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."
You can build a sub-$1000 PC that will work with the Rift. Some people have posted builds much lower. Price isn't the problem. High-end Macs just don't have gaming GPUs.
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.
The most expensive Mac has a GPU that is useless for high-end gaming. Intel integrated graphics are not even close to being OK for this purpose, and an expensive AMD card that is specialized for CAD and graphic design simply isn't capable of working for VR. There's no reason for Oculus or HTC/Valve to invest a single second of time trying to support those systems.
Processing power isn't the bottle neck. I have a system built on a 2600K processor, which is fairly old, but it's clocked to over 3.5 ghz, and it's not a problem. My system still crushes Valves VR capability test rather handily, because I have a GTX980 as the graphics card.
A gaming box can be built that would be adequate for VR for around $1000. There isn't a single Mac that is capable, no matter how much money you throw at Apple. Even if you could throw, say a Geforce GTX980ti in one, the drivers don't exist. Apple maintains complete driver control on their platform, and even when they DID provide options that included then-equivalent hardware, the performance was abysmal.
"Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm fucked."; ~ Donald J. Trump
They have builds to meet the recommended spec on the specs page... It currently takes $1100. You can reach the minimum with $800 just barely.
That's a pretty damn high end machine.
But yes, ultimately the issue is not that apple didn't "release a good computer", it's that apple's computers aren't targeted at gaming, and hence don't have gaming GPUs in them.
Yeah... no.
See for the work I do (service Scientific instruments) I use a Mac, because I am more productive on the Mac , and when I am charging customers $200/hr they don't want to pay for me to piss about with a high end gaming rig.
The price difference is irrelevant, make up a couple of hours in increased productivity and that difference is gone. And that would be just in the first month, after 4+ years the Mac turns out to be profitable as I have probably saved 40-60 hours and more (i.e. about $8000-$12,000 plus of billable hours)
Your needs are not mine, you may be more productive in Windows/Linux, so go for it, use what best for you. It is a tool and I choose the best ones that work well and "feel right", be it a computer, oscilloscope, logic analyser, socket set or screw driver.
So, if Apple does not make what you want, who cares, buy what you need elsewhere, they are under no obligation to build anything they don't want to.
I see them pretty commonly in tech. Some people go all-out and run Linux or a BSD on their laptop, but for those who don't want to deal with the hardware-support issues, OSX is often the next choice.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
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.