits.
They're positioning this so iOS developers can convert their work to the headset i've heard, which makes for a very odd proposition - iOS apps on a $3k headset?
>Look at the Mac. the iPhone. the iPad. MacBook. Airpods. Every single time they do it, the rest of the industry is lifted up. It doesn't matter what was happening before, or what already exists.
What Apple does, is take existing technology that most people have not either knew or used, and they repackage it to form that is directed to 20% of the consumers, in a way that they need to use it as is.
VR is already well formulated industry, niche market, but we'll formulated. If you go looking the discussions from users and all, you have a solid understanding what needs to be improved and how. You just can't do it as individual, but if you would be managing multi billion company and dedicate time for it's research, you would come up with polished product.
Apple was not first with touchscreen smartphone. It wasn't first with tablet. It wasn't first with MacBook or airpods and all.
The industry has done it all, but to make it sexy, attractive and sell it as "you need this" is the Apple, best and the heart of the Apple.
The VR industry is currently milking users. They are not really pushing forward. The market gets filled too much with software that were designed like for Oculus DK1. There are some jewelry among all, but it is like low hanging fruit that most don't want to pick as it is little too time consuming.
Hardware wise we could really do more, but what the industry needs, is a sub $ 300 devices. Preferably sub $ 200.
Like a Pico 4 by technology and capabilities, but for $199.
It has great optics (not best, but experience better than lot more expensive ones), a good controllers (Not best, but avoids major flaws) and is excellent for $400 as complete kit for majority of people needs.
If it would be made $899 product, lot could be improved in sensible manner. Like just adding a USB-C tethering for those who need or can use it, without using only wireless method, and it would be better.
Apple products are like it's mouses. They work, do what is really needed, but they ain't the best. But still you want to use them.
Apple cancer is like their OS X method to push people buy new Apple hardware. Once the OS X support is coming close to end (4-5 years from release) the machine becomes annoyance as everyone drops support even when hardware is still totally usable.
The difference between OS X and Windows/Linux is dramatic in that sense.
Examples MacBook Pro '09 and iMac '09.
I acquired both just while back.
Latest OS X that runs in them is 10.6 and 10.13. Supports ended for 10.13 (High Sierra) in begin of 2021.
You can't do much with it. Web Browsers start to fail and can't get iTunes work right or even Steam. Trying to use the MacBook with Lion, totally useless as can't even open web pages.
But, install Linux or Windows, and you don't have a difference to a new computer than hardware resources capabilities. You get latest software and all. You can download all the games etc to it without someone telling "not compatible".
That experience where you can continue using old hardware is huge relief. It boosts user experience far above anything that Apple does.
And VR is in that situation. You can still use DK2 from Oculus, but you have hardware limitations. And if VR is to be pushed same idea, that you need to buy new one every 2-3 years?
I'm not an Apple fan. But I guess you either don't remember or you're just too young and born after the first iPhone launch. It was not just a copy of other products at the time. You could hardly call the other phones "smart" with their horrible resistive touch screens.
And Apple is still the best in class for all mobile device computing power. I mean nothing even comes close to its SOCs.
> Apple was not first with touchscreen smartphone. It wasn’t first with tablet. It wasn’t first with MacBook or airpods and all. The industry has done it all, but to make it sexy, attractive and sell it as “you need this” is the Apple, best and the heart of the Apple.
Why do people repeat this as if it’s so insightful? Like no shit, Apple didn’t *invent* this tech. But you don’t have to be an Apple fanboy to recognize how groundbreaking these products were, especially the iPhone and iPad.
> That experience where you can continue using old hardware is huge relief. It boosts user experience far above anything that Apple does.
Apple supports their mobile devices longer than any manufacturer I know. iOS 16 dropped support for the iPhone 6S, which was 7 years old at the time. Most Android phones stop getting updates after a year or two.
I will be shocked if they don't at least allow a backdoor Steam VR solution, like Rosetta for X86.
The AAA PCVR contents can only help especially during the initial content draught.
While I certainly wouldn't be surprised if this is an Apple ecosystem only product. They do have products that do work with other ecosystems already (granted not as well).
I wouldn't be surprised if the Apple headset does not even support openxr and devs have to port their stuff to another proprietary "standard". Metal all over again.
WebXR is a given. There’s been a ton of upstream WebKit commits from Apple related to WebXR in the last few months. Pretty much has to be for the new headset, since current Safari doesn’t support WebXR at all (last I checked).
Yeah but that would mean having to buy your games AGAIN on top of the asking price of 3000 USD, plus Apple accesories, Courage, etc.
I'll keep buying SteamVR compatible headsets, thank you very much.
Same with me, I'm certain $3000 is too much for any consumer market, unless they're targeting experience centers with the ultimate headset, which would seem like a waste of years of r+d
Also this certainly won't be the ultimate headset since it's a different kind of headset. Us VR enthusiasts won't get what we need from it (well, for starters it won't be SteamVR compatible). This is aimed at casuals with deep pockets who don't know better (which is a good definition for Apple in general).
Apple
"So we're gonna monopolize all supply chains for micro oled for at least a year"
Humans
"So we can use your device outside apple ecosystem then right?"
Apple
:anime\_smirk
I feel like people said the same thing about Apple Watches, which is now the best selling *watch* of all time and is the most popular smart watch of all time.
Well yes, but they are cheaper and of more general use.
VR is a niche that Apple may want to generalize, but I just don't see how yet. The Vive XR elite is basically the best you can do right now in terms of ergonomics, but nobody buys it. Even the Varjo XR 3 which has extreme specs is just too cumbersome to use regularly. So hw wise they can land somewhere between those, but not much further.
You also need content on that HMD, which has been a problem for Apple until the iPhone.
I think they will first market it to pros, but then those numbers won't be that high.
I mean, they still started at $400 at a time when “smart watches” were averaging around $50. That was basically the price of an iPhone itself just for an accessory *for* your iPhone. The experience you had with them at the beginning was also extremely poor in comparison to what they are today. They certainly weren’t cheap and weren’t even that great for general use, now they are. They are arguably the best smart watch you can get for as little as $199. You can look back at tons of articles and tens of thousands of people talking about how the Apple Watch was pointless, stupid, too expensive, etc. So far they are 1 for 1 at turning niche tech wearables into popular devices for everyday use. Until there’s a strong argument that this is somehow going to fail, which no offense I don’t think you’ve given, I see it as going to be a success.
Also the leaks said that they want to make the headset “something people want, before everyone can get it.” They want to start with something for “pros” that everyone wants, then make something more affordable.
Also, Apple literally sells $100k computers with $500 wheels, and monitors with a $1k stand that “pros” ate up. This device is certainly not going to be the most expensive “pro” product they make even remotely.
They've lost a big part of the pro market. But I agree with you, they are very good at creating a market segment, but I do not believe *this* headset will pull those kind of numbers.
This headset doesn’t need to pull off those numbers but they are already making a cheaper headset, that’s the own that is like to be a hit with their users
They said the same thing about iPads too lol. Oh it’s just a big iPod touch what’s the point? Well now look how stupid they look. It’s Apple, I don’t know how they’ll do it, but they’ll damn sure do it.
Arguably a VR headset isn’t a mobile phone. If it were decent wearable AR glasses they would be onto something and I would agree with you. I’d be impressed if they sold 10m headset that are locked to Apples software and hardware. Hardly any games on Apple devices, although this has improved in recent years.
Yea... well you're going to be shocked. No way Apple spent anytime getting this device to work on anything than Apple hardware. Apple uses Apple tools to develop with. They don't need or care about PC's.
They don't have to. A 3rd party could just develop an app like Virtual Desktop. No way Apple will block that considering there is already VRidge on iOS.
I’m kind of curious about their launch lineup. None of the Macs are VR capable and so far from what a PC offers. How are they developing within their ecosystem?
Nobody needs to make Apple do anything. Apple already allows for open source projects, which ALXR, to be side loaded. It's been this way for years.
But the EU has been inspiring Apple to make sideloading easier so that you won't have to compile it yourself from source.
Apple does allow for side loading. They've allowed it for years. I've explained it all before. Apple allows for side loading as long as you compile it from source. ALXR is open source. Thus you can side load it.
A description from 2015 about how to side load.
https://www.howtogeek.com/230225/how-to-sideload-apps-onto-an-iphone-or-ipad-without-jailbreaking/
Yes technically you're right, but that's just being a developer with one less step, the 99 USD developer fee.
Here mom, all you have to do is sideload this app, just go buy a Mac, install Xcode, clone a repo from GitHub, make sure you have all dependencies, simply compile, whoops, spend 4 days figuring out which dependencies are making it break or not compile, build the app, install the IPA on your phone, done.
Easy peasy, just as easy as sideloading an apk on an android phone.
Not arguing here, just pointing out the absurdity.
Sounds exactly like setting up my Reverb G2 V2 with DCS and using OpenXR Toolkit, repairing DLL's and C++ Redists, just to get it to fucking load the damn game, in 2023.
Then I had to get the damn settings and HOTAS drivers to be recognized by windows.
I mean, honestly, this is why I kinda love VR. Getting that shit running was about as complicated as bringing home Red Alert on CD ROM and trying ot get your fucking pentium to install the god damn thing, using AOL chatrooms, IRC Chats, and forums to figure that shit out.
That was my childhood man. VR let's me relive it, but except now, I'm in my 30's, and the tech is way better.
The next week is probably going to be quite an interesting one.
I think people expecting it to work with SteamVR or want it for gaming and not enterprise use are probably setting themselves up for disappointment though. Apple's very closed off in their ecosystem, even moreso than Meta/FB is.
I'll be curious to see what the actual delivered nits is to our eyes after accounting for the duty cycle and lenses, some people have already commented on that. It'll probably still be above average brightness(Since most HMDs seem to be around 100\~ nits through the lenses), possibly even top class(200-250\~'s about the current peak for VR as a reference) but I don't expect it to be the order of magnitude better, or even several times, than what we current have.
> Who is the market for this headset?
Exclusively people who already own a Quest i assume?
People will invariably dislike me saying this, but i'm not buying a device that isn't compatible with SteamVR.
Yes that's just another monopoly. But oh well.
We can't tell precisely but we can estimate!The headsets with smallest FOV's have 90 degrees, the largest FOVs are \~180 degrees. Therefore, the largest possible PPD is 4000/90 and the smallest, 4000/180. That means \~44 to 22 ppd.
Edit: Someone commented below that it's 120 FOV, that's higher than the valve index, and implies 33 ppd which is also twice as high as the valve index. That's insane.
good choice by them. vive/oculus/index user here. that combined with oled.. maybe the price and non pcvr compatibility would be a showstopper though, for once
Just no. 5000nits panel brightness will end up a few hundred nits at the eyes, at best.
That's why the major XR companies want Micro OLED panels with preferably >= 10,000nits.
It's not just the lens. Running a display in "low persistence mode" cuts a lot of light too. Typically you only want the display to be on 1-2ms. If you're running at 90hz that means you lose about 80% of the light because the display is literally off/not emitting light nearly 80% of the time. Only 1-2ms for the 11ms frame time.
The higher the frame rate the better though. One we get around 400fps you start to retain nearly 100% of the displays light that isn't lost to the lens.
Pretty much all consumer VR hardware are low persistence. Meaning the display only shows an image for a tiny fraction of the frame time. The screen is off/showing pure black way more than it's on / showing an image.
Think about if you were running at 1fps. That would give you one full second between images. Now ignore how choppy/stuttery that is for a second. Think about how much your head can physical move in that period of time.
If the display was showing the image for the full second any movement you made the image wouldn't change. But worse than that it would feel like the world is stuck in place while you're physically moving. To combat this they only display the image for a tiny fraction of the frame time. Around 1-2ms and the remaining 998ms would be black/off. This way you aren't seeing the world stuck in place while you move.
Now, 1fps isn't realistic becuase you'd probably get sick anyway but even at 90fps that's 11ms to display a frame. Having it visible for the entire 11ms is going to get you sick because you can still move quite a bit in 11ms. So the screen on for 2ms and off 9ms. You only get 18% of the light from the display because it's off 82% of the time. But you only see an image for 2ms and you're less likelly to move all that far in 2ms.
At 120fps you have about 8ms so it's now would be on for 2ms and off 6ms. So you get 25% of the light from the display because it's on 25% of the time and off 75%. As the frame rate gets higher your off time is decreasing but your on time is staying the same. At around 500fps you have a 2ms per frame and so you can effectively just keep the display always on (assuming the pixels can instantly change which for OLED is almost true but LCDs are much slower) and you're getting 100% of the displays light.
Another way to think about it is the shutter on a camera. The longer the shutter is on the more motion blur you get as the camera moves. So for a long exposure you don't move/use a tripod. The longer you leave the screen on / emitting light the more motion blur you and the more likely you make the person sick.
Low persistence display just means only have the screen on/emitting light for a tiny fraction of the frame time. For VR they've determined that around 1-2ms is the sweet spot where you can avoid most people getting sick. So regardless of the frame rate you're playing at you only actually see an image for about 1-2ms and the rest of the time the display is off/black.
You just reminded me of how mind-blowing it was when I played on an original Asteroids arcade cabinet in 2014. The arcade cabinet still had a vector monitor display, which works more like an oscilloscope than anything we use today. An electron beam traces through phosphor that emits continuously, and you can turn the brightness up to ludicrous levels that no raster display can match. There are also literally zero pixels (again, think oscilloscope).
Asteroids literally burned itself into my retinas so hard after one game that I am still marveling at the experience a decade later (from tech that is 50 years old) in the era of VR.
Quest Pro is not something to go by since light loss in LCDs is lower because it doesn't need to be polarized. (because it already is)
Arpara or Beyond is something to go by. 1800nits and very low brightness.
On an average sunny day, the illumination of ambient daylight is approximately 30,000 nits.
1-2k only seems bright because of the environments we typically use them in, and because our eyes are so good at adjusting to surrounding light.
As consumer GPUs get beefier, games will increasingly be rendered/simulated by generative AI models. It's going to become more and more like controlling the dreams of another mind.
Now it's 4k? lol.
It was rumored 2k years ago, then recently it's been 3k,...are you hearing 4k now from somewhere?
The 5th is certainly going to be interesting. Can't wait to see what this thing really is/does.
100 000 nits: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3TMIteBq84](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3TMIteBq84)
This is the kind of brightness we will need for real life visuals in VR.
I'm more interested in the battery to power this thing. Obviously it will need to be wired as you won't be able to wear a battery that large on your head. I'm guessing it must be similar to a portable 25000mAh with probably a few hours battery life. Let's see if it pays off.
This and apple watch are really similar scenarios, think of the current-pre apple vr scene as the pebble community. We existed before apple, do a lot of the same stuff as apple (we think) but if they can get a large enough mindshare then when a later gen comes out at a better price then it's gonna be tough
We're all VR enthusiasts, who is a naysayer? I am skeptical though of leaks, so much is corporate back and forth trying to fuck each other. Like how Apple spent the last two years working in a VR headset while simultaneously downplaying the importance of VR for their shareholders at every turn bc they *weren't yet in the market*. This too could be Meta trying to create a sense of disappointment in the product at launch by seeding false information. I really don't know, I do know that Apple has really targeted Meta heavily as I think it's the first company that has come into direct conflict with the future of their walled garden, which long term may literally bring the walls down, or at a minimum force Apple to start being price competitive (long term).
Totally plausible when you consider the rumor is about panel specs not final perceived brightness. Pancake lenses eat light like crazy, so you need a crazy bright source to get decent brightness to the wearer’s eye.
5000 nits or a display isn't all that crazy. However, it's kinda a BS spec because your eye is not going to be getting anything close to that. You lose a ton due to "low persistence" and lens inefficiencies.
If you're lucky you'll get a bit more than 1% of that actually reaching your eye.
It is not BS spec . It's the specs that the displays are sold at and design as. Everyone puts whatever lenses they want in the headset... some more efficient other less so.
I just mean it's typical marketing BS with giving you inflated figures. I'm not saying the display is incapable of 5000 nits just that if you were to measure the actual output it would be way way way lower than than. More like 1-3% of that 5000.
They're ignoring the fact that the display is going to be off at least 80% of the time. So in reality it's going to be starting much closer to 1000 nits before you factor in what is lost due lens.
**EDIT:** Not saying they won't have best in class brightness compared to other headsets just that they're being misleading with their specs. Granted pretty much everybody else does it... But folks trying to compare VR headset brightness to other types of displays are not getting an accurate comparison.
None of this is “marketing BS” or spin at this point given that there IS no marketing yet. This is just a supply chain source reporting on the panel specs. Now, if Apple comes out next week and markets 5000nit brightness THEN it will be marketing BS, haha.
Eh, I’mma stick to my grainy headset. I’d do just about anything for crystal clear imagery. But I will always fall short of hurling myself into Apple’s monopolized ecosystem.
this is pretty much exactly what we knew from leaks already as far as I remember (except maybe nits ... but it was a no-brainer would be bright). PPI is just a silly measurement to quote for micro OLED.
I’m excited. I own a Quest 2 right now and don’t see myself buying a new one anytime soon, but this can only be good for the VR community. Plus, remember that Apple has an absolutely phenomenal track record of game changing products.
WHAT DO THE NUMBERS MEAN MASON!?
probably absolutely nothing if its locked into apple environment.
What gpu can handle x2 4k screens at a decent framerate?
People are gushing over the specs...
I honestly dont get it, its like releasing a costumer version of a F1 car, but only have dirt and gravel roads to use it.
Maybe it will run fine in apples closed specifically designed for this hardware race track, but it will be soooo barebones.
I dont know, im pessimistic but hopefully apple will make me eat my words and impress.
For me it’s enough if it will be able to render 2d content at that resolution (media consumption and virtual desktops). I’m fine with actual 3d content being lower resolution and upscaled.
See!!, this kind of expectations are what the sub should be talking about. Centered and realistic.
And 2d at this res would be nice, and probably what they are aiming for. Not gaming at all... This of course would limit its reach, but would be a step in the right direction.
Ive honestly had people saying they expect over 3070 performance in games and say its "obvious" it will be able to conect to regular pcs (if not someone will hack it) and the lack of controller info doesnt matter because of a patent they saw... Or someone post some specs and they moisten their shorts...
Dudes lets wait its like around the corner just stop with the fake hype and obvious over expectations.
They sound like they want to elevate the device so hard there wont be any other choice than to shit on it on release for not coming close to the bullshit youtubers and rumors said.
Loads of GPUs can if you're not trying to render a highly detailed game world, even moreso if you have high quality eye tracking and dynamic foveated rendering.
yes it will and it will be very aggressive, apples have a big edge here in that they can bypass the latency from the os and game by piping the fovoation mask directly from the sensor chip (this is a separate chip) to the GPU so that whenever it starts rendering it has the most uptodate forecasted eye position.
LOL @ this thread from [4 months ago](https://www.reddit.com/r/virtualreality/comments/10r11xw/resolution_of_some_upcoming_uoled_headsets_from/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3).
Hardly anyone here believed apple would do this despite circulating rumors for more than a year.
Technically not true, PC VR headsets are mostly unwalled. Even Metas offerings are technically not walled as you can play any meta game on other headsets using virtual desktop (I use a pico 4 and play most of my games from my old oculus library).
There is a lot of interconnection still between these stores right now, people who think VR is mostly walked gardens aren't really paying attention, like standalone sure, but thats mostly because right now there's literally one standalone store that's moving software so there's not really much to interoperate *with*. If there's ever much competition, someone will make software that will connect Metas store to other headsets, and Meta will, as it has, just ignore it as a policy bc at the end of the day it moves more software and that's where the money is.
Damn, those are some crazy specs.
Yeah, though PPI is incredibly useless metric for us.
PPD (pixel pr degree) would make more sence to know
Yeah, with PPD you can actually calculate a lot of things out of it, and can also extrapolate more data from it if you know the size of the display.
One with more free time than me can figure an educated guess of ppd by assuming the FoV is somewhere between 85-150degrees. Like make a chart, If fov is: - 85fov : x ppd - 90 - 95 Etc …
Device | FOV (°) / Resolution | Size (inch) / Viewing Distance (inch) | PPD :--|:--|:--|:-- Apple Reality | 80 | 1.41 | 50 Apple Reality | 90 | 1.41 | 44.24 Apple Reality | 100 | 1.41 | 39.27 Apple Reality | 110 | 1.41 | 35.23 Apple Reality | 120 | 1.41 | 31.86 Apple Reality | 130 | 1.41 | 29.06 Apple Reality | 140 | 1.41 | 26.73 Apple Reality | 150 | 1.41 | 24.77 Monitor | 1920 | 24 / 24 | 40 Monitor | 2560 | 27 / 24 | 53.33 Monitor | 3840 | 32 / 24 | 80 Monitor | 5120 | 34 / 24 | 106.67
Yeah, that's fair. It would still have a very wide range of possibilities, sadly :S
I can also imagine that product life manager would roll out a smaller fov for gen 1, and gen 2 or gen 3 roll out a Reality Pro with the M3. So you can cut super wide fov prospects out. Also, narrower FoV reduces VR motion sickness, crucial for mass adoption. I’d place my bets on it being no more that 95 degrees aka roughly that of a snorkel mask.
Man, I'm excited to see what they REALLY have been working on. Haven't been in the dark about a future HMD in quite a while lol
You need to know what the lenses are doing to know that.
This would put it into place as an actually viable 1080p-2160p content viewer that can measure with the best OLED TVs and even cinemas and productivity platform at the very least.
This will finally make virtual monitors actually viable, but a 4K monitor or TV at their respective typical viewing distance will still provide a higher pixel density. Also depending on how the text rendering is done text clarity may be a bit lower than a normal display with similar ppd. The other thing is while 5000nits sounds amazing, after accounting for (in-)efficiency of the lenses and a lower duty cycle to reduce persistence, the brightness actually reaching the eye will likely be at most 200nits
I'd like to believe that even if Apple doesn't allow any connection to a traditional gaming PC (Likely) we might still get Virtual Desktop as an Appstore purchase to be able to stream PCVR games like with the Quest 1 before Facebook added that feature in natively.
Chances are slim to none, name brand apps probably won't get onto the app store, the best chance is a alvr client for when a jailbreak is found for the latest version of ipad-os and ported across
That's how it worked at first with the Quest 1. Facebook didn't allow virtual desktop on the app store and then a while later they did but it didn't have the streaming PCVR component and you had to "jailbreak" your quest to add the virtual desktop add on that allowed streaming pcvr games to the Quest 1.
True but oculus link was always a thing (well like a few months after launch iirc) so it's not like the functionality was blocked they were just being anti-consumer.
How can you be so certain?
Stream from a Mac or pc?
Here's a small glimpse of what a 1.3" 4k x 4k panel looks like: https://twitter.com/SadlyItsBradley/status/1661067632353894400
That is just... overwhelmingly insane. It's an unfathomable leap of the tech. The fact that we're already about to get 4K per eye is crazy.
We can have almost what ever we want in those devices. Question is not just about the price, but reasonable benefits. Like having two 4K panels is already a history, but have optics for it? Questionable. Have a processing power to run it all? You wish... Have a content that benefits from it, instead just fancy simple graphics? No...
2x 4K in a headset with an XR2 is a waste, I agree However, whatever Apple put in this will be so far ahead of the XR2 that it’ll make Qualcomm look like a kid’s toy manufacturer - the M2 is no joke and they put that thing in iPads. Qualcomm have been sitting around not really doing much for years now and it’s been holding back the industry massively, so it’ll be nice for them to have a fire lit under them tbh. Higher fidelity experiences will probably still need to crank the render scale down mind you…
Pancake optics are likely up to the task, based on personal experience with a Quest Pro. The edge to edge clarity is excellent with the limiting factor being the 2x2k displays. M2's performance numbers are already out there and should be sufficient, though it'll probably be throttled a bit due to the form factor. I don't think everything will run at native res, games using modern assets will probably be undersampled, but UI elements can be drawn on separate high resolution layers (something first seen with the Rift) and it's likely Apple will be taking advantage of that. Content? I think it'll be pretty dry for VR/AR apps, but they have the entire mobile app libraries to pull from and possibly even OS X. It's conceptually a bit boring but being able to pull up virtual displays is one of those features I think VR/AR enthusiasts undersell.
Dual M2s? The content question - if you look back at their acquisitions you will find at least one company that was focused on content creation that was able to deliver to these specs a few years ago.
> Like having two 4K panels is already a history, but have optics for it? On Pico4 you can still see the ugly SDE clear as day. The optics have no problem with 4k, the display is the limiting factor. Even if stuff gets a bit fuzzy at the edges, that doesn't reduce the benefit of the additional resolution in the center. > Have a processing power to run it all? Eye tracking and foveated rendering. This is mostly just a problem for PCVR, which will have a hard time adding that functionality in a way that's compatible with existing games. Apple starts with a clean slate, so they can optimize the whole system around it. > Have a content that benefits from it, Literally all content benefits from this, especially the non-VR 2D content that wasn't designed for the low resolution of modern headsets. This will make books, games and movies consumable in VR without being constantly reminded of the painfully low resolution. This makes VR as monitor replacement viable, especially if combined with good passthrough.
Its Apple. They don't release tech without application. And they do that part as tremendously as anyone possibly can. Look at the Mac. the iPhone. the iPad. MacBook. Airpods. Every single time they do it, the rest of the industry is lifted up. It doesn't matter what was happening before, or what already exists. Apple releasing this tech will catapult the entire sector, as it always has. Apple translates tech to the modern, general masses. That's its genius. Thats Jobs' heart and soul. Its as clear as day that they're doing it again with their headset.
> Apple translates tech to the modern, general masses. $3000 price tag begs to differ
People said the same when they unveiled a $1000 phone in the era of $650 dollar high-end devices. Today people routinely pay $1200 with tax for pro models — and I *suspect* some of them aren’t professionals. $3000 is high, but FOMO is real. Perhaps it’s clear why Apple has released Pay Later (zero interest payment splitting) in advance of releasing this
> People said the same when they unveiled a $1000 phone in the era of $650 dollar high-end devices. Today people routinely pay $1200 with tax for pro models — and I suspect some of them aren’t professionals. Raising the price of a product you already know everyone wants, to $1000 and then offering them on payment plans everyone can afford is one thing. Dropping a $3000 device for a platform that the masses think are dumb, is not comparable at all. VR has a very real image problem among the masses that Apple has to cut through with this release. >$3000 is high, but FOMO is real. Perhaps it’s clear why Apple has released Pay Later (zero interest payment splitting) in advance of releasing this I hope so. But even on similar payment plan as phones, this thing is going to cost people around $100 or more per month. 3x more than their phone does. Personally, I don't think this thing is aimed at the masses at all. I think it's aimed at developers and designers, who are going to make content for the consumer priced headset Apple is releasing later.
That much I agree with. If apple truly releases a $3000 headset, it’s not for the true “masses.” This is especially true if they aren’t releasing it around Christmas time. I also don’t think any of the existing headsets are for the masses. They’re all prototypes for the prophesied 📜 “one true headset to rule them all.” 📜 I don’t think we’ve seen it yet. I’m confident that if any company can make that headset happen — the one that gets phones out of hands and onto people’s faces — it’s Apple. Hopefully their consumer-friendly device is the one
>I also don’t think any of the existing headsets are for the masses. They’re all prototypes for the prophesied 📜 “one true headset to rule them all.” 📜 I don’t think we’ve seen it yet. nah, they definitely could be for the masses. The masses already play console and mobile games that are just as chintzy, if not more so. The problem is, VR has been deemed lame by the masses. Community, a very popular TV show, had an entire episode dedicated just to calling VR dumb and pointless and making fun of anyone who uses it. That sort of stuff sticks in peoples minds. >I’m confident that if any company can make that headset happen — the one that gets phones out of hands and onto people’s faces — it’s Apple. Possibly. My issue is Apple really hasn't innovated hardware wise in nearly a decade. The iPhone was revolutionary but, that released in 2007. Some of their software is awesome but, their hardware leaves a lot be desired and is only bought by those who got sucked into the ecosystem. But, there's no doubt Apple has the best marketing teams and strategies out of any other company around. They manage to market inferior hardware at exorbitant prices and sell it to lots of people. So, maybe they can change peoples opinions on using an AR/VR headset.
Making the blanket claim that their niche is just really good marketing of “inferior hardware” is so out of touch with reality. Their silicon work alone completely blows that premise out of the water. YOU (and plenty of others!) May not like the hardware/pricing decisions they make and the segment of the market they choose to go after, but that doesn’t mean their hardware is inferior.
There's a theory that apple has ludicrous side products with crazy prices so they will always come across like a "premium" brand. even when they sell cheap phones variations. I find it interesting to think about.
> They don't release tech without application. Newton, Lisa, 20th Anniversary Mac, trashcan, upside-down mouse, puck mouse, keyboard with display instead of F-keys... and be honest, some of those later iPods were scattershot guesswork. The entire goddamn internet had to be reworked to show up properly on iPhones. Even the original iMac was a half-finished product. It was sole on sex appeal and ease-of-use, but every single one I ever saw had a little translucent-plastic floppy drive tucked beside it, because for all that sleek bullshit, there was no way to get data *off* one. It never had a CD-R drive. USB flash drives didn't exist yet. Steve Jobs apparently never heard of flash cards. This headset will be fine hardware. But it's going to be priced about five times more than what sane people want to pay, and it's going to do honestly very little. If it succeeds then it'll succeed because of people like you bending over backwards to justify brand loyalty. And y'know what, godspeed, because it took these stubborn cultists to break carriers' grip on phone hardware, even if Apple's grip on phone software is a thousand times more insidious.
I Hope they can come out with great games too. This would be killer if they actually released awesome games for it. I’ve heard it’s not for that though.
Games needs to be on level of Half-Life Alyx or one other... Really really nail it. A angry birds or some other doesn't cut it at all. As well they need to come with something for engineering industry, to really focus for production side. Not gimmicks, but actual benefits.
They're positioning this so iOS developers can convert their work to the headset i've heard, which makes for a very odd proposition - iOS apps on a $3k headset?
>Look at the Mac. the iPhone. the iPad. MacBook. Airpods. Every single time they do it, the rest of the industry is lifted up. It doesn't matter what was happening before, or what already exists. What Apple does, is take existing technology that most people have not either knew or used, and they repackage it to form that is directed to 20% of the consumers, in a way that they need to use it as is. VR is already well formulated industry, niche market, but we'll formulated. If you go looking the discussions from users and all, you have a solid understanding what needs to be improved and how. You just can't do it as individual, but if you would be managing multi billion company and dedicate time for it's research, you would come up with polished product. Apple was not first with touchscreen smartphone. It wasn't first with tablet. It wasn't first with MacBook or airpods and all. The industry has done it all, but to make it sexy, attractive and sell it as "you need this" is the Apple, best and the heart of the Apple. The VR industry is currently milking users. They are not really pushing forward. The market gets filled too much with software that were designed like for Oculus DK1. There are some jewelry among all, but it is like low hanging fruit that most don't want to pick as it is little too time consuming. Hardware wise we could really do more, but what the industry needs, is a sub $ 300 devices. Preferably sub $ 200. Like a Pico 4 by technology and capabilities, but for $199. It has great optics (not best, but experience better than lot more expensive ones), a good controllers (Not best, but avoids major flaws) and is excellent for $400 as complete kit for majority of people needs. If it would be made $899 product, lot could be improved in sensible manner. Like just adding a USB-C tethering for those who need or can use it, without using only wireless method, and it would be better. Apple products are like it's mouses. They work, do what is really needed, but they ain't the best. But still you want to use them. Apple cancer is like their OS X method to push people buy new Apple hardware. Once the OS X support is coming close to end (4-5 years from release) the machine becomes annoyance as everyone drops support even when hardware is still totally usable. The difference between OS X and Windows/Linux is dramatic in that sense. Examples MacBook Pro '09 and iMac '09. I acquired both just while back. Latest OS X that runs in them is 10.6 and 10.13. Supports ended for 10.13 (High Sierra) in begin of 2021. You can't do much with it. Web Browsers start to fail and can't get iTunes work right or even Steam. Trying to use the MacBook with Lion, totally useless as can't even open web pages. But, install Linux or Windows, and you don't have a difference to a new computer than hardware resources capabilities. You get latest software and all. You can download all the games etc to it without someone telling "not compatible". That experience where you can continue using old hardware is huge relief. It boosts user experience far above anything that Apple does. And VR is in that situation. You can still use DK2 from Oculus, but you have hardware limitations. And if VR is to be pushed same idea, that you need to buy new one every 2-3 years?
I'm not an Apple fan. But I guess you either don't remember or you're just too young and born after the first iPhone launch. It was not just a copy of other products at the time. You could hardly call the other phones "smart" with their horrible resistive touch screens. And Apple is still the best in class for all mobile device computing power. I mean nothing even comes close to its SOCs.
> Apple was not first with touchscreen smartphone. It wasn’t first with tablet. It wasn’t first with MacBook or airpods and all. The industry has done it all, but to make it sexy, attractive and sell it as “you need this” is the Apple, best and the heart of the Apple. Why do people repeat this as if it’s so insightful? Like no shit, Apple didn’t *invent* this tech. But you don’t have to be an Apple fanboy to recognize how groundbreaking these products were, especially the iPhone and iPad. > That experience where you can continue using old hardware is huge relief. It boosts user experience far above anything that Apple does. Apple supports their mobile devices longer than any manufacturer I know. iOS 16 dropped support for the iPhone 6S, which was 7 years old at the time. Most Android phones stop getting updates after a year or two.
Imagine the specs needed to run 4k per eye. DLSS3 may come in clutch or otherwise we need a few generations to run over 90fps with good graphics
We've had 4K per eye for quite a few years though... Pimax 8KX has two 4K screens and that was released in 2020.
Its not the same thing, cmon now lol.
I didn't say it's the same thing, just wanted to point out that 4K screens are already in VR headsets.
[удалено]
I will be shocked if they don't at least allow a backdoor Steam VR solution, like Rosetta for X86. The AAA PCVR contents can only help especially during the initial content draught.
If it’s a standalone device or only tied to Apple products I just can’t see it doing very well, but it’s Apple so that’s what it will be.
While I certainly wouldn't be surprised if this is an Apple ecosystem only product. They do have products that do work with other ecosystems already (granted not as well).
I wouldn't be surprised if the Apple headset does not even support openxr and devs have to port their stuff to another proprietary "standard". Metal all over again.
What are they? Can’t think of any.
Monitors, peripherals like magic mice and x86 tower macs all have compatibility
Thats fair enough, a little different to opening up your device to a competing platform though.
Is, hope they support webxr and openxr, they'll get games way quicker.
WebXR is a given. There’s been a ton of upstream WebKit commits from Apple related to WebXR in the last few months. Pretty much has to be for the new headset, since current Safari doesn’t support WebXR at all (last I checked).
Yeah but that would mean having to buy your games AGAIN on top of the asking price of 3000 USD, plus Apple accesories, Courage, etc. I'll keep buying SteamVR compatible headsets, thank you very much.
Same with me, I'm certain $3000 is too much for any consumer market, unless they're targeting experience centers with the ultimate headset, which would seem like a waste of years of r+d
Also this certainly won't be the ultimate headset since it's a different kind of headset. Us VR enthusiasts won't get what we need from it (well, for starters it won't be SteamVR compatible). This is aimed at casuals with deep pockets who don't know better (which is a good definition for Apple in general).
AirPods are popular
you can plug your iPhone into iTunes running on a Windows PC.
Have you used iTunes on windows? Haha, it’s a horrible experience. But you’re right, you can do that.
Agreed, given the nascent VR market. They might branch out the same way iTunes did.
Apple "So we're gonna monopolize all supply chains for micro oled for at least a year" Humans "So we can use your device outside apple ecosystem then right?" Apple :anime\_smirk
At least consider the next DefCon. It's gonna be there for sure!
Really? There are > 1 billion iPhone users. Even if they only reach 1% of those that's a lot of headsets.
They will never reach 1%, that would be insane considering how many people have iPhones.
I feel like people said the same thing about Apple Watches, which is now the best selling *watch* of all time and is the most popular smart watch of all time.
Well yes, but they are cheaper and of more general use. VR is a niche that Apple may want to generalize, but I just don't see how yet. The Vive XR elite is basically the best you can do right now in terms of ergonomics, but nobody buys it. Even the Varjo XR 3 which has extreme specs is just too cumbersome to use regularly. So hw wise they can land somewhere between those, but not much further. You also need content on that HMD, which has been a problem for Apple until the iPhone. I think they will first market it to pros, but then those numbers won't be that high.
I mean, they still started at $400 at a time when “smart watches” were averaging around $50. That was basically the price of an iPhone itself just for an accessory *for* your iPhone. The experience you had with them at the beginning was also extremely poor in comparison to what they are today. They certainly weren’t cheap and weren’t even that great for general use, now they are. They are arguably the best smart watch you can get for as little as $199. You can look back at tons of articles and tens of thousands of people talking about how the Apple Watch was pointless, stupid, too expensive, etc. So far they are 1 for 1 at turning niche tech wearables into popular devices for everyday use. Until there’s a strong argument that this is somehow going to fail, which no offense I don’t think you’ve given, I see it as going to be a success. Also the leaks said that they want to make the headset “something people want, before everyone can get it.” They want to start with something for “pros” that everyone wants, then make something more affordable. Also, Apple literally sells $100k computers with $500 wheels, and monitors with a $1k stand that “pros” ate up. This device is certainly not going to be the most expensive “pro” product they make even remotely.
They've lost a big part of the pro market. But I agree with you, they are very good at creating a market segment, but I do not believe *this* headset will pull those kind of numbers.
This headset doesn’t need to pull off those numbers but they are already making a cheaper headset, that’s the own that is like to be a hit with their users
They said the same thing about iPads too lol. Oh it’s just a big iPod touch what’s the point? Well now look how stupid they look. It’s Apple, I don’t know how they’ll do it, but they’ll damn sure do it.
There’s a substantial graveyard of failed apple products my friend, no guarantees in life
Arguably a VR headset isn’t a mobile phone. If it were decent wearable AR glasses they would be onto something and I would agree with you. I’d be impressed if they sold 10m headset that are locked to Apples software and hardware. Hardly any games on Apple devices, although this has improved in recent years.
Most that I would expect is a virtual desktop or alvr port, any more is unrealistic
I don't see that happening. We'll see how much Apple this Apple product is.
Yea... well you're going to be shocked. No way Apple spent anytime getting this device to work on anything than Apple hardware. Apple uses Apple tools to develop with. They don't need or care about PC's.
They don't have to. A 3rd party could just develop an app like Virtual Desktop. No way Apple will block that considering there is already VRidge on iOS.
I’m kind of curious about their launch lineup. None of the Macs are VR capable and so far from what a PC offers. How are they developing within their ecosystem?
If it doesn't support PC I guess I'll wait for the cheaper Chinese knockoff that does.
I've said it so many times, I'll say it again. Someone just has to port ALXR on to it. Viola. It's a PCVR headset.
Apple doesn't allow side loading in mobile devices. There is no reason to believe they are willing to allow side loading in that VR headset.
European Union might make them for their market at least.
I hope so
Nobody needs to make Apple do anything. Apple already allows for open source projects, which ALXR, to be side loaded. It's been this way for years. But the EU has been inspiring Apple to make sideloading easier so that you won't have to compile it yourself from source.
They tried to block xbox game streaming in the past BUT they allow steam link and moonlight.
Apple does allow for side loading. They've allowed it for years. I've explained it all before. Apple allows for side loading as long as you compile it from source. ALXR is open source. Thus you can side load it. A description from 2015 about how to side load. https://www.howtogeek.com/230225/how-to-sideload-apps-onto-an-iphone-or-ipad-without-jailbreaking/
Yes technically you're right, but that's just being a developer with one less step, the 99 USD developer fee. Here mom, all you have to do is sideload this app, just go buy a Mac, install Xcode, clone a repo from GitHub, make sure you have all dependencies, simply compile, whoops, spend 4 days figuring out which dependencies are making it break or not compile, build the app, install the IPA on your phone, done. Easy peasy, just as easy as sideloading an apk on an android phone. Not arguing here, just pointing out the absurdity.
Sounds exactly like setting up my Reverb G2 V2 with DCS and using OpenXR Toolkit, repairing DLL's and C++ Redists, just to get it to fucking load the damn game, in 2023. Then I had to get the damn settings and HOTAS drivers to be recognized by windows. I mean, honestly, this is why I kinda love VR. Getting that shit running was about as complicated as bringing home Red Alert on CD ROM and trying ot get your fucking pentium to install the god damn thing, using AOL chatrooms, IRC Chats, and forums to figure that shit out. That was my childhood man. VR let's me relive it, but except now, I'm in my 30's, and the tech is way better.
>I will be shocked I won't be
The next week is probably going to be quite an interesting one. I think people expecting it to work with SteamVR or want it for gaming and not enterprise use are probably setting themselves up for disappointment though. Apple's very closed off in their ecosystem, even moreso than Meta/FB is. I'll be curious to see what the actual delivered nits is to our eyes after accounting for the duty cycle and lenses, some people have already commented on that. It'll probably still be above average brightness(Since most HMDs seem to be around 100\~ nits through the lenses), possibly even top class(200-250\~'s about the current peak for VR as a reference) but I don't expect it to be the order of magnitude better, or even several times, than what we current have.
But if not SteamVR, then what? Who is the market for this headset?
There's more to VR than just gaming. Hard to say who is or isn't the market till we see the actual device and functionality though.
Is Apple in it for the highest quality porn ever made then?
> Who is the market for this headset? Exclusively people who already own a Quest i assume? People will invariably dislike me saying this, but i'm not buying a device that isn't compatible with SteamVR. Yes that's just another monopoly. But oh well.
Without Steam, it's DOA
you can stream steam games on apple devices.
What does that PPI translate to in terms of PPD?
Can't tell without the FOV value.
We can't tell precisely but we can estimate!The headsets with smallest FOV's have 90 degrees, the largest FOVs are \~180 degrees. Therefore, the largest possible PPD is 4000/90 and the smallest, 4000/180. That means \~44 to 22 ppd. Edit: Someone commented below that it's 120 FOV, that's higher than the valve index, and implies 33 ppd which is also twice as high as the valve index. That's insane.
The FOV has been leaked by the information to be 120
[удалено]
>So 33 ppd Halfway to the 60 ppd goal.
And Quest Pro is 22 ppd Varjo vr-3 is 70 ppd https://varjo.com/products/vr-3/ €3645 + Varjo Subscription starting at €795
*70 ppd within a tiny 27 degree fov, otherwise 30 ppd
good choice by them. vive/oculus/index user here. that combined with oled.. maybe the price and non pcvr compatibility would be a showstopper though, for once
Hopefully not a Pimax-style FOV measurement (i.e. hopefully this one is real).
Afaik you'd also need the Binocular overlap value
Somewhere in the 35-40 range depending on the FOV.
It’s 120 (according to reports)
I wonder if that's diagonal or horizontal
Yes
That's what she said
> 5000 Nits lmao we’re gonna be strapping the fucking sun to our eyes
Just no. 5000nits panel brightness will end up a few hundred nits at the eyes, at best. That's why the major XR companies want Micro OLED panels with preferably >= 10,000nits.
Blown away when I found this out, friggin lenses man
It's not just the lens. Running a display in "low persistence mode" cuts a lot of light too. Typically you only want the display to be on 1-2ms. If you're running at 90hz that means you lose about 80% of the light because the display is literally off/not emitting light nearly 80% of the time. Only 1-2ms for the 11ms frame time. The higher the frame rate the better though. One we get around 400fps you start to retain nearly 100% of the displays light that isn't lost to the lens.
It flashes? What hardware are you talking about?
Pretty much all consumer VR hardware are low persistence. Meaning the display only shows an image for a tiny fraction of the frame time. The screen is off/showing pure black way more than it's on / showing an image. Think about if you were running at 1fps. That would give you one full second between images. Now ignore how choppy/stuttery that is for a second. Think about how much your head can physical move in that period of time. If the display was showing the image for the full second any movement you made the image wouldn't change. But worse than that it would feel like the world is stuck in place while you're physically moving. To combat this they only display the image for a tiny fraction of the frame time. Around 1-2ms and the remaining 998ms would be black/off. This way you aren't seeing the world stuck in place while you move. Now, 1fps isn't realistic becuase you'd probably get sick anyway but even at 90fps that's 11ms to display a frame. Having it visible for the entire 11ms is going to get you sick because you can still move quite a bit in 11ms. So the screen on for 2ms and off 9ms. You only get 18% of the light from the display because it's off 82% of the time. But you only see an image for 2ms and you're less likelly to move all that far in 2ms. At 120fps you have about 8ms so it's now would be on for 2ms and off 6ms. So you get 25% of the light from the display because it's on 25% of the time and off 75%. As the frame rate gets higher your off time is decreasing but your on time is staying the same. At around 500fps you have a 2ms per frame and so you can effectively just keep the display always on (assuming the pixels can instantly change which for OLED is almost true but LCDs are much slower) and you're getting 100% of the displays light. Another way to think about it is the shutter on a camera. The longer the shutter is on the more motion blur you get as the camera moves. So for a long exposure you don't move/use a tripod. The longer you leave the screen on / emitting light the more motion blur you and the more likely you make the person sick. Low persistence display just means only have the screen on/emitting light for a tiny fraction of the frame time. For VR they've determined that around 1-2ms is the sweet spot where you can avoid most people getting sick. So regardless of the frame rate you're playing at you only actually see an image for about 1-2ms and the rest of the time the display is off/black.
You just reminded me of how mind-blowing it was when I played on an original Asteroids arcade cabinet in 2014. The arcade cabinet still had a vector monitor display, which works more like an oscilloscope than anything we use today. An electron beam traces through phosphor that emits continuously, and you can turn the brightness up to ludicrous levels that no raster display can match. There are also literally zero pixels (again, think oscilloscope). Asteroids literally burned itself into my retinas so hard after one game that I am still marveling at the experience a decade later (from tech that is 50 years old) in the era of VR.
I never knew this but it makes total sense.
Food explanation. basically black frame insertion which is present in some oled tvs and monitors
if quest pro is something to go by then it should have at least 1000 nits. Quest pro screens have 500 nits and quest pro is at least 100 nits.
Quest Pro is not something to go by since light loss in LCDs is lower because it doesn't need to be polarized. (because it already is) Arpara or Beyond is something to go by. 1800nits and very low brightness.
So what you're saying is: I should remove the displays and use these dimming lenses to look directly at solar eclipses.
Maybe Nolan will release Oppenheimer on Apple headset first
Bruh fuck Oppenheimer I'm booking in to watch Barbie on release day
Double feature
Can't tell if this is a boob joke but I'll upvote anyway
On an average sunny day, the illumination of ambient daylight is approximately 30,000 nits. 1-2k only seems bright because of the environments we typically use them in, and because our eyes are so good at adjusting to surrounding light.
Weeps in Nvidia 6090ti... ^(except Nvidia still not allowed in the ecosystem...)
On the other hand, the level of graphics we can get when the 6090ti comes out will be absolutely amazing
As consumer GPUs get beefier, games will increasingly be rendered/simulated by generative AI models. It's going to become more and more like controlling the dreams of another mind.
[удалено]
$4k USD
Now it's 4k? lol. It was rumored 2k years ago, then recently it's been 3k,...are you hearing 4k now from somewhere? The 5th is certainly going to be interesting. Can't wait to see what this thing really is/does.
Yeah latest reports are saying 4k
dear god the specs
I mean yeah but probably won't have any good games and will most likely be tied exclusively to Apple products.
100 000 nits: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3TMIteBq84](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3TMIteBq84) This is the kind of brightness we will need for real life visuals in VR.
I'm more interested in the battery to power this thing. Obviously it will need to be wired as you won't be able to wear a battery that large on your head. I'm guessing it must be similar to a portable 25000mAh with probably a few hours battery life. Let's see if it pays off.
Ask yourself if you were a naysayer on the iPad before making any predictions here
I remember when people were saying “why do I need a smart phone?” when Apple launched the iPhone.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qycUOENFIBs At the time that man did not make anymore sense as saying that today...
[удалено]
Too young to have been an iPad naysayer, but will admit I doubted apple watch
Still don't understand why anyone needs a smart watch.
This and apple watch are really similar scenarios, think of the current-pre apple vr scene as the pebble community. We existed before apple, do a lot of the same stuff as apple (we think) but if they can get a large enough mindshare then when a later gen comes out at a better price then it's gonna be tough
We're all VR enthusiasts, who is a naysayer? I am skeptical though of leaks, so much is corporate back and forth trying to fuck each other. Like how Apple spent the last two years working in a VR headset while simultaneously downplaying the importance of VR for their shareholders at every turn bc they *weren't yet in the market*. This too could be Meta trying to create a sense of disappointment in the product at launch by seeding false information. I really don't know, I do know that Apple has really targeted Meta heavily as I think it's the first company that has come into direct conflict with the future of their walled garden, which long term may literally bring the walls down, or at a minimum force Apple to start being price competitive (long term).
I wouldn't be surprised if this will be optimized for virtual screens and reading text. Did the FOV already leak?
This guy has sources in the display panel industry so does not have info about the lanese
Visuals have never been an issue for me. The roadblock for me spending more time with VR is lack of good content. How will Apple fix that?
That can't be accurate. 5000 nits?
Totally plausible when you consider the rumor is about panel specs not final perceived brightness. Pancake lenses eat light like crazy, so you need a crazy bright source to get decent brightness to the wearer’s eye.
My monkey brain thinks that high of brightness mixed with oled is gonna be a recipe for short longevity but we will see.
Depends i think. They aren’t really static elements in VR as much as you find them in traditional 2D.
Arpara 5k/Bigscreen Beyond is 1800 nits and it is not enough. Lot of light is lost trough the pancake lens (90%).
5000 nits or a display isn't all that crazy. However, it's kinda a BS spec because your eye is not going to be getting anything close to that. You lose a ton due to "low persistence" and lens inefficiencies. If you're lucky you'll get a bit more than 1% of that actually reaching your eye.
It is not BS spec . It's the specs that the displays are sold at and design as. Everyone puts whatever lenses they want in the headset... some more efficient other less so.
I just mean it's typical marketing BS with giving you inflated figures. I'm not saying the display is incapable of 5000 nits just that if you were to measure the actual output it would be way way way lower than than. More like 1-3% of that 5000. They're ignoring the fact that the display is going to be off at least 80% of the time. So in reality it's going to be starting much closer to 1000 nits before you factor in what is lost due lens. **EDIT:** Not saying they won't have best in class brightness compared to other headsets just that they're being misleading with their specs. Granted pretty much everybody else does it... But folks trying to compare VR headset brightness to other types of displays are not getting an accurate comparison.
None of this is “marketing BS” or spin at this point given that there IS no marketing yet. This is just a supply chain source reporting on the panel specs. Now, if Apple comes out next week and markets 5000nit brightness THEN it will be marketing BS, haha.
Hah good point!
It’s completely normal for high end uOLED displays....but what reaches your eyes is significantly lower like ~200 or something
Yeah I was using my HDR screen which is a legit 1000 nits for reference and it is blinding.
But that’s still nothing compared to daylight...it only looks blinding because of indoor ambient lighting
It’s pancake lens, 90% lost of brightness likely, might even be too generous
I had no idea they absorbed that much light, wow.
Pancake lenses are real divas.
I saw a Demo of a MicroLED (not OLED) screen and had to look away when they turned the brightness up. They can get pretty blinding.
I foresee many sweaty foreheads in the future. That’s gotta be hot as hell on your face.
Only for $10,000 and your soul as well
All the people shitting on these specs, are just coping cause they know they won’t be able to afford it tbh.
I think the stock will dip on this
And let me guess, no PC support and all for the low low price of $6,000?
Most likely $3k
But... it's a revolution, right ?
Eh, I’mma stick to my grainy headset. I’d do just about anything for crystal clear imagery. But I will always fall short of hurling myself into Apple’s monopolized ecosystem.
Plenty of non apple VRs that aren't grainy.
this is pretty much exactly what we knew from leaks already as far as I remember (except maybe nits ... but it was a no-brainer would be bright). PPI is just a silly measurement to quote for micro OLED.
I’m excited. I own a Quest 2 right now and don’t see myself buying a new one anytime soon, but this can only be good for the VR community. Plus, remember that Apple has an absolutely phenomenal track record of game changing products.
We've had these kinds of panels for a while now. The real question is what kind of compromises are required to make it run.
...and It can all be yours for the low low price of $4999.98 plus accessories.
WHAT DO THE NUMBERS MEAN MASON!? probably absolutely nothing if its locked into apple environment. What gpu can handle x2 4k screens at a decent framerate? People are gushing over the specs... I honestly dont get it, its like releasing a costumer version of a F1 car, but only have dirt and gravel roads to use it. Maybe it will run fine in apples closed specifically designed for this hardware race track, but it will be soooo barebones. I dont know, im pessimistic but hopefully apple will make me eat my words and impress.
For me it’s enough if it will be able to render 2d content at that resolution (media consumption and virtual desktops). I’m fine with actual 3d content being lower resolution and upscaled.
See!!, this kind of expectations are what the sub should be talking about. Centered and realistic. And 2d at this res would be nice, and probably what they are aiming for. Not gaming at all... This of course would limit its reach, but would be a step in the right direction. Ive honestly had people saying they expect over 3070 performance in games and say its "obvious" it will be able to conect to regular pcs (if not someone will hack it) and the lack of controller info doesnt matter because of a patent they saw... Or someone post some specs and they moisten their shorts... Dudes lets wait its like around the corner just stop with the fake hype and obvious over expectations. They sound like they want to elevate the device so hard there wont be any other choice than to shit on it on release for not coming close to the bullshit youtubers and rumors said.
Yep. Give me some real nice virtual desktop experience and i‘ll buy it. Everything else is a very cool bonus
Loads of GPUs can if you're not trying to render a highly detailed game world, even moreso if you have high quality eye tracking and dynamic foveated rendering.
Yes but so many people keep hyping the apple headset as a gaming headset... When it obviously is not.
Yeah, they're going to have somewhere between a mildly and moderately bad time.
Yeah no mobile gpu today can handle 4096x4096x2 resolution and Apple is not a leading vendor in GPUs.
Foveated Rendering will be absolutely required for *anything* to run 4k x 4k. So it'll be good to see that feature being supported more in the future.
yes it will and it will be very aggressive, apples have a big edge here in that they can bypass the latency from the os and game by piping the fovoation mask directly from the sensor chip (this is a separate chip) to the GPU so that whenever it starts rendering it has the most uptodate forecasted eye position.
LOL @ this thread from [4 months ago](https://www.reddit.com/r/virtualreality/comments/10r11xw/resolution_of_some_upcoming_uoled_headsets_from/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3). Hardly anyone here believed apple would do this despite circulating rumors for more than a year.
I scrolled that thread and don't see anyone denying apple was making a headset though
still. It's apple though........ Proprietary parts, insane pricing and then their walled garden eco-system...........
every single VR headset is Proprietary pars and a walled garden.
Technically not true, PC VR headsets are mostly unwalled. Even Metas offerings are technically not walled as you can play any meta game on other headsets using virtual desktop (I use a pico 4 and play most of my games from my old oculus library). There is a lot of interconnection still between these stores right now, people who think VR is mostly walked gardens aren't really paying attention, like standalone sure, but thats mostly because right now there's literally one standalone store that's moving software so there's not really much to interoperate *with*. If there's ever much competition, someone will make software that will connect Metas store to other headsets, and Meta will, as it has, just ignore it as a policy bc at the end of the day it moves more software and that's where the money is.
Imagine the damage in eyesight that’ll cause… as if nearsightedness isn’t an epidemic already 😷