4 ms·

I'm not sold on eyes as a pointer just yet. The Quest Pro can do this and it does not feel great. Based on experience with a lot of other headsets: > Can we co

I'm not sold on eyes as a pointer just yet. The Quest Pro can do this and it does not feel great. Based on experience with a lot of other headsets: > Can we comfortably use it for 8+ hours a day? No. Even if the ergonomics are perfect, the screens aren't good enough for this. > Is text really crisp enough for productivity usage? If they match the leaked resolution, no.

whynotminot 3y ago
What’s the leaked resolution?
- oezi 3y ago
  They now published 24m pixel total, 12m per eye, i.e. 4k per eye.
  - whynotminot 3y ago
    4K is roughly 8 million pixels. I wonder if they’re including the front display in their pixel count. Or there actually is significantly better than 4K per eye happening here. At any rate, it’s a lot of pixels. Not sure what GP is complaining about.
    - Miraste 3y ago
      GP here. It's 12M because the displays are square, not 16:9, so there are more vertical pixels. This will look better than most existing headsets, but it's not enough to match flat displays. You can't think about it in terms of traditional monitors- this is 4k over your entire field of vision, which translates to monitor-sized objects at maybe 720p. That's why all the virtual screens in their demo are so big; they're very low density. Remember the age of 768p laptops? It'll look like that.
      - whynotminot 3y ago
        I get what you're saying in a mathematical sort of way, but I think the point you might be missing is that "monitor sized object" isn't a relevant concept for this device. You're saying that I can't think about this in terms of regular monitors, but I think you're doing precisely that. "monitor sized object" exists as a thing because we live in a reality where desks limit the size of the things we can reasonably use for work. But here, your desk is virtual now. There is "space" for a bigger screen. You're saying they compensated by making the virtual screen larger--my thought here is "so what"? Text legibility / crispness will be important. I'm one of those guys who buys the 5K displays, so I agree it matters. But Apple made a point of calling out clean text rendering, and none of the previews have complained so far. But obviously no one in those early previews has spent 8 hours in an IDE, so we'll see. Fully agree that more would be better, and would increase the usability of smaller, more fine elements. But this might be enough resolution to pull off the concept in a perfectly usable way.
notJim 3y ago
> No. Even if the ergonomics are perfect, the screens aren't good enough for this. Is > 4k not enough for this? Looks to be almost double the Quest Pro resolution.
- Miraste 3y ago
  Sadly no. I've used AR glasses that have double the pixels per degree than the Quest Pro (done by using a smaller FOV). It looks like 1080p on maybe a 32" desktop monitor. You can read but it's not a fun experience. Apple's version will depend on what FOV they use, but it's going to look pixelated regardless. There's a reason they didn't use their Retina branding.

whynotminot 3y ago

What’s the leaked resolution?

oezi 3y ago
They now published 24m pixel total, 12m per eye, i.e. 4k per eye.
- whynotminot 3y ago
  4K is roughly 8 million pixels. I wonder if they’re including the front display in their pixel count. Or there actually is significantly better than 4K per eye happening here. At any rate, it’s a lot of pixels. Not sure what GP is complaining about.
  - Miraste 3y ago
    GP here. It's 12M because the displays are square, not 16:9, so there are more vertical pixels. This will look better than most existing headsets, but it's not enough to match flat displays. You can't think about it in terms of traditional monitors- this is 4k over your entire field of vision, which translates to monitor-sized objects at maybe 720p. That's why all the virtual screens in their demo are so big; they're very low density. Remember the age of 768p laptops? It'll look like that.
    - whynotminot 3y ago
      I get what you're saying in a mathematical sort of way, but I think the point you might be missing is that "monitor sized object" isn't a relevant concept for this device. You're saying that I can't think about this in terms of regular monitors, but I think you're doing precisely that. "monitor sized object" exists as a thing because we live in a reality where desks limit the size of the things we can reasonably use for work. But here, your desk is virtual now. There is "space" for a bigger screen. You're saying they compensated by making the virtual screen larger--my thought here is "so what"? Text legibility / crispness will be important. I'm one of those guys who buys the 5K displays, so I agree it matters. But Apple made a point of calling out clean text rendering, and none of the previews have complained so far. But obviously no one in those early previews has spent 8 hours in an IDE, so we'll see. Fully agree that more would be better, and would increase the usability of smaller, more fine elements. But this might be enough resolution to pull off the concept in a perfectly usable way.

notJim 3y ago

> No. Even if the ergonomics are perfect, the screens aren't good enough for this. Is > 4k not enough for this? Looks to be almost double the Quest Pro resolution.

Miraste 3y ago
Sadly no. I've used AR glasses that have double the pixels per degree than the Quest Pro (done by using a smaller FOV). It looks like 1080p on maybe a 32" desktop monitor. You can read but it's not a fun experience. Apple's version will depend on what FOV they use, but it's going to look pixelated regardless. There's a reason they didn't use their Retina branding.