Palmer Luckey: Oculus Rift will support Mac if Apple ‘ever releases a good computer’

“Oculus Rift most likely won’t be coming to Mac any time soon, according to Oculus VR founder Palmer Luckey, who says that an Apple-compatible version of the virtual reality headset won’t arrive until Apple ‘release a good computer,'” Luke Dormehl reports for Cult of Mac.

“Luckey qualifies what sounds like a bit of a harsh statement by elaborating on his point,” Dormehl reports, “stating that: ‘It just boils down to the fact that Apple doesn’t prioritize high-end GPUs. 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.'”

Dormehl reports, “If Apple did prioritize high-end GPUs in the same way that Apple did “back in the day,” Luckey says that he would be all too happy to bring Oculus to the Apple ecosystem.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: If you can’t get your little toy to work on any of the GPUs included in current Macs, your coders suck.

No further elaboration to qualify that statement by any measure shall be forthcoming.

SEE ALSO:
Oculus co-founder says he didn’t want a deal with Apple, chose Facebook instead – March 27, 2014

Apple is working on VR user interfaces and gaming; looking for Oculus and Leap experts – February 10, 2015
Apple patent application reveals personal display headset invention – May 8, 2014
Apple continues to tweak Apple TV video headset accessory – April 10, 2014
Apple granted knockout patent for head-mounted personal display – December 10, 2013
iGlasses: Apple granted patent for head-mounted augmented reality displays – July 5, 2012

Advertisements

74 Comments

    1. A single 5K display resolution is one thing. The upgradeable video card to drive motion across multiple larger displays is very different.

      I have been saying for years that Apple’s Macs are falling behind what the pros need to innovate in video, VR, gaming, and elsewhere. It’s time for Apple to put out something really great.

    2. Luckey’s problem is he does not know Macs and does not want to learn. His basic statement that the highest end Mac Pro with “A” FirePro D700 is not fast enough is just asinine because you simply cannot order a Mac Pro with a single D700. You get two running in concert.

      Hey Mr. Luckey, if two D700s running in concert won’t run your graphics toy even at its lowest acceptable level, then your toy is just not ready for prime time.

      1. Or maybe you don’t understand the importance of extremely fast GPUs necessary for realistic VR motion. Palmer is right — you need at least twice the GPUs that the Mac Pro offers to run a smooth VR system. That would be one Mac Pro per eye, or one PC with two current GPUs. Want to guess which is the more cost effective approach?

    3. I’m running a brand new fully tricked out iMac that is in constant hesitation mode when using brushes and gradients in Camera Raw. WTF did I spend all this money on!!!!

      1. Like I said 90% or more PC’s out there even the ones being sold today can’t handle it either – these are a few speciality machines which are more expensive than most want to pay – Yes a few gamers will buy them but whatever.

        1. So what are you trying to say?

          90% of PCs can’t do VR, but 100% of Macs can’t.

          Please, just face reality: Apple is not even trying to be competitive in cutting edge graphics production, gaming, and other computing intensive tasks. Cook has made Apple a fashion/consumer company.

          1. Well as we all know Apple doesn’t really make an effort until it has a strategy to launch and sell it as a new category that it can monetarise on a big scale Evan if it forms a niche in a large market and in doing creaming off the profits. Game consoles don’t even offer that opportunity with little profit for all the effort and VR is nothing but a niche or some time to come. Creeping into it now would in all honesty be pointless for Apple. When it goes so it will do so using mostly it’s in house solutions/tech that work with decent but not exclusively expensive high end specs which simply make it a self indulgent geek product. That’s not Apples style, it likes to bring opportunities to the masses even if it doesn’t deal with the mass market itself. In that way it can launch it as a complete platform that can turn those niche concepts however good they are technically like Oculus. He is being dismissive and arrogant because he knows this and knows that Apple as and when it enters this market will do so by circumventing them with the intention of making them mostly irrelavent.

            1. “He is being dismissive and arrogant ”

              Well that’s an interesting take coming from a guy who throws around insults and calls Oculus customers “wankers”.

              Admit it: Apple is no longer cutting edge on anything anymore.

            2. “Admit it: Apple is no longer cutting edge on anything anymore.”

              So take your incessant negativity elsewhere, and go buy these other wonderful products that are so much better than Apple’s.

          2. When there is a decent market for VR, then Apple will launch the best yet affordable VR capable machines, and not one minute before. Apple is never first for faster for its own sake. Later for 3G, LTE, graphics cards and new processors. But when it’s needed for the market they will be there.

        2. I would say only about 1-2% of all PC’s at most could handle it. Vast majority of people aren’t high end gamers and buy cheaptastic PC’s for low end web and simple uses. There are 2012 Mac Pro’s NOW running Titan X cards but those are pro’s who could give a damn about Oculus Wankers.

    1. Apple views its computers as “non-user-serviceable appliances”. They’ve taken that too far lately, back-peddled in a few areas after customer complaints, but continue to produce products that need to be replaced instead of upgraded. I think they need to work harder to strike a healthy balance. Upgrading is the best way to keep a computer usable, but it won’t be done if it’s too difficult or costly for users.

      1. Indeed.

        How about a higher-end Mac box similar to the Apple II cx — three industry-standard sized card slots, easily accessed expandable memory, bigger power supply, big fan for ventilation — don’t want or need “pretty” or “sleek, elegant.”

        Functional. Who cares how noisy the fan might be, or, how “retro 1990’s plain-wrapper” the square-box appears? Don’t care about any of that — likely going to end up under my desk and out-of-sight, anyways.

        By some chance, can Thunderbolt port speeds support an outboard stand-alone graphics card box, with I/O speeds capable of hosting ultra-high end graphics cards, etc?

        That’s my optics.

        Niffy

  1. MDN’s take is totally off. Macs lack the GPUs found in high end gaming PCs. That’s a simple fact, and anyone pushing the limits of what those cards can do can simply not provide the same experience when those cards aren’t present.

    Apple made the decision long ago not to compete in the PC gaming market and as a result doesn’t offer mega-fan-heat-sink-and-fin monster extreme gaining rigs. They just don’t.

    If you’re like me, that’s fine. I game on iOS where Apple does prioritize gaming graphics and on a PlayStation leaving the hardcore PC gaming to others.

    And before anyone claims that the MacPro has decent graphics… Those graphics are for workstations, not gaming.

    1. As a big gamer myself, I do the same.

      iOS is my most frequently used platform followed by PlayStation. I love my Mac, but other than Blizzard and a few Mac App Store treats, I don’t do any gaming on it. And my Mac was the original Retina Display with 16GB of ram and it still is only a mediocre gaming platform. Sadly.

      But I think now that Apple has a taste of the lucrative aspects of being in the video game industry as a major console player, I don’t think they’d make those same decisions to eschew gaming in the future.

    2. Exactly right. The best configurable GPU on an iMac can only be done on the high-end 27″ iMac, i.e. $2400 to *start*, and the card is another $250… and even then it’s considered a *mobile* GPU, not a desktop one, so it’s got the graphics performance of a nearly 4-year old desktop GPU, an nVidia GTX 670.

      Search for Radeon R9 M395X in the benchmark chart…
      http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html

  2. AMD sucks. And their Drivers for the GPU’s also suck. They don’t support anything properly. Metal and OpenCL are great ideas, but no one is using them. They don’t even support the latest version of OPENGL…

    1. I was going to point out the Apple VR hires as well. Who wants to bet that when Apple decides to do something they will get it to work just fine with an A-series processor, not a top of the line PC class graphics card

    2. At last someone who gets it, the more dismissive the opposition is the more scared they are in reality. The watch and car nods were/are equally dismissive and insulting. The only fools however are those who take their words, or propagate them unquestionably at face value. You can question Apples strategy when you see it in action but to do so blindly before it’s actually revealed is, well just being blind.

        1. Nope.

          Apple has to now produce on a rapidly growing global scale, whoch in the past it never had to…

          Exactly why Steve Jobs picked Tim Cook a world class production and supply chain expert manager with a stellar historical travk record that no one can take away from him.

          1. breeze, you really should take Cook’s dick out of your mouth before posting. all the Apple worship you and your alter egos dribble out here are completely naive and technically uninformed.

            just save youself the time and stop psoting. we know If it has an Apple sticker you worship it. capisch

            1. Hey sonny boy zeerb, wipe the milk from your lips and then see if you can give yourself a blow job, beofre crawling back in that hole you belong, you miserable Trump wipe, bag of misseery.

  3. 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.

    Which translates into: YOU’RE TOO LAZY TO OPTIMIZE YOUR CODE FOR HIGH END AMD GPUS.

    What an ass.

    1. Another possibility, I guess in ignorance, is that Facebook, oops Oculus, wrote their code to work with DirectX (Microsoft 3-D APIs) and not OpenGL, which is what Apple provides.

      Either way, oops they screwed themselves out of a market.

    2. Come on, Derek, are you honestly holding up the D700 as a state of the art GPU ???? That’s just ridiculous.

      Nobody is expending effort “optimizing” their software for an old GPU. Including Apple.

      1. Facts:

        The D700 is a rebranded FirePro W9100. It was a middling performer 3 years ago.

        I wish Apple’s fanboys would wake up to reality. The company we knew and loved is letting the Mac die without updates while the rest of the world keeps getting better.

            1. Thanks macgadgetfreek!

              silverhawk is renowned for ad hominem and shadowboxing rather than dealing with reality. haven’t read anything informative or factual from him/her/it in many years — and it wasn’t for lack of trying to have a civil discussion, either.

        1. I could understand your statement IF the Mac Pro had a single GPU. It does not. If there had been a single board with dual W9100 chips and 6 GB of dedicated graphic RAM each available for Windows machines, it would not have ben a “middling performer 3 years ago”. Claiming that such an arrangement cannot support VR even in its lowest acceptable mode is just asinine. Rift is not ready for prime time if this really is the case.

          1. Shadow, what makes you think that gaming and high-end graphics PCs have only one GPU slot?

            Fact is, the Mac Pro has about half the graphics performance compared to the state of the art PCs.

            Visit Falcon NW and configure a Mach V with 3 GPU slots, for example. Obviously you get what you pay for, but it’s not hard to configure a machine that is dialed into your specific user needs, has room to grow, and isn’t sealed and locked down. Sadly, you gotta run Windows, but on sheer performance measures, it blows away any Mac.

            I am getting the impression that there are vocal Apple worshippers who do not want Apple to respond with new user friendly hardware, that support for new cutting edge technology just isn’t interesting or important, and that whatever 3 year old graphics cards Apple releases is more than adequate. You should just accept whatever Tim feels you need, without ever having the option to configure or upgrade hardware.

            Sorry, but if this is what people are willing to accept as the future of Apple, then we are witnessing Apple’s technological decline now.

            Sure, iOS may make money, but Macs are where the next technological boundaries need to be expanded. So how com instead of urging Apple to move forward, all I hear are a bunch of apologists with their heads in the sand? MDN has truly lost its value when facts don’t matter, and brand worship becomes the order of the day.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.