3 ms·
This is an apples/oranges comparison for a number of reasons: 1. The Bigscreen Beyond 2 is still a tethered device and can't do anything without a beefy comput
by haswell 1y ago
This is an apples/oranges comparison for a number of reasons:
1. The Bigscreen Beyond 2 is still a tethered device and can't do anything without a beefy computer. It wouldn't be so small if it contained a computer capable of driving the screens at 90hz.
2. The AVP displays are 3660x3200 pixels per eye at 90-100hz vs the Beyond 2's 2560x2560 per eye at 75hz (can only reach 90hz by upscaling 1920×1920 per eye).
3. The Beyond devices don't have video passthrough which is a core use case of the AVP and its OS and adds to the computing needs and resulting form factor.
Presumably Apple could have made a smaller device if they had limited themselves to the specifications of something like the BB2. The existence of the BB2 is not evidence that the tech existed to miniaturize the AVP since the BB2 is simply not able to achieve the same outcomes as the AVP. They're just fundamentally different devices.