fastasleep

lkrupp said:

I remember when the CEO of Oculus famously touted that he would make their VR headset macOS compatible when Macs had enough horsepower. Anybody even remember Oculus because you ever hear a word about them these days much less the current state of VR headsets on the market?

You must have a short memory. Facebook announced in Fall 2021 they were rebranding as Meta and Oculus was being rebranded under that umbrella as well, after owning them for over 7 years. They just released the Quest Pro a few months ago, and the Quest 2 is very popular. Current state of VR headsets on the market? Besides those two, have you not heard of PSVR 2 which just launched a month ago?

danox said:

fastasleep said:

maury markowitz said:

I don't think Apple is their risk factor.

I think the fact that people are is interested in VR as they were in 3D television is the risk factor.

The number of people who want this crap in any near future is a rounding error.

Spoken like someone who has never tried VR.

VR/AR, or whatever else you wanna call it can’t work until the OS for it and all of the hardware used with it is miniaturized, note the battery life and the computing power basically need to be the same if not better, as the latest computers made and be designed to occupy the space of a normal frame of glasses that anyone would be proud to wear without a second thought, what tech company out there do you think has that ability it isn’t? Epic, Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Nvidia, AMD or Intel. The only company with the chops to do so is Apple Computer.

Which is why Sweeney Todd is crying like a customer in a barbers chair.

VR headset hardware already exists for many years now. AR glasses hardware already exists, though not as advanced as where Apple is aiming.

I'm not sure if you mean to reply to me, though, as it doesn't make any sense in response to what I was replying to.

photoflow76 said:

I never thought there was a need for a camera or Face ID on my watch.  However, I recently got my kids the Verizon Gizmowatch 3 and let me tell you, they love the camera for pictures and the 3 minute video calls that work great with mom & I!   The watch also has a series of canned text messages and allows for super simple voice message recordings, etc.   Why the heck isn’t the Apple Watch this easy to use for certain, basic functions?!?  Yes, Apple Watch is more full featured of course, but for certain basic functions, I never thought Apple would have some things to learn from a kid’s smartwatch.

Maybe it's you who has some things to learn about your Apple Watch? Look again — I just checked to make sure I wasn't crazy, but suggested canned responses and audio messages are there, and pretty sure they've been there since day 1. 

ravnorodom said:

If Apple can create a movie that works with their own proprietary headset and is able to simulate IMAX experience, I’m in. 

What do you mean "create a movie that works"? You can already watch movies in VR headsets on a simulated giant screen. The content itself is agnostic. You'll absolutely be able to do this on Apple's headset, there's zero reason to omit this feature.

Unreal Engine can obviously publish to all of Apple's platforms, along with all of the major game platforms, PCs, Android, etc. — including VR platforms. Is there any reason at this point to suspect Apple won't allow developers — Epic included —  to target realityOS? 

What he's complaining about is that Apple will still take their cut on the App Store on this platform too, not that they're developing another platform. That's what he means by Walled Garden™, that they can't leverage Apple's many years of hard work for free. It's a ridiculous argument and always has been. The "metaverse" context is just more meaningless handwaving.