I doubt this will be “it” for the tech. But probably an important jump forward in the field in at least a few respects. I’m interested to hear of experiences using them in the future.
Pornn.
Fair enough. It’s obviously got you excited, and if it’s therefore probably going to get a lot of other people excited. But I’m not one of them. I’m not a gamer, and I’m not at all visually creative in any way. So for me, it’s nothing that I’m interested in or will ever be interested in, and I won’t be buying it.
Is it possible to go back on the conversation we had around dyers when the iPad first got announced? I’m pretty sure most thought it was ridiculous at the time.
i don’t recall the dryers chat
what was the gist of it?
I assume Apple Watch is needed to recognise hand movements, which the newer ones already do.
Nope if you go through the well presented article , the amount of sensors recognise hand movements
1 Like
I think this is a game changer…again
2 Likes
The tech/software is very exciting, and it’s still very early days.
Going to be a matter of seeing what companies do with it. Possibilities are huge.
1 Like
Same for pharmaceutical companies who sell drugs for nausea.
I can barely handle vr while sitting and they want us to walk around with it?
Specs are impressive though. You won’t be gaming in 8k though. I don’t believe that for a second.
1 Like
Specs are very impressive. I’d very much like to try it, but not buy it.
Stolen from elsewhere:
Gaze tracking is critical for mass-market headset-based VR and AR. Our eyes only actually see roughly a circle ~2º across (called the fovea) with any precision. Everywhere else, we have the ability to see large patches of color, or movement, but no detail. Our brains fake all the detail we think we see outside of the fovea.
Even more interesting, when our eyes move, we go totally blind for a few milliseconds. This phenomenon is called saccadic masking. You can verify it experimentally in a mirror. No matter how hard you try, you will never be able to see your own eyes move, because they shut down while moving.
Taken together, these allow for something called foveated rendering, where the device tracks where the user’s fovea is, and renders only that small patch with high detail. It then renders everything else much more coarsely. As long as the time to render a frame can be kept below the saccadic masking duration, rendering in this way is imperceptible to the user.
This means it only needs to render around 3% of the screen, which would allow even a phone GPU to render VR/AR meeting today’s standards for angular resolution.
2 Likes
for ~$5.3K+ AUD (likely $6K+ on shore), it aint changing any games
that’s was a typo, there was an Apple thread that predates this one.
1 Like
If you believe the GTG timings for the screen and the sync between the software, the gpu to output to the screen plus the processing time to react to where your eye is even looking I still don’t believe it can be done in ‘real time’. Not to mention I hope it’s running in at least 120fps. Doesn’t mention either if it’s running with 8 bit colour or 10 bit. Also read 6000 nits for HDR when even Apples current best beast runs at 1600? And it’s going to do all that for half the cost of that monitor, in a smaller form, with the software and the hardware…
Like I said, if it does that I will be impressed.
1 Like
Apple has made the point that it’s magical.
So, when you incorporate magic into the equation, then… hey presto (
) anything is possible.
1 Like
Personally, i wouldn’t.
1 Like
If anybody walks along the street wearing them, I’m not getting out of their way…or more precisely, my foot isn’t.
This may be controversial, but all electronic devices are powered by magic smoke. We know this to be true because when the magic smoke comes out, they stop working.
4 Likes