Slashdot Mirror
Oculus Founder: Rift Will Come To Mac If Apple "Ever Releases a Good Computer" (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader writes: It's been almost a year now since Oculus announced that the consumer version of the Rift virtual-reality headset would only support Windows PCs at launch -- a turnaround from development kits that worked fine on Mac and Linux boxes. Now, according to Oculus co-founder Palmer Luckey, it "is up to Apple" to change that state of affairs. Specifically, "if they ever release a good computer, we will do it," he told Shacknews recently. Basically, Luckey continued, even the highest-end Mac you can buy would not provide an enjoyable experience on the final Rift hardware, which is significantly more powerful than early development kits. "It just boils down to the fact that Apple doesn't prioritize high-end GPUs," he said. "You can buy a $6,000 Mac Pro with the top-of-the-line AMD FirePro D700, and it still doesn't match our recommended specs."
If a high end Mac won't support it. You will need a higher end PC which will be beyond most people's budgets.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
It's pretty true. The Mac Pro used to be a high-end 2CPU workstation comparable with offerings from any business PC manufacturer. Now it's a little tin can with 1 CPU. The issue with Apple used to be that you would pay significantly more for the same performance. Now the issue is that no amount of money can buy that performance even if you have a blank check, other than nonstandard solutions like eGPUs.
Don't kid yourself, they are focused on selling overpriced hardware to maximise profits. No battery problems with a desktop mate. The article says it perfectly in that Macs are just not good enough.
You know what, that's how I feel too.. but an awful lot of people in the market go for that user experience, and I'm long past blaming Apple for going for that market. I would never buy it, but a lot of people do.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
no, apple is simply not interested in gamers.
They also don't make blade servers, managed switches, raid arrays
They are focused on the people who actually buy their products, not on the people will never buy a mac no matter what they build.
These people include engineers, mathematicians, statisticians, physicists, micro biologists, bioinformaticians , chemists, astronomers , etc etc etc etc
As it is now, Lucky is just another redneck at the corner gas, spitting his baccy on the woodturner and arguing with the others about "Ferds and Chivvies". If you don't want to release it for Mac, don't. Don't be a fucking asshole about it. Oops - too late.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
The Mac Pro. The old Mac Pros used to have the ability to use RAID. This one? One SSD, and that's it? For a computer that will cost you $4000 for something with reasonable specs, this is just unacceptable. It also is a bitch to rack, requiring a third party kit.
You're supposed to be keeping your bulk storage on a NAS, not the local machine. That's the modern way of doing things. About the only task this isn't adequate for is video editing, so that may require an external RAID box. But why should everyone else need to buy a massive, bloated tower when only a handful of workstations actually need it?
And why would you want to rack-mount this system? It's a workstation, not a server.
the base spec at academic is more in line with the lack of power. recently we bought the 5k 27" imacs at a base price of £1245 I think. overpriced but compared tro the arse fucking that dell indulges in with its 'partners', not shocking.
It might be overpriced if you're only looking at the CPU, GPU, and RAM. But don't forget that the 27" iMac includes a 5K panel that supports wide gamut and is by all accounts excellent in calibration and color reproduction. A Dell 27" 5K monitor by itself is over $1,500 - compared to that, getting an equivalent monitor plus a whole computer for about $1770 US (based on the British price you listed above) seems like a bargain.
And if the university is full of creative types running the Adobe apps, then they probably really do need quality monitors.
Considering how much Microsoft is hell-bent on alienating their users with Win10, and considering what you've just described, where will the desktop computer market go from here?
Windows... you may think the issues are huge, but outside a handful of uber pissed of people, I find that most people either don't care, or aren't even aware of it.
I'm not saying it doesn't matter, I'm simply saying that it is number 417 on their give a crap list and it just doesn't register on their radar.
"That's the modern way of doing things."
Yep, let's make MORE POINTS OF FAILURE by having ANOTHER MACHINE TO MAINTAIN.
You modernists are fucking morons.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Is a mere 110,000 potential customers actually worth the capital investment costs? Is it worth the ongoing support? Out of that group, how many are likely to purchase and what is it going to cost go get them to make those purchases? Compound that with how much is it going to cost to develop the product, divide it by the projected number, and does it make sense for any reasons other than idealism?
Those are questions, not assertions. I really have no idea. I do not have the domain knowledge to even begin to speculate authoritatively.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Go sell your derangement somewhere else. A 12-core Xeon E5-2697 v2 will pound whatever you've got into the dust, chump. 24 threads, 30 MB cache, 768 GB RAM accessability, 60 GBps of ECC RAM bandwidth, 40 PCIe 3.0 lanes of IO.
This "lets tell everyone how bad Apple is" has been going on for as long as there has been an Apple computer. For years the punch line was "Apple is about to go out of business". Now it is Apple sucks at game.
Uh, Apple is not just here, it is on and off the most successful company in the history of the world. You know why? Because PEOPLE LIKE APPLE PRODUCTS AND SUPPORT. Geeks don't need or want it - fine. But this may come as a surprise to a few here, but Apple is not and never has been in business to make geeks happy. They are in business to make money, and they are very good at that.
Tell me again how wonderful Samsung phones are, and then lets compare profitability - you see that is why corporations exist, not so you can shove a memory card in your phone, but to make a profit. Apple makes money - because the average person likes their product and their support.
Not everyone likes Apple - DUH, does everyone like Ford or Chevy? DUH. To constantly for decades bring up these lame dog whistles about how Apple won't do this, or my home built is better is just proving you do not have a clue.
Bicycles make lousy snowboards, I think we should all boycott Canondale.
Mac= form over function, they would rather have a pretty machine thats underspecced than an ugly powerhouse.
Shorter version of your post: "You're holding it wrong"
"I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?