Say what? This is happening because Apple puts underpowered mobility graphics cards in its iMacs. The Oculus won't run on Windows laptops with these cards either. Apple has 100% control over what graphics cards they use.
Quote:
Originally Posted by franktinsley
Apple's single biggest problem right now is how far behind they are in graphics tech on OS X. They absolutely must find a way to start keeping up. Whether that's through pivoting to a new graphics API like metal or something else, they have to find a way to stop being 3 years behind because it hurts OS X in profound ways that go far beyond games.
And really, when I think about it further, it's not even that much a problem of hardware, since when it comes to laptops, apple competes fairly well on the hardware side. Where they're really dropping the ball is in software. They simply drag their feet when it comes to supporting the latest versions of Open GL and they have absolutely no excuse. They should be ahead of everyone there, not behind.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrangerFX
Those mobile GPUs in the desktop iMacs have to go! It is time for Apple to put real GPUs in their desktop computers.
In the very early days of personal computing, which I lived through, Apple computers were open and one could plug boards in that performed specialist tasks. This in fact was quite necessary. Then Apple (Steve) released the Mac (corrected from earlier iMac), a (very tightly) closed ecosystem and overnight, a huge market for Apple computers dried up as engineers and later their employers and businesses turned to open PC's. They had no choice. The iMac almost spelled doom for Apple and today the legacy continues. Imagine Apple as just a (non-handheld) computer company.
Perhaps this is a wakeup call. I wouldn't hold out too much hope though.
In the very early days of personal computing, which I lived through, Apple computers were open and one could plug boards in that performed specialist tasks. This in fact was quite necessary. Then Apple (Steve) released the iMac, a (very tightly) closed ecosystem and overnight, a huge market for Apple computers dried up as engineers and later their employers and businesses turned to open PC's. They had no choice. The iMac almost spelled doom for Apple and today the legacy continues. Imagine Apple as just a (non-handheld) computer company.
Perhaps this is a wakeup call. I wouldn't hold out too much hope though.
And yet Mac growth and profit margins continue to outpace the industry.
And yet Mac growth and profit margins continue to outpace the industry.
This is irrelevant to the discussion however. Given the Oculus Rift VR headset hardware support requirements, which Apple computers could support it (I'm not an expert, just asking the question)? Sure, the Mac Pro. This is the same problem in a different context that Apple computers has suffered for decades. We'd even have settled (desperately) for the 'Geek Port' found in the Be computer. The closed environment ironically, allowed Apple to eventually produce the superior experience of today on both the desktop and handheld but in the dark days of the 90's, life was tough for Apple aficionados in technical computing environments and this situation with Oculus is a little reminder of those times. (I wonder whether Apple could - or even possibly, will, develop the same capability but with greater hardware and software efficiency?)
And yet Mac growth and profit margins continue to outpace the industry.
This is irrelevant to the discussion however. Given the Oculus Rift VR headset hardware support requirements, which Apple computers could support it (I'm not an expert, just asking the question)? Sure, the Mac Pro. This is the same problem in a different context that Apple computers has suffered for decades. We'd even have settled (desperately) for the 'Geek Port' found in the Be computer. The closed environment ironically, allowed Apple to eventually produce the superior experience of today on both the desktop and handheld but in the dark days of the 90's, life was tough for Apple aficionados in technical computing environments and this situation with Oculus is a little reminder of those times. (I wonder whether Apple could - or even possibly, will, develop the same capability but with greater hardware and software efficiency?)
I beg to differ with you; growth and profit margin are very relevant. It mean of the specs that people generally want, Apple is choosing to supply them. First, mobility is paramount. For geeks who want to sit at a desktop and look like a fool wearing the Oculus Rift VR headset, Apple isn't interested in that small crowd any more then they want to compete with the Xbox. Apple picks their market segments well...very well!
I beg to differ with you; growth and profit margin are very relevant. It mean of the specs that people generally want, Apple is choosing to supply them. First, mobility is paramount. For geeks who want to sit at a desktop and look like a fool wearing the Oculus Rift VR headset, Apple isn't interested in that small crowd any more then they want to compete with the Xbox. Apple picks their market segments well...very well!
Your argument is predicated on the emergence and success of iOS and the iPod, iPhone and iPad. You haven't addressed the core issue. Scientists such as myself using VR for visualisation are not fools sitting at desks. In Apple's desktop computing lineup, ?external innovation and imagination are stifled. This did not matter in the slightest to Steve Jobs but did matter to scientists and engineers and yes, to geeks too.
I hear what you're saying but Apple aren't going there.
There's always the hackintosh route though.
edit: several hours later And a great vibrant community it is ! Some very clever people on the hackintosh sites. Very open source feel to it. I'm sure Apple keep a watch over there - those guys are truly innovative esp on graphics drivers. Well, all kexts really. Not that I recommend Mac users to delve into that area, disasters do happen. Ymmv
Your argument is predicated on the emergence and success of iOS and the iPod, iPhone and iPad. You haven't addressed the core issue. Scientists such as myself using VR for visualisation are not fools sitting at desks. In Apple's desktop computing lineup, ?external <span style="line-height:22.399999618530273px;">innovation</span>
and imagination are stifled. This did not matter in the slightest to Steve Jobs but did matter to scientists and engineers and yes, to geeks too.
You might not be fools, but I bet your a smaller market than people just wanting a fashionable device. Which also seems to be a market strategy that's working very very well for Apple.
You might not be fools, but I bet your a smaller market than people just wanting a fashionable device. Which also seems to be a market strategy that's working very very well for Apple.
I bet your a smaller market than people just wanting a fashionable device... Apple build powerful, real-world computing systems disguised as fashionable devices. This was true of the first Macs but they lacked expansion capabilities needed by technical professionals and those professionals, when asked by their employers and friends what computers they should buy, knowing that they'd be supporting them, recommended the same kind of system that they were using. This happened time and time again.
Which also seems to be a market strategy that's working very very well for Apple... no one would argue that, which is great. This however, is a very restricted perspective. Tomorrow could and will, be very different.
If only Oculus had the deep pockets of a large tech company like, um, Google or FaceBook, they might be able to release on multiple platforms. It's too bad they don't. /s
Facebook owned it, perhaps after paying a billion they don't have the cash to develop it further.
My friend is a film director and got a demo recently. He said it was startling. Not just games but films in VR will be amazing. Today it requires a high-end PC, but in five years your phone will power it.
I think it doubtful your phone will be able to power decent VR headsets in 5 years. I was having a discussion with my son about the HTC/Valve Vive headset and he thinks the AMD HD7970 card in his gaming rig 'might' just be able to drive it. The PowerVR GX6650 GPU in the iPhone6 can do 14.9 GTextels/s. The HD7970 does 118.4 GTextels/s. When Valve demoed the Vive they were using a GTX 980 GPU that does 165 GTextels/s. Of course there are several other GPU metrics, I'm just picking one for the sake of simplicity.
Then of course there is the moving target. In five years, VR headset GPU requirements will have suffered five years worth of mission creep and will likely be 4K per eye at 120 fps.
In the very early days of personal computing, which I lived through, Apple computers were open and one could plug boards in that performed specialist tasks. This in fact was quite necessary. Then Apple (Steve) released the iMac, a (very tightly) closed ecosystem and overnight, a huge market for Apple computers dried up as engineers and later their employers and businesses turned to open PC's. They had no choice. The iMac almost spelled doom for Apple and today the legacy continues. Imagine Apple as just a (non-handheld) computer company.
Perhaps this is a wakeup call. I wouldn't hold out too much hope though.
I don't believe you, because you don't seem to know what you're talking about. The iMac came out in 1998, by which time the PC had LONG been dominant in business. In fact, the iMac was what began to turn Apple around from the brink of bankruptcy to being the biggest, most profitable public company in human history with the highest consumer satisfaction ratings. It owns both the computer and mobile markets -- eats up the lion's share of profits, leaving scraps for the others to divide up.
And you didn't even mention the Macintosh, which is probably what you meant instead of iMac...which furthers the notion that you don't know what you're talking about and or weren't around for the beginning of the personal computing days.
I don't believe you, because you don't seem to know what you're talking about. The iMac came out in 1998, by which time the PC had LONG been dominant in business. In fact, the iMac was what began to turn Apple around from the brink of bankruptcy to being the biggest, most profitable public company in human history with the highest consumer satisfaction ratings. It owns both the computer and mobile markets -- eats up the lion's share of profits, leaving scraps for the others to divide up.
And you didn't even mention the Macintosh, which is probably what you meant instead of iMac...which furthers the notion that you don't know what you're talking about and or weren't around for the beginning of the personal computing days.
DOOOOOM!!!
Try again?
.
You're correct in one respect - I had meant Mac, not iMac! My first was the 512K Mac. We had the Lisa too. This was the mid 1980's. I wrote my first program in 1974, at university with Hollerith cards and worked on a NASA computer in 1979 that had core memory. Regardless, the rest of my argument is ernest. Take it or leave, I honestly don't care. (Thanks for the correction though, I picked up the same error in a later post before publishing.)
Apple's single biggest problem right now is how far behind they are in graphics tech on OS X. They absolutely must find a way to start keeping up. Whether that's through pivoting to a new graphics API like metal or something else, they have to find a way to stop being 3 years behind because it hurts OS X in profound ways that go far beyond games.
Apple has a second chance in the form of Vulkan(granted it is still in development). Now they just have to not be left behind again. Vulkan has done away with the cruft that OpenGL has accumulated over the years and is an API completely designed for modern computing.
Vulkan will probably make metal obsolete given time as it can offer just about as complete control over lower level hardware and will be platform agnostic on both traditional desktop hardware and mobile devices.
As far as I can see, only the MacPro meet those requirements, although I wouldn't be surprised if the most powerful iMacs could handle the job. As such, the problem is much more serious than the lack of gaming tradition on the Mac.
I'm still surprised with the power Oculus is asking. Undoubtedly, Sony's Morpheus can do a similar job with a much weaker PS4, whereas Microsoft's HoloLens seems to run for more than a few minutes without cooking the user's brain.
I'm still surprised with the power Oculus is asking. Undoubtedly, Sony's Morpheus can do a similar job with a much weaker PS4, whereas Microsoft's HoloLens seems to run for more than a few minutes without cooking the user's brain.
To be fair, HoleLens's resolution has been described as "HD", which isn't very specific when 720p is also considered HD. Outside of the Minecraft demo, I haven't heard about HoloLens driving anything to the same level as found on the PS4, XB1 or PC at incredible intense intervals.
As for Morpheus, its display is 1920x1080. The Rift has at least double that resolution, and the PC games that support it(whether exclusive or ported) will most likely be far more resource intensive than most PS4 games will be in both graphical fidelity and framerate. While the rift will eventually expand beyond games, games are currently the sweet spot with it in terms of advertising. Actual usage however may vary, as I've seen a lot of research projects dig into it.
The real question of course will be if the HTC Vive has similar requirements, since it has the exact same resolution and framerate requirements. If they are lower...then this will get interesting. If not then such is apparently the price to pay.
Edit: No non-windows builds however are a huge hit, and I'll probably be going with either a Vive or OSVR from Razer, since at least one of them will be released before OR is.
You're correct in one respect - I had meant Mac, not iMac! My first was the 512K Mac. We had the Lisa too. This was the mid 1980's. I wrote my first program in 1974, at university with Hollerith cards and worked on a NASA computer in 1979 that had core memory. Regardless, the rest of my argument is ernest. Take it or leave, I honestly don't care. (Thanks for the correction though, I picked up the same error in a later post before publishing.) :\
Taking the rest of you argument in ernest, it's still nonsense -
"iMac almost spelled doom for Apple and today the legacy continues."
The Mac didn't spell doom for Apple. And the legacy continuing today is being the most profitable PC maker, who has sales growth while the others are flatlining or declining.
To be fair, HoleLens's resolution has been described as "HD", which isn't very specific when 720p is also considered HD. Outside of the Minecraft demo, I haven't heard about HoloLens driving anything to the same level as found on the PS4, XB1 or PC at incredible intense intervals.
As for Morpheus, its display is 1920x1080. The Rift has at least double that resolution, and the PC games that support it(whether exclusive or ported) will most likely be far more resource intensive than most PS4 games will be in both graphical fidelity and framerate.[...]
All fair points. However, if the competitors are well accepted by the public as good enough, Oculus will be segregated to a niche market for VRphyles.
All fair points. However, if the competitors are well accepted by the public as good enough, Oculus will be segregated to a niche market for VRphyles.
Oh yea that is already happening. A decent enthusiast/initial part of the VR users behind Oculus were doing research with the headsets and utilized Mac's+OSX/Linux or Other hardware with Linux installed. The Dolphin Emulator devs are one of the first big folk gaming wise who are going to move VR development away from Oculus to OSVR. Considering most the resulting emulators are also GPL licensed(v2) the exodus will probably spread in the near future to any devs looking at such implementations.
I'm not anyone important, but Oculus is certainly no longer a go for me from this news, and the Vive will be out before it with with similar specs and a decently sized ecosystem.
Comments
Say what? This is happening because Apple puts underpowered mobility graphics cards in its iMacs. The Oculus won't run on Windows laptops with these cards either. Apple has 100% control over what graphics cards they use.
Apple's single biggest problem right now is how far behind they are in graphics tech on OS X. They absolutely must find a way to start keeping up. Whether that's through pivoting to a new graphics API like metal or something else, they have to find a way to stop being 3 years behind because it hurts OS X in profound ways that go far beyond games.
And really, when I think about it further, it's not even that much a problem of hardware, since when it comes to laptops, apple competes fairly well on the hardware side. Where they're really dropping the ball is in software. They simply drag their feet when it comes to supporting the latest versions of Open GL and they have absolutely no excuse. They should be ahead of everyone there, not behind.
Those mobile GPUs in the desktop iMacs have to go! It is time for Apple to put real GPUs in their desktop computers.
In the very early days of personal computing, which I lived through, Apple computers were open and one could plug boards in that performed specialist tasks. This in fact was quite necessary. Then Apple (Steve) released the Mac (corrected from earlier iMac), a (very tightly) closed ecosystem and overnight, a huge market for Apple computers dried up as engineers and later their employers and businesses turned to open PC's. They had no choice. The iMac almost spelled doom for Apple and today the legacy continues. Imagine Apple as just a (non-handheld) computer company.
Perhaps this is a wakeup call. I wouldn't hold out too much hope though.
And yet Mac growth and profit margins continue to outpace the industry.
And yet Mac growth and profit margins continue to outpace the industry.
This is irrelevant to the discussion however. Given the Oculus Rift VR headset hardware support requirements, which Apple computers could support it (I'm not an expert, just asking the question)? Sure, the Mac Pro. This is the same problem in a different context that Apple computers has suffered for decades. We'd even have settled (desperately) for the 'Geek Port' found in the Be computer. The closed environment ironically, allowed Apple to eventually produce the superior experience of today on both the desktop and handheld but in the dark days of the 90's, life was tough for Apple aficionados in technical computing environments and this situation with Oculus is a little reminder of those times. (I wonder whether Apple could - or even possibly, will, develop the same capability but with greater hardware and software efficiency?)
I beg to differ with you; growth and profit margin are very relevant. It mean of the specs that people generally want, Apple is choosing to supply them. First, mobility is paramount. For geeks who want to sit at a desktop and look like a fool wearing the Oculus Rift VR headset, Apple isn't interested in that small crowd any more then they want to compete with the Xbox. Apple picks their market segments well...very well!
I beg to differ with you; growth and profit margin are very relevant. It mean of the specs that people generally want, Apple is choosing to supply them. First, mobility is paramount. For geeks who want to sit at a desktop and look like a fool wearing the Oculus Rift VR headset, Apple isn't interested in that small crowd any more then they want to compete with the Xbox. Apple picks their market segments well...very well!
Your argument is predicated on the emergence and success of iOS and the iPod, iPhone and iPad. You haven't addressed the core issue. Scientists such as myself using VR for visualisation are not fools sitting at desks. In Apple's desktop computing lineup, ?external innovation and imagination are stifled. This did not matter in the slightest to Steve Jobs but did matter to scientists and engineers and yes, to geeks too.
There's always the hackintosh route though.
edit: several hours later
And a great vibrant community it is !
Some very clever people on the hackintosh sites.
Very open source feel to it.
I'm sure Apple keep a watch over there - those guys are truly innovative esp on graphics drivers.
Well, all kexts really.
Not that I recommend Mac users to delve into that area, disasters do happen. Ymmv
You might not be fools, but I bet your a smaller market than people just wanting a fashionable device. Which also seems to be a market strategy that's working very very well for Apple.
I bet your a smaller market than people just wanting a fashionable device... Apple build powerful, real-world computing systems disguised as fashionable devices. This was true of the first Macs but they lacked expansion capabilities needed by technical professionals and those professionals, when asked by their employers and friends what computers they should buy, knowing that they'd be supporting them, recommended the same kind of system that they were using. This happened time and time again.
Which also seems to be a market strategy that's working very very well for Apple... no one would argue that, which is great. This however, is a very restricted perspective. Tomorrow could and will, be very different.
If only Oculus had the deep pockets of a large tech company like, um, Google or FaceBook, they might be able to release on multiple platforms. It's too bad they don't. /s
Facebook owned it, perhaps after paying a billion they don't have the cash to develop it further.
Apple should make true 3D displays (including the new Apple Thunderbolt Display) to support nVidia 3D Vision
http://www.nvidia.com/object/3d-vision-main.html
My friend is a film director and got a demo recently. He said it was startling. Not just games but films in VR will be amazing. Today it requires a high-end PC, but in five years your phone will power it.
I think it doubtful your phone will be able to power decent VR headsets in 5 years. I was having a discussion with my son about the HTC/Valve Vive headset and he thinks the AMD HD7970 card in his gaming rig 'might' just be able to drive it. The PowerVR GX6650 GPU in the iPhone 6 can do 14.9 GTextels/s. The HD7970 does 118.4 GTextels/s. When Valve demoed the Vive they were using a GTX 980 GPU that does 165 GTextels/s. Of course there are several other GPU metrics, I'm just picking one for the sake of simplicity.
Then of course there is the moving target. In five years, VR headset GPU requirements will have suffered five years worth of mission creep and will likely be 4K per eye at 120 fps.
I don't believe you, because you don't seem to know what you're talking about. The iMac came out in 1998, by which time the PC had LONG been dominant in business. In fact, the iMac was what began to turn Apple around from the brink of bankruptcy to being the biggest, most profitable public company in human history with the highest consumer satisfaction ratings. It owns both the computer and mobile markets -- eats up the lion's share of profits, leaving scraps for the others to divide up.
And you didn't even mention the Macintosh, which is probably what you meant instead of iMac...which furthers the notion that you don't know what you're talking about and or weren't around for the beginning of the personal computing days.
DOOOOOM!!!
Try again?
.
I don't believe you, because you don't seem to know what you're talking about. The iMac came out in 1998, by which time the PC had LONG been dominant in business. In fact, the iMac was what began to turn Apple around from the brink of bankruptcy to being the biggest, most profitable public company in human history with the highest consumer satisfaction ratings. It owns both the computer and mobile markets -- eats up the lion's share of profits, leaving scraps for the others to divide up.
And you didn't even mention the Macintosh, which is probably what you meant instead of iMac...which furthers the notion that you don't know what you're talking about and or weren't around for the beginning of the personal computing days.
DOOOOOM!!!
Try again?
.
You're correct in one respect - I had meant Mac, not iMac! My first was the 512K Mac. We had the Lisa too. This was the mid 1980's. I wrote my first program in 1974, at university with Hollerith cards and worked on a NASA computer in 1979 that had core memory. Regardless, the rest of my argument is ernest. Take it or leave, I honestly don't care. (Thanks for the correction though, I picked up the same error in a later post before publishing.)
Apple's single biggest problem right now is how far behind they are in graphics tech on OS X. They absolutely must find a way to start keeping up. Whether that's through pivoting to a new graphics API like metal or something else, they have to find a way to stop being 3 years behind because it hurts OS X in profound ways that go far beyond games.
Apple has a second chance in the form of Vulkan(granted it is still in development). Now they just have to not be left behind again. Vulkan has done away with the cruft that OpenGL has accumulated over the years and is an API completely designed for modern computing.
Vulkan will probably make metal obsolete given time as it can offer just about as complete control over lower level hardware and will be platform agnostic on both traditional desktop hardware and mobile devices.
I'm still surprised with the power Oculus is asking. Undoubtedly, Sony's Morpheus can do a similar job with a much weaker PS4, whereas Microsoft's HoloLens seems to run for more than a few minutes without cooking the user's brain.
I'm still surprised with the power Oculus is asking. Undoubtedly, Sony's Morpheus can do a similar job with a much weaker PS4, whereas Microsoft's HoloLens seems to run for more than a few minutes without cooking the user's brain.
To be fair, HoleLens's resolution has been described as "HD", which isn't very specific when 720p is also considered HD. Outside of the Minecraft demo, I haven't heard about HoloLens driving anything to the same level as found on the PS4, XB1 or PC at incredible intense intervals.
As for Morpheus, its display is 1920x1080. The Rift has at least double that resolution, and the PC games that support it(whether exclusive or ported) will most likely be far more resource intensive than most PS4 games will be in both graphical fidelity and framerate. While the rift will eventually expand beyond games, games are currently the sweet spot with it in terms of advertising. Actual usage however may vary, as I've seen a lot of research projects dig into it.
The real question of course will be if the HTC Vive has similar requirements, since it has the exact same resolution and framerate requirements. If they are lower...then this will get interesting. If not then such is apparently the price to pay.
Edit: No non-windows builds however are a huge hit, and I'll probably be going with either a Vive or OSVR from Razer, since at least one of them will be released before OR is.
Taking the rest of you argument in ernest, it's still nonsense -
"iMac almost spelled doom for Apple and today the legacy continues."
The Mac didn't spell doom for Apple. And the legacy continuing today is being the most profitable PC maker, who has sales growth while the others are flatlining or declining.
All fair points. However, if the competitors are well accepted by the public as good enough, Oculus will be segregated to a niche market for VRphyles.
All fair points. However, if the competitors are well accepted by the public as good enough, Oculus will be segregated to a niche market for VRphyles.
Oh yea that is already happening. A decent enthusiast/initial part of the VR users behind Oculus were doing research with the headsets and utilized Mac's+OSX/Linux or Other hardware with Linux installed. The Dolphin Emulator devs are one of the first big folk gaming wise who are going to move VR development away from Oculus to OSVR. Considering most the resulting emulators are also GPL licensed(v2) the exodus will probably spread in the near future to any devs looking at such implementations.
I'm not anyone important, but Oculus is certainly no longer a go for me from this news, and the Vive will be out before it with with similar specs and a decently sized ecosystem.
OSVR I will keep an eye on as well.