You must log in or register to comment.

NettaUsteaDE t1_iyxple9 wrote

It’s not even announced, who cares if it’s delayed


lightdarkness317 t1_iyz9etn wrote

Breaking News: Something You've Never Heard Of Might Not Come Out When You Didn't Expect It, And How It Might Kill You... More at 11


robot_handjob t1_iyyqxs7 wrote

I do. Apple rarely releases a product that isn’t clean and polished and I’m excited to see them shit all over the tens of billions Facebook spent on VR.


YouTee t1_iyz9jxq wrote

Well, except for every V1 of any product they make. Then you know you're signing up to be a paying beta tester


BigCommieMachine t1_iz0j160 wrote

The M1 MacBook were leaps and bounds better than anything else on the market. I mean I know it is a quasi -V1 product because it was all under the hood, but designing a new laptop is way easier than fundamentally launching a new platform.


Heliosvector t1_iyzsch6 wrote

The quest 2 is a resounding success and has little to do with the failure that is “metaverse” the apps device will probably be twice the price or more with better specs. Both devices and brands will fill their niches.


NeverComments t1_iz02vjl wrote

>the apps device will probably be twice the price or more with better specs

If the specs we've heard are accurate it's looking to closer to ten times the price. It's primarily an AR/MR device so we're looking at an extremely high resolution screen, pancake lenses, eye tracking, a handful of high-res cameras with LiDAR companions all powered by an M-series chip. The closest competitor is Meta's Quest Pro which has a lower resolution panel, one color camera, no LiDAR and comes in at a $1.5k MSRP. An optimistic price point for Apple's headset would be $2.5k but I think it'll end up being a $2999 MSRP (intentionally pricing out Average Joe for this first iteration).


Heliosvector t1_iz03pu3 wrote

What does it need lidar for??


Bobbyanalogpdx t1_iz04hcx wrote

LiDAR would help place objects more accurately in an AR/MR setting


NeverComments t1_iz04sea wrote

Depth sensing is used to properly spatialize digital content for AR. You can try and parse depth information using raw camera imagery and ML but it's...not great. With the Quest Pro you need to manually tell the headset where your walls are while Apple's ARKit can use LiDAR to automatically map out your floor plan.


Heliosvector t1_iz06ptb wrote

If it similar tech to what they have been using for face unlock on phones?


NeverComments t1_iz0c7zm wrote

They're conceptually similar but measuring different things. The dot projector in FaceID acts as a sort of guide. The dots are projected in a grid and you can use the distortion of the dots on the projected surface to interpret the shape of the user's face. The LiDAR sensors measure time of flight which allows it to determine the specific distance of objects relative to the sensor. The sensor used for Face ID can tell you that it's detected an object but LiDAR can tell you exactly how far away it is. That property makes LiDAR extremely useful for AR where you need to know how far away a given surface is in order to render something at the appropriate size with the correct perspective distortion applied.


allinbbbyfortendies t1_iz24vgk wrote

Close range Room mapping, I actually bought an iPhone simply because they are cheaper than the similar units that were available at the time.

Units that had no hardware other than the lidar, not even computation to parse the inputs, they were thousands of dollars.(I haven't looked recently)

Anyway I bought just the apple unit as they were obscenely cheap when just the replacement part, but for the life of me I could not reverse engineer any usable data from the device

I ended up embedding an entire iPhone into the robot I was working on. It was literally thousands cheaper than buying one otherwise


BurntRussianBBQ t1_iz0dpxi wrote

I'm super impressed with my quest 2. Having some problems with the VR being blurry, but that's just because my eyes are so deepset. The tracking and quality of games as a standalone VR system can't be beat.

Lol never thought I'd own a FB product but here I am.


Raculz t1_iyzaptx wrote

I would bet my left nut their product will be vastly inferior to the 3 year old quest 2, but will still sell well because it's Apple.


BigCommieMachine t1_iz0i4o1 wrote

I mean Apple is probably being extremely cautious after the current Meta Quest Pro debacle.

They have to absolutely land the software, which is why it is delayed and why the Quest Pro is struggling. Their biggest rival is floundering after putting a ton of resources into it, so you have the opportunity to slow down and make sure you nail it.

Investors were demanding Meta put out something after going all in on the “Metaverse” instead of the ad cash-cow. They pushed out the mediocre Quest Pro and I wouldn’t be shocked if Zuck “steps back” from Meta within the next year.


1000dancingpbys t1_iyxx62k wrote

It can’t be delayed if there’s no release date 🙄


ElectrikDonuts t1_iyyutr2 wrote

Apple car says hello


[deleted] t1_iyzc5z0 wrote



ElectrikDonuts t1_iyzdckr wrote

Rumored forever


FallenBleak5 t1_iyzhagk wrote

What about the Apple TV? Not the box, the actual TV. That was a big rumour for a while.


bigots_hate_her t1_iz09es8 wrote

I mean, same thing was said about RISC CPUs for well over a decade before we got the M1..


Ok-Camp-7285 t1_iyz8xxx wrote

Just because there's no public release date, doesn't mean there isn't one


poisonous-leek-soup t1_iz0frue wrote

I don’t know why you’re getting downvoted, this is perfectly correct, internally they will have some date in mind for it’s announcement and release, which has just been delayed.


TheMacMan t1_iyy7hn6 wrote

Kuo is full of shit. Any time his prediction doesn’t check out, he just claims a delay.


Defoler t1_iyzw6kw wrote

Yeah he is a professional predictor.
And almost everything he predicts outside of the already commonly expected, ends up being a bust.


[deleted] t1_izldt3q wrote

He's never once done that and I guarantee you can't disprove me. And it doesn't apply here because his previously predicted release date was the first half of 2023 - i.e. it hasn't happened yet. Plus delays are fucking normal, why do you act like that's impossible to believe?

I fucking dare you to admit you're wrong and apologize for lying. And I know you can't do it.


TheMacMan t1_izlfipp wrote

Kuo is wrong 90% of the time or more.

He said M2 MacBook Pro in September. When that didn’t happen he said October. When that didn’t happen he said November. Didn’t happen and he said end of the year. Then again changed it to spring 2023. 🤣


[deleted] t1_izlizm8 wrote

>He said M2 MacBook Pro in September. When that didn’t happen he said October. When that didn’t happen he said November. Didn’t happen and he said end of the year. Then again changed it to spring 2023.

Isn't it so telling that you just think you can claim he did this things he didn't do, without ever linking to any of his actual reports? It's almost as if you're a liar and he never reported any of those things. Weird how that works, isn't it?

It's going to be funny when you do what everyone like yourself does and send me 10 links of articles that don't support the claim you're actually making.


TheMacMan t1_izlkd3d wrote

I’ve got nothing to prove to you. Stay ignorant and keep sucking Kip’s dick. 🤣


[deleted] t1_izll0e1 wrote


See what I mean? You just make shit up, and when challenged to prove your lies, you just pivot to other shit. What kind of utterly fucking dogshit human being behaves this way? Please honestly answer that question. Who fucked up so badly raising you that you woke up this morning, presumably sad and alone, and thought, "I am going to invent lies about a journalist today and argue with anyone who correctly identifies them as lies." Your existence is piss.

>He said M2 MacBook Pro in September. When that didn’t happen he said October. When that didn’t happen he said November. Didn’t happen and he said end of the year. Then again changed it to spring 2023.

I will donate $50 to the charity of your choice if you can back up any of this with an actual Kuo report.


PassMeAnother t1_izm0izj wrote

Ha, looks like your dumb ass has to donate to charity. Pay up idiot. Clearly you can’t think with Kuo’s dick that far down your throat.


slick2hold t1_iyyk8m0 wrote

Another bs article that shouldn't even be printed. Problem with internet is everyone is a journalist. Where is apple car and apple tv? Those are to be released 5+yrv ago. But stock may move in this bs story


Fritzi_Gala t1_iyzc4io wrote

The Apple TV was released in 2007 and is still being updated with new models. Is there a different “Apple TV” product that was rumored and never released that I’m unaware of?


slick2hold t1_iz05sv7 wrote

No im referring to them building our an actually tv set and h Them released what we have today a set top box. Prior to that the rumors were Apple would release a TV sef.


[deleted] t1_izj94i0 wrote

No one ever said Apple was going to release a car or a TV five years ago. The problem is never the journalists and always the people like yourself, who just lie to contrive reasons to attack journalists. And yes, Kuo is a legitimate journalist with a proven track record of breaking stories like this. He's right like 99% of the time.

You are a pathetic, despicable child. Know how I know that? Because:

  1. you aren't going to admit that what you're saying is a lie
  2. you're going to reply with more lies
  3. you're going to try to spin the blame on me for insulting you

You know what you should do? Admit you lied (you did) and apologize for it. You are objectively wrong and a worthwhile human being would own up to that fact. But you're trash, so you won't.


[deleted] t1_izld9z4 wrote

Hey buddy, do I need to remind you what you actually said?

>Where is apple car and apple tv? Those are to be released 5+yrv ago.

None of those articles report a release date because no one ever reported a release date. They've only ever reported that Apple is developing a car, which is factually true. You're still a liar, plus you did all the exact dumbfuck troll things I said you were gonna do:

>you aren't going to admit that what you're saying is a lie

>you're going to reply with more lies

>you're going to try to spin the blame on me for insulting you

Honest question - are you just sincerely really fucking stupid and don't understand how to read or understand what you're reading? Or are you a pointless troll doing this on purpose because you're an awful person?


[deleted] t1_iyz2nx1 wrote



gold_rush_doom t1_iyz5zyu wrote

In the 2010s every year there were rumors that apple is making a TV


NeetMastery t1_iyz689m wrote

Ah, a physical TV. Gotcha, thank you! Never seen rumours of it and google just gave the existing stuff, that makes sense!


theo2112 t1_iyxujjc wrote

Enough about this already. I’m sure it’s coming, but until anyone else releases a compelling VR/AR product, apple is never going to. They are not going to be the ones to tip their hands on what the next generation of these devices can be.


SUPRVLLAN t1_iyxzv3h wrote

I’m not so sure this time, I think that Google, Samsung, etc have figured out by now that they shouldn’t be first to market. Wait until Apple releases theirs, and that’s the blueprint to iterate on.


lawst1102 t1_iyy9y6r wrote

Agreed. Others are playing or have played in the space. But there is a very good chance that whatever apple releases becomes the standard experience and then everyone shifts to copy as much as they legally can.


bdone2012 t1_iyyciw4 wrote

Samsung and google have already put out headsets. Samsung had gear vr which was pretty good for what it was. And google had one too. Neither were amazing in the long run.


SUPRVLLAN t1_iyycxp2 wrote

And they both know they sucked and ceased public iteration. VR/AR 2.0 is coming, they’re waiting for Apple to make the next move.


joshwagstaff13 t1_iz04ilt wrote

> Samsung had gear vr

Samsung also had a WMR headset, in the form of the Odyssey+.


V_es t1_iyz6w5e wrote

And they all suck. They are waiting for Apple to make a move and see what they can copy.


SatansCouncil t1_iyzo2ja wrote

Your statement is so contradictive. Others have produced product, but are waiting to copy apple?

Sounds like, once again, others do the pioneering, then apple will step in, release an overpriced underperformer.

Performance specs will be average at best, but apple will claim some new retna display bullshit, fans will eat it up.

Dont get me wrong, its a great business model, it works for apple.


V_es t1_iyzx0mq wrote

It’s not contradictive it’s how it’s been so far. Apple is late to the game but makes a product that actually works, and everybody tweaks theirs to copy what Apple does.


DarthBuzzard t1_iyyefhx wrote

> but until anyone else releases a compelling VR/AR product, apple is never going to. They are not going to be the ones to tip their hands on what the next generation of these devices can be.

This isn't the smartphone era. VR/AR has a long road to maturity. Apple can't afford to wait another 10 years before they release something in this space, or they risk losing a top spot.


theo2112 t1_iyyj08n wrote

Another 10 years? No. But another 2 years while Facebook flails around trying to stay relevant doing the dirty work of explaining to your 50 year old aunt what VR even is. Sure.

Then, once there’s even a single compelling reason for the average person (apple doesn’t target niche groups with hardware) to want a VR headset, apple will unveil theirs.


mrgnarchr t1_iyz00pq wrote

I just got some Nreal Air glasses, I like ‘em


NrealAssistant t1_iz8lemt wrote

Hi mrgnarchr. That is wonderful to hear. May I know what your primary use for the glasses is? Nreal Air is used by some people to experience augmented reality, while others use it primarily for gaming on a large screen, and some people use it for productivity on a portable device.

I appreciate you bringing up the Nreal Air. It's consumer AR glasses in the shape of a typical sunglass. You can instantly get large screens for an AR experience by connecting it to a device with a USB-C port that supports Display out.


buttorsomething t1_iz0fiur wrote

Only thing out there doing anything is the quest and for $400 it’s amazing but you really need a PC so after all that it’s like $1400 minimum. But even the quest 2 by itself is amazing. Truly hard to understand why it’s lower GFX are ok without trying it. VR is more about immersion than amazing GFX. Unless you have a PC.


NextFaithlessness7 t1_iyxxeib wrote

Apple will drop their product late with half the specs if the competition


theo2112 t1_iyxxs9b wrote

And it will perform twice as well, sell twice as many, and define the category. See: mp3 player, smart phone, tablet, smart watch/wearable, and so on.

This is the playbook. See what the competition is doing. Find a way to improve the experience, not the spec sheet, release the product touting the use case. Profit.

Wash, rinse, repeat.


Madholm t1_iyyakz1 wrote

With the current state of Meta and the general ‘meh’ status of VR gaming, why should Apple even be in a hurry to push out a product?


PrivatePilot9 t1_iyyekyn wrote

Because Apple has been quietly watching from the sidelines, collecting data on the “meh” experience, and fixing what makes it “meh” to begin with.

See above comments. This is what they do, and they do it well.


Madholm t1_iyyg7ht wrote

No, there just isn’t a market for it. Even best use scenarios like gaming doesn’t have consumers biting on the tech and gamers will buy just about anything.

You think that just because it’s Apple that will change? Sorry man, this isn’t an MP3 player, phone, watch, headphones type situation where Apple can capitalize. It’s a severely floundering hardware segment and small things like cutting the cables to make it wireless and more user friendly isn’t going to solve the problems with the platform.

What I mean is that Apple is going to have to reinvent the wheel for this one to be a success, because there is nothing compelling to build from at the moment. Microsoft actually has a somewhat more viable market strategy for their headset, but it’s clearly not a consumer device.


DarthBuzzard t1_iyyek39 wrote

> sell twice as many

Not this product though. It's rumored to be a very expensive device.


theo2112 t1_iyyi1k3 wrote

The first iPhone was (I believe) $600 with no subsidy available when paying even $1 for a cell phone was unheard of.

The first iPod (the very first) was expensive relative to other mp3 players.

Again, by Apples playbook you don’t have to be cheap if your product is the best. And, again based on past products, having the first gen be somewhat unattainable for the average person only fuels the demand when gen 2 rolls around at a lower price.


LawsMan t1_iyyo8i5 wrote

The iPhone started at $499 (over $700 today) and required a two year service contract with AT&T. That was a lot of money then too. You’re right that it’s the iterations that bring costs down and expand markets.

People doubting Apple sound a lot like Balmer and the head of Palm:

“We’ve learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone. PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not going to just walk in.” —Palm CEO Ed Colligan, November 16, 2006


DarthBuzzard t1_iyyjmmp wrote

We're talking a possible $2000-3000 device here.


Balducci30 t1_iyyaavz wrote

Weren’t the big ones all Steve Jobs tho conceptually?


Zlifbar t1_iyytv2v wrote

Made up object's made up shipping date slips for a made up reason


LitPixel t1_iz0w0j2 wrote

If. If this story is true then 1 it’s not slipping and 2 there is a reason.

I think it’s being moved back, not delayed, because FB showed their hand and it was crap. Apple relieved, has more time to bake their software.


weaselmaster t1_iyyf4vj wrote

Dr. Kuo, will you just stop talking for a second?

Every lame tip you get from some obscure supplier of a single part of some super complex alleged future product does not have day to day (or even quarter to quarter or year to year) importance. You are being used primarily as a stock market manipulation tool, as the stock market is hyper-focused on the short term.

They’ll come out with a product whenever they come out with it!

No amount of industry insider rumor has ever predicted the popularity or financial success of a new Apple product or their supply chain — often, it’s been the opposite. Stop!


superpingu1n t1_iyxwbed wrote

Market will drop so it's time again to release the "apple headset + apple car" spam.


crispychoc t1_iyz9o70 wrote

Maybe it will end up like the AirPower charger that never saw the light of day.


perkail t1_iz03kdv wrote

This “expert” analyst has been wrong about this for over two years. They literally just share rumors their friends that work at Foxconn tells them and this is tiresome. I imagine Apple is trolling him


[deleted] t1_izj97cd wrote

What have they been wrong about, exactly?


rndname t1_iyyzg15 wrote

I have no interest in this thing, so it makes no difference.


Tom_Neverwinter t1_iyy4imz wrote

May as well mark this in the same category as someome crying fire! 5g! The rapture! Planet x! Etc... Etc... Wolf!


Chronotaru t1_iyzxznx wrote

As long as it's out before Quest III they should be fine.


WobleWoble t1_iyzzxed wrote

It’s all speculation, why is this part of news?


Complete_Let3076 t1_iz0mlgr wrote

Absolutely true, though macrumors .com doesn’t really appear to be a valid “news” source


[deleted] t1_izj9alm wrote

It's not speculation, it's sourced reporting from the guy (Kuo) is absolutely rock solid in this regard.


JeremeRW t1_iz09b7c wrote

This isn’t shipping for a long time, unless Apple has some breakthrough in input methods. Current methods are terrible, they need something new.


sittingmongoose t1_iz0e5xt wrote

Honestly, this is probably for the best. The longer it stays in the oven, the longer apple has to add features to the software. Which is a huge deal for VR/AR.

And more importantly it gives devs time to make content, which is by far the most important thing and the biggest problem with VR/AR now.


Complete_Let3076 t1_iz0owfb wrote

Yup, there’s no rush really. People are so opposed to VR right now thanks to meta, and no one wants to spend thousands on a product that ends up glitchy or useless. Apples not perfect, but I look forward to trying out whatever they release (at the store unless I stumble into $3000 somehow)


Plane_Vanilla_3879 t1_iz20ntp wrote

Big question is what do you do with them? What (useful)content will be available?


Scared_Manner1822 t1_iz75h89 wrote

i wonder if youll seea noth in the screen tho,oh,i mean island


zerozed t1_iz0audk wrote

This delay is almost certainly due to issues arising from using the M2 chip. Apple has (reportedly) chosen to use the M2 as opposed to a purpose-designed chip and power efficiency is very likely to be horrendous. All current standalone headsets (e.g. Pico 4, Quest 2, Quest Pro, Pimax Crystal, use ARM's custom-designed first generation XR2 chips (or the XR2+ variant).

Apple is reportedly using the M2 which is not designed to be anywhere near that power efficient. Apple can't just "add a bigger battery" to fuel the M2--adding weight makes the headset heavier and uncomfortable.

The engineering challenges stem mainly from battery technology along with the immaturity of software. I have little doubt that Apple will do well on the software front, but their decision to use the M2 betrays quite a bit of hubris IMHO. I'd expect a short 30-60 minutes of use (max) before needing to be recharged.

Folks need to understand why Apple & Meta are working in this area--they see AR/VR/XR as the next computing platform. Meta is the industry leader for a reason--they've invested billions in R&D, employ most of the talent, and have been pushing the industry forward. And even then, the best consumer AR kit they could produce is Quest Pro with a BOM of ~$900 and a retail price of $1500. Apple's device will almost certainly retail ~$2000-$3000 and the fact that they still can't make it work satisfactorily shows how far behind they've fallen.


cfinst t1_iyz8581 wrote

Apple knows what they are doing…they have proved themselves time and time again!

Take your time and do it right! I will buy that set no matter what because the oculus blew my mind years ago and Facebook sucked the life out of it.

If anyone can make a proper “metaverse” it’s not Facebook it’s apple so good luck guys I’ll be waiting whenever you’re ready


SatansCouncil t1_iyzof2q wrote

A walled metaverse? No thanks.


cfinst t1_iyzqui6 wrote

I mean…do you have a suggestion for another company that could take on the task and implement it in such a way that 100s of millions of people would be comfortable and safe using?

Has “meta” or “alphabet” ever built any single universal platform that didn’t just 100% exploit personal data for money?

I’d prefer a company make money off of hardware and legitimate software sales than just scalping data 24/7


Complete_Let3076 t1_iz0oe4v wrote

Apple is scalping our data too. They just know how to make us feel good about it


imaginary_num6er t1_iyyahzd wrote

Probably needs a 4090Ti to run 60 FPS.


BIZLfoRIZL t1_iyyslke wrote

I’ve got an oculus quest running at 60 fps on a gtx 970… not as resource heavy as you might expect.


Chronotaru t1_iyzy2nh wrote

It's rumoured to contain an M2, and framerate is always relative to detail level. Quest 2 manages more with less. An M2 for a standalone VR/AR headset is a powerhouse.


buttorsomething t1_iz08hwl wrote

A power house to run notes and your phone. Hopefully I’m wrong but right now they are having issues with support on unity.


Cash907 t1_iyzfahb wrote

No one cares. This is a product no one asked for or cares about, just like the stupid AppleCar. Why is the tech journo industry so fixated on it?


Chronotaru t1_iyzxyaq wrote

Tell that to Facebook who bet the whole farm on it. For Apple this is just one product.


Complete_Let3076 t1_iz0o0uz wrote

XR/AR is already a pretty big part of everyday tech (especially social media and some video games/shopping apps). It isn’t going away and at some point we’ll all be wearing glasses (or something like that..). Yes, this particular post appears to be bullshit, but the general interest in this topic is based whether folks like it or not. No one wanted smart phones until we saw how useful they were and how they could enhance our lives. Same deal with the internet. XR might not change our lives in the next couple years, and certainly not in 2023. But give it a decade or two and shits gonna be a lot different. Just because meta is embarrassing itself and tech “journalists” are full of shit sometimes doesn’t mean it’s not happening


UpV0tesF0rEvery0ne t1_iyyfp8q wrote

It's hard to imagine anyone catching up with meta to be honest. They have invested agressivly and with billions of dollars developing so much new tech around flat lenses, ai based ar and camera tracking. Even with the workforce and money Apple has, is hard to compete with multiple billion dollars directed at one product.


unpeople t1_iyz7rux wrote

Meta spent $10 billion this year on VR, but they're a social media company, not a hardware manufacturer, so a lot of that was spent on things that Apple has already solved. Apple's annual R&D budget is $28 billion, and if the rumors of an impending headset are true, that means they've been working on it for years at this point. They've most likely outspent Meta by now, while having the advantage of decades of experience producing top tier hardware and operating systems, plus hundreds of hardware and software patents in their back pocket.


UpV0tesF0rEvery0ne t1_iz04gut wrote

That's a good point, but many of the reports I side apple point to them having thousands of projects on the go, some even designed to weed out leekers, empty projects to explore non commercial ideas and collect patents.

I would be suprised if the 28 billion is spread amongst hundreds of real products and metas 10 billion is focused around just a handful of vr/ar specific things


frontiermanprotozoa t1_iyzk18a wrote

meta has indeed done amazing things for pushing vr and making it affordable (among many terrible things) but they have an image issue they cant really solve by renaming themselves. Everyone and even their grandma has the phrase "facebook tracks you" or "facebook listens to your microphone" in their mind (regardless of truth). Its not enough for people to drop facebook or apps they already incorporated in their lives, but it will probably be enough for people resisting adoption of something you put on your head and changes what you see. It has a completely different place in peoples mind and has an entirely different psychology than a phone in your pocket. So apple with their (false) image of privacy and strong fanbase might just be the thing that pushes vr to mainstream.


Complete_Let3076 t1_iz0p6sa wrote

Metas investment into VR is pretty much worthless if people don’t believe in the product or company. I don’t really see a redemption arc in the works for them, but who knows. I don’t agree with you but I’m upvoting for adding to the conversation


Baby_bluega t1_iyynfun wrote

Well meta is going the complete wrong direction, but then again, I can't imagine Apple doing any better. Oculus cv1 was great. Rift s, was a bit if a downgrade. The quest was portable, so cool, but the processor is so weak it sucks, and is really only usable for a handful of games. Now they are releasing the quest pro for $1500, which is about absolute joke. For that price I can almost buy a varjo areo, which beats it by miles in every category and is made by some no name company. It has 1.5 times the resoltion in both width and hieght. I can buy a valve index for 2/3rds the price, and I would take that over a quest pro any day of the week.

I think quest is great for children that can't afford a gaming pc, but that's about it. Granted, that is most the matket.


Necrophag1st t1_iyyy50i wrote

Quest Pro is superior to the Index, even as a dedicated PCVR device.


UpV0tesF0rEvery0ne t1_iz059cp wrote

I have a 4090 and a index hooked up in my living room but I play on the quest 2 daily instead, it's just less hassle and works anywhere, in whatever room, in bed.

It's like I have a wireless index with a quest 2 and air link, my only gripe is the controllers


Baby_bluega t1_iz0dd5r wrote

Really? I thinking about selling my quest because I never use it. I use my index daily and got a quest because I found it on sale for $200 and thought it would be good for traveling. I just went away for a week, and brought my quest with me. It was so uncomfortable, and the tracking felt so terrible, graphics so bad that I couldn't play for more than 15 minutes before I decided I'd just rather be doing something else. Even when I use it for the purpose I bought it for, it's just not worth it wearing the damn thing imo. Honest to God I'd rather play on my cv1 for the better tracking alone. That might have to do with the type of game though. I play first person shooters where you need finely tuned tracking.

I know you get good graphics with pc, but it's still just way less comfortable, and the tracking is so much worse I would never use it over my index at home.

Not sute why the gpu is relevant, but I have a 3090ti.