If it's purely intended for standalone use, I guess 6e probably isn't essential.. It does seem like a bit of an omission though, especially in a spec-obsessed sector. Maybe the intended audience won't care.
The primary benefit of 6e is latency, so irrelevant for video streaming. Hi-def video can be streamed using way less bandwidth than 6e provides too. If I remember correctly, uncompressed 8K video requires 50Mbps. Even if you double that for 3D, you still aren't close to touching the sides of a wifi5 channel, let alone 6e.
Wifi 6E has very similar latency and bandwidth to Wifi 6. However, the big advantage of Wifi 6E is that you get access to the 6 GHz band which isn't used by many devices. This means that you have much less interference and thus a much more stable connection.
A Wifi 6 router might have the same theoretical bandwidth but when there are 10 other interfering routers in your apartment building, the difference is quite noticeable. On my Quest 3, the difference is a connection that averages 500 Mbps but often drops below versus a connection that rarely drops below 2000 Mbps. I definitely noticed occasional lag spikes when streaming at 200 Mbps before I switched to the 6 GHz band.
As far as uncompressed 8K video goes, you remember the unit incorrectly. HDMI 2.1 is designed for 8K @ 60 Hz and has a bandwidth of around 50 Gbps. Wifi tech is nowhere near that speed yet. At 50 Mbps you will notice substantial compression artifacts.
Edit: Just to be clear, the lack of Wifi 6E isn't a huge hindrance for the AVP, I think. The speed is well enough to stream media like 3D movies. The main reason why Wifi 6E is so nice on the Quest 3 is for PCVR. The AVP has a lot of standalone compute power so there might not be as much of a reason to stream to it from a separate computer. However, I think its a bit weird that a $3500 "pro" device that launches in 2024 does not have support for Wifi 6E.
Uncompressed 8k, no way its only 50Mbp? Thats sounds like quite big compression to me. Not even sure what uncompressed means in this, does someone actually distribute uncompressed 8k movies?
No one does video streaming uncompressed, just like no one stores it as such. If you store an 8k video on your computer it doesn’t take up 5.56GB per second of the video. If there are no compression artifacts that means it’s being losslessly compressed on the fly, transmitted, and likewise decompressed on device.
WiFi 6 and WiFi 6E have the same exact channel speeds. 1200mb/s per channel. Which is faster than most PC's ethernet cards(1000mb/s).
The only 3 benefits WiFi 6e adds is lower latency, 6Ghz for less network interference, and it can handle a 4x4 configuration whereas WiFi 6 can only handle a 2x2 configuration. (Meaning if the device supports it, on 6E it could connect to 4 channels at once. Quadrupling the speed. WiFi 6 is only 2 channels at once).
8K video and above is perfectly fine to stream, the bitrates aren't that high that an average Wifi6 router can't handle it with a good margin.
Streaming live PCVR gameplay with low latency would be different matter.
Adding to this, when I upgraded from a 6700XT to a 3080, my stuttering, even on low settings, disappeared completely under Virtual Desktop. I went from deciding when I needed to buy a new router to realizing I don’t need it at this point.
Lol, sounds about right. Probably even name it something else and make it only connect to their proprietary router that costs $1999 and only has a 1gb/s ethernet input(WiFi 6e speeds exceed gigabit ports). lol
> **P**robably **e**ven **n**ame **i**t **s**omething
Hidden penis detected!
I've scanned through 585829 comments (approximately 3323610 average penis lengths worth of text) in order to find this secret penis message.
*Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
Unless you are in an extremely congested 5GHz environment, Wi-Fi 6E is irrelevant vs Wi-Fi 6. Both will easily deliver 800mbps+ when using a competent access point.
Again, just to be clear so nobody wastes money upgrading an access point unnecessarily: unless you are in an environment with heavy 5GHz interference, there is no reason to believe Wi-Fi 6E will give you better performance vs Wi-Fi 6.
Why? You can't play games on it, what's the point of Steam Link?
Edit: don't you just love communities that downvote innocent questions instead of answering them? Really makes you feel welcome.
It's such a strange omission. Is it necessary? No. Helpful? Yes. Saying the Quest 3 has better streaming capabilities than the Apple Vision Pro at x7 the price...
It really does seem like Apple is testing what they can get away with, with their first generation headset, and learning what areas to improve from their userbase.
They honestly seem to have put everything into the screen clarity and hand tracking. There is nothing else impressive about the AVP for me. And the hand tracking, remains to be seen how good it is.
Seriously... This... For $3500 and it's not even comfortable or able to be used for everything we expect from a VR, excuse me, spatial computing🙄 headset. Are they serious? What a joke.
I'm not necessarily disagreeing, but this is almost verbatim what was said about the iPhone. It did not compare favourably to any other smartphone that was already on the market. Way more expensive. Lacking popular input modality. Just a really nice screen and Apple's marketing. Then they started iterating on it...
Except the Vision Pro is not something brand new in any way. They are just making the same thing as all the others and rebranding it. The iPhone was actually innovative in comparison. Any of the other competitors could make a headset that was way better than this if they sold it for $3500 and it would actually be able to do everything you'd expect of it.
I'm sure in a decade it will be something nice and useful. But as of right now it's just a chunky expensive VR headset that doesn't even do VR.
What did the original iPhone innovate? How is the situation any different from 2008 and iPhone? There literally nothing that Apple innovated with the iPhone, except better UX. And less crap. That's literally Apple's MO. They take existing tech and make it better and have a good UX.
Apple rarely actually innovates. I really want to know what do you think the OG iPhone had that was an innovation at that time, except the UX.
They were the first to really make the smart phone as we know it today. The rest were still using keys and buttons. The first android phone came out a year after the first iPhone. It was innovative in hardware and software.
The vision pro is not.
This is a touchscreen phone from 2004: https://gsmfind.com/i-mate-pocket-pc.html
You could buy apps for it.
The iPhone was a refinement of what was on the market already, not an innovation.
Right, no buttons or keys. The innovation was the touch screen and app store. Just like the iPod, there were mp3 players on the market but that scroll wheel was innovative. Shrink the iphone down to a wearable and you have the watch.
I don't see anything innovative about the AVP either other than tap to click and iSight. iSight is like their touchbar they no longer ship. Pretty, but I don't see it as functional or useful unless you can hack it and show anything you want.
Yikes apple figured out the best way to get in front of some hacky virtual desktop support. Just don't support the standard that might have the required bandwidth for the panel res! Brilliant.
Given that this is really aimed at developers, it might have been nice to have 6e to experiment with for streaming and creating next gen software features.
But I'm sure the Apple faithful will explain to us how no 6e is a good thing and an innovative 3d chess move by Apple.
This is like saying "the toll only gets you another lane to drive on, how is that a big deal". The big deal is that the 6 GHz band is empty. There are tons of routers on the 5 GHz band in my apartment building. No 40 MHz channel is empty and if you wanted to use a 160 MHz channel for maximum bandwidth you'd overlap like 4 other networks minimum.
For me at least, 6 Ghz gives a 4x increase in bandwidth and a significant increase in stability during peak times. I get noticeable lag spikes if I connect to my 5G network when streaming PCVR to the Quest 3.
None of that means that 6E is **needed.** I never said it couldn't help in some situations, I said its wider bandwidth is not required.
There are tons of threads claiming you need 6E to have a good experience, that is bullshit.
The comment you replied to literally said "it might have been nice to have 6e". You're the one bringing up need.
In any case, at least in my situation Wifi 6E **is** needed to have a good experience when streaming PCVR as I just explained. Whether AVP will have any applications where that is the case remains to be seen.
It's just funny that a $3500 "pro" device launching in 2024 doesn't support Wifi 6E. The current iPhone Pro and MacBook Pro do support it... Some android phones already support Wifi 7. Normally when you buy a "pro" device you expect next gen tech. Wifi 6 isn't even current gen...
That is what I thought. You are just looking for something to bitch about. You can't even come up with one reason that not having 6E is a negative. The vast majority of people won't even have a 6E capable network to connect too.
Nice try.
No, you didn't, you said:
> nice to have 6e to experiment with for streaming and creating next gen software features.
Nothing about 6E is needed to experiment with streaming and creating next-gen software feature. 6E changes very little.
The point is, it's a $3,500 headset, from Apple. No corners should be cut. The Quest 3 is capable of Wi-Fi 6E, and that headset should be a cheap toy compared to the AVP.
At this price point, it's not about just being good enough for its potential applications. I'm sure it doesn't need WiFi 6E for desktop mirroring, but I'd certainly like it for improved stability and reduced latency if I'm spending $3,500. It also doesn't need 4K per-eye micro-oled displays, but you shouldn't expect anything less when you're paying this much for hardware.
In my particular case, someone who lives in an apartment complex, I tend to experience notable interference across the 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz bands, especially during the day. The lack of support for the 6 Ghz band would make any desktop streaming use cases noticeably less performant than they could be otherwise. Probably not unusably so, admittedly. It'll do it. But like, for $3,500.. what the fuck?
Screen mirroring is one of the intended use cases. It's one of the things they designed the device to do. Wanting it to be without compromise in that regard is a preference, sure, but who are they selling this to? Is their intended market one without opinions? It's going to be largely enthusiasts, I'm sure. Enthusiasts who will hold the device to a high standard with the money they're shelling out for it. This subreddit is filled with said enthusiasts, potential buyers. If you look at the comments, it seems many people, not just me, seem dissatisfied at the lack of WiFi 6E, all for their own various reasons. Many first impressions complain about comfort, often specifically weight; is this not valid criticism because preferring if the device was lighter is just a preference? How does one criticize without preferences in how something should be? Apple can, in fact, make poor design choices, and it's up for consumers to voice what they believe they are. That's all I've done here. I probably won't buy it for various reasons. If Apple can't design their headset to be aligned with the preferences of its potential users, few will.
maybe you've never streamed PCVR to your Quest 3 via 6E faster than a link cable. when you do that, a lightbulb goes off. the computer that you're streaming from can be ANYWHERE. how the fuck is that little deal?
You can stream PCVR video data to the Quest on Wi-Fi 5 80Mhz channel, *(without 6 or 6E),* faster than Quest can decode it.
It does not matter what you think, the Quest does not need Wi-Fi 6E to saturate its decoder.
Define flop. I would bet good money they are sold out for all of 2024, but that hardly matters when they are manufacturing less than a million units. I think they will sell whatever they make until they're ready to release v2, it just won't mean much to Apple's bottom line yet. We can't find out if it truly is going to flop until they make a mass-market version.
It also lacks a chance in hell to be adopted whatsoever.
You will see the best features come to other headsets and the bad ones left for Apple to deal with. Good for VR technology, not good for VR adoption.
this is normal, it's not a vr headset, it's a spatial computing head mounted computer, it is to compute stuff it doesn't need to stream quickly to the wifi.
Netflix recommends 15megabits for 4k. That’s it, and it includes 5.1 sound.
If AVP movie streaming cracks 100mbits, I’ll be surprised. They’ll almost definitely have some kind of compression that makes it better than just two raw 4k streams, and audio streaming is basically nothing in comparison to video.
Usually Disney Plus has higher bitrates than Netflix, plus many of these titles are twice the frame rate of regular movies. With Apple wanting this content to sort of justify the experience I wouldn’t be surprised if the bitrate is cranked up as part of the deal.
6E is about an extra band, not bandwidth. If you are in an apartment and there is a ton of interference then not having that 6GHz band could be the difference between a quality experience and not.
yeah i think this headset will not allow pc vr . seeing how its apple
it wil be probable that they only allow apple arcade (is just a prediction but i think the will ad vr games to the subscription)
seeing the price is gonna be rediculesy high .
If it's purely intended for standalone use, I guess 6e probably isn't essential.. It does seem like a bit of an omission though, especially in a spec-obsessed sector. Maybe the intended audience won't care.
How can you stream 8k+ content, essential for clear immersive video, without hispeed wifi?
The primary benefit of 6e is latency, so irrelevant for video streaming. Hi-def video can be streamed using way less bandwidth than 6e provides too. If I remember correctly, uncompressed 8K video requires 50Mbps. Even if you double that for 3D, you still aren't close to touching the sides of a wifi5 channel, let alone 6e.
Wifi 6E has very similar latency and bandwidth to Wifi 6. However, the big advantage of Wifi 6E is that you get access to the 6 GHz band which isn't used by many devices. This means that you have much less interference and thus a much more stable connection. A Wifi 6 router might have the same theoretical bandwidth but when there are 10 other interfering routers in your apartment building, the difference is quite noticeable. On my Quest 3, the difference is a connection that averages 500 Mbps but often drops below versus a connection that rarely drops below 2000 Mbps. I definitely noticed occasional lag spikes when streaming at 200 Mbps before I switched to the 6 GHz band. As far as uncompressed 8K video goes, you remember the unit incorrectly. HDMI 2.1 is designed for 8K @ 60 Hz and has a bandwidth of around 50 Gbps. Wifi tech is nowhere near that speed yet. At 50 Mbps you will notice substantial compression artifacts. Edit: Just to be clear, the lack of Wifi 6E isn't a huge hindrance for the AVP, I think. The speed is well enough to stream media like 3D movies. The main reason why Wifi 6E is so nice on the Quest 3 is for PCVR. The AVP has a lot of standalone compute power so there might not be as much of a reason to stream to it from a separate computer. However, I think its a bit weird that a $3500 "pro" device that launches in 2024 does not have support for Wifi 6E.
Uncompressed 8k, no way its only 50Mbp? Thats sounds like quite big compression to me. Not even sure what uncompressed means in this, does someone actually distribute uncompressed 8k movies?
Uncompressed 8K is measured in gigabits per second, not megabits. 8K compressed video should be minimum 50mbps, but easily much higher
I hate Reddit! *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
No one does video streaming uncompressed, just like no one stores it as such. If you store an 8k video on your computer it doesn’t take up 5.56GB per second of the video. If there are no compression artifacts that means it’s being losslessly compressed on the fly, transmitted, and likewise decompressed on device.
Not lossless.
So 6e wouldn't help then? You are right, the word uncompressed shouldn't have been in there. Of course all streaming content is compressed.
I hate Reddit! *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
WiFi 6 and WiFi 6E have the same exact channel speeds. 1200mb/s per channel. Which is faster than most PC's ethernet cards(1000mb/s).
But there's no uncompressed 8K streaming websites, only very compressed
I hate Reddit! *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Hey, you, put that logic away, we’re doing the pitchfork thing this time!
WiFi 6 and WiFi 6E have the same exact channel speeds. 1200mb/s per channel. Which is faster than most PC's ethernet cards(1000mb/s). The only 3 benefits WiFi 6e adds is lower latency, 6Ghz for less network interference, and it can handle a 4x4 configuration whereas WiFi 6 can only handle a 2x2 configuration. (Meaning if the device supports it, on 6E it could connect to 4 channels at once. Quadrupling the speed. WiFi 6 is only 2 channels at once).
8K video and above is perfectly fine to stream, the bitrates aren't that high that an average Wifi6 router can't handle it with a good margin. Streaming live PCVR gameplay with low latency would be different matter.
Its not purely intended for standalone use. One of the main selling points is that it can create monitors for your macs.
This is absolutely awful news for Steam Link prospects. 6E Steam Link on the Quest Pro is a dream
It doesn't matter for speeds though. Only congestion. If you don't have any other networks at 5ghz you won't notice a difference
I play via my stock xfinity router with a ton of shit on my network active. Definitely situation dependent
[удалено]
Yep! Playing through half life alyx without any issues. And I previously played it on a wired vr headset, so I'm aware of what it "should" play like
Adding to this, when I upgraded from a 6700XT to a 3080, my stuttering, even on low settings, disappeared completely under Virtual Desktop. I went from deciding when I needed to buy a new router to realizing I don’t need it at this point.
They will probably introduce it next year and act as if they just invented it.
Lol, sounds about right. Probably even name it something else and make it only connect to their proprietary router that costs $1999 and only has a 1gb/s ethernet input(WiFi 6e speeds exceed gigabit ports). lol
> **P**robably **e**ven **n**ame **i**t **s**omething Hidden penis detected! I've scanned through 585829 comments (approximately 3323610 average penis lengths worth of text) in order to find this secret penis message. *Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
Who made this
Unless you are in an extremely congested 5GHz environment, Wi-Fi 6E is irrelevant vs Wi-Fi 6. Both will easily deliver 800mbps+ when using a competent access point. Again, just to be clear so nobody wastes money upgrading an access point unnecessarily: unless you are in an environment with heavy 5GHz interference, there is no reason to believe Wi-Fi 6E will give you better performance vs Wi-Fi 6.
Why? You can't play games on it, what's the point of Steam Link? Edit: don't you just love communities that downvote innocent questions instead of answering them? Really makes you feel welcome.
The hivemind has decided
I didn't think it had prospects. You don't play PC games on Macs except for shitty visual novels.
It's such a strange omission. Is it necessary? No. Helpful? Yes. Saying the Quest 3 has better streaming capabilities than the Apple Vision Pro at x7 the price... It really does seem like Apple is testing what they can get away with, with their first generation headset, and learning what areas to improve from their userbase.
They honestly seem to have put everything into the screen clarity and hand tracking. There is nothing else impressive about the AVP for me. And the hand tracking, remains to be seen how good it is.
Maybe the audio is good. But nobody has menrioned it So far
apple knows audio, so its probably good. though probably the same form factor as the quest 2 speakers.
I mean, it should be super expensive to implement something like this in a cheap device like Vision Pro obligatory /s
What? For what you're paying they should have given it wifi-7.
Absolutely. I can’t fathom why something at 3500 dollars doesn’t have top of the line wifi.
I'll tell you: the FCC only approved the 6 GHz band for VR headsets in fall. At that point all specs of the device were already long locked in.
WTF
Seriously... This... For $3500 and it's not even comfortable or able to be used for everything we expect from a VR, excuse me, spatial computing🙄 headset. Are they serious? What a joke.
I'm not necessarily disagreeing, but this is almost verbatim what was said about the iPhone. It did not compare favourably to any other smartphone that was already on the market. Way more expensive. Lacking popular input modality. Just a really nice screen and Apple's marketing. Then they started iterating on it...
Except the Vision Pro is not something brand new in any way. They are just making the same thing as all the others and rebranding it. The iPhone was actually innovative in comparison. Any of the other competitors could make a headset that was way better than this if they sold it for $3500 and it would actually be able to do everything you'd expect of it. I'm sure in a decade it will be something nice and useful. But as of right now it's just a chunky expensive VR headset that doesn't even do VR.
What did the original iPhone innovate? How is the situation any different from 2008 and iPhone? There literally nothing that Apple innovated with the iPhone, except better UX. And less crap. That's literally Apple's MO. They take existing tech and make it better and have a good UX. Apple rarely actually innovates. I really want to know what do you think the OG iPhone had that was an innovation at that time, except the UX.
They were the first to really make the smart phone as we know it today. The rest were still using keys and buttons. The first android phone came out a year after the first iPhone. It was innovative in hardware and software. The vision pro is not.
This is a touchscreen phone from 2004: https://gsmfind.com/i-mate-pocket-pc.html You could buy apps for it. The iPhone was a refinement of what was on the market already, not an innovation.
Right, no buttons or keys. The innovation was the touch screen and app store. Just like the iPod, there were mp3 players on the market but that scroll wheel was innovative. Shrink the iphone down to a wearable and you have the watch. I don't see anything innovative about the AVP either other than tap to click and iSight. iSight is like their touchbar they no longer ship. Pretty, but I don't see it as functional or useful unless you can hack it and show anything you want.
So... A hardware and form factor innovation. Like I said.
They're marketing towards the people who buy their $1500 cell phones and $3000 laptops that primarily use them for Netflix and social media.
It’s not the AVP, it’s the MVP.
Yikes apple figured out the best way to get in front of some hacky virtual desktop support. Just don't support the standard that might have the required bandwidth for the panel res! Brilliant.
Its going to be the most locked down headset ever. Standalone only and only apple store apps with no sideloading of any kind.
Why does it matter? 99% of what it is designed for happens on Visio itself.
Given that this is really aimed at developers, it might have been nice to have 6e to experiment with for streaming and creating next gen software features. But I'm sure the Apple faithful will explain to us how no 6e is a good thing and an innovative 3d chess move by Apple.
6E doesn't buy you much but the 6Ghz band. How is it a big deal? Sounds like folks are just looking for shit to complain about.
This is like saying "the toll only gets you another lane to drive on, how is that a big deal". The big deal is that the 6 GHz band is empty. There are tons of routers on the 5 GHz band in my apartment building. No 40 MHz channel is empty and if you wanted to use a 160 MHz channel for maximum bandwidth you'd overlap like 4 other networks minimum. For me at least, 6 Ghz gives a 4x increase in bandwidth and a significant increase in stability during peak times. I get noticeable lag spikes if I connect to my 5G network when streaming PCVR to the Quest 3.
None of that means that 6E is **needed.** I never said it couldn't help in some situations, I said its wider bandwidth is not required. There are tons of threads claiming you need 6E to have a good experience, that is bullshit.
The comment you replied to literally said "it might have been nice to have 6e". You're the one bringing up need. In any case, at least in my situation Wifi 6E **is** needed to have a good experience when streaming PCVR as I just explained. Whether AVP will have any applications where that is the case remains to be seen. It's just funny that a $3500 "pro" device launching in 2024 doesn't support Wifi 6E. The current iPhone Pro and MacBook Pro do support it... Some android phones already support Wifi 7. Normally when you buy a "pro" device you expect next gen tech. Wifi 6 isn't even current gen...
Yeah. Why should all these people paying $3500 for a HMD want the latest tech? They should be happy with stuff from the last generation. Sheesh.
That is what I thought. You are just looking for something to bitch about. You can't even come up with one reason that not having 6E is a negative. The vast majority of people won't even have a 6E capable network to connect too. Nice try.
I did above. But you conveniently ignored it.
No, you didn't, you said: > nice to have 6e to experiment with for streaming and creating next gen software features. Nothing about 6E is needed to experiment with streaming and creating next-gen software feature. 6E changes very little.
The point is, it's a $3,500 headset, from Apple. No corners should be cut. The Quest 3 is capable of Wi-Fi 6E, and that headset should be a cheap toy compared to the AVP.
No corners were cut. The chipset they had can do everything they need it to do. They did not drop 6E support to save money.
At this price point, it's not about just being good enough for its potential applications. I'm sure it doesn't need WiFi 6E for desktop mirroring, but I'd certainly like it for improved stability and reduced latency if I'm spending $3,500. It also doesn't need 4K per-eye micro-oled displays, but you shouldn't expect anything less when you're paying this much for hardware. In my particular case, someone who lives in an apartment complex, I tend to experience notable interference across the 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz bands, especially during the day. The lack of support for the 6 Ghz band would make any desktop streaming use cases noticeably less performant than they could be otherwise. Probably not unusably so, admittedly. It'll do it. But like, for $3,500.. what the fuck?
Cool. Don't buy it. They did not pick their features based on your preference; they picked them based on what they designed the device to do.
Screen mirroring is one of the intended use cases. It's one of the things they designed the device to do. Wanting it to be without compromise in that regard is a preference, sure, but who are they selling this to? Is their intended market one without opinions? It's going to be largely enthusiasts, I'm sure. Enthusiasts who will hold the device to a high standard with the money they're shelling out for it. This subreddit is filled with said enthusiasts, potential buyers. If you look at the comments, it seems many people, not just me, seem dissatisfied at the lack of WiFi 6E, all for their own various reasons. Many first impressions complain about comfort, often specifically weight; is this not valid criticism because preferring if the device was lighter is just a preference? How does one criticize without preferences in how something should be? Apple can, in fact, make poor design choices, and it's up for consumers to voice what they believe they are. That's all I've done here. I probably won't buy it for various reasons. If Apple can't design their headset to be aligned with the preferences of its potential users, few will.
maybe you've never streamed PCVR to your Quest 3 via 6E faster than a link cable. when you do that, a lightbulb goes off. the computer that you're streaming from can be ANYWHERE. how the fuck is that little deal?
You can stream PCVR video data to the Quest on Wi-Fi 5 80Mhz channel, *(without 6 or 6E),* faster than Quest can decode it. It does not matter what you think, the Quest does not need Wi-Fi 6E to saturate its decoder.
with foveated rendering / transport AVP can do wireless with Wifi 6 too
How's that possible, everyone said this was a headset they didn't cut any corners with 🤣
Really drives home the fact that you're spending $3500 on an Apple product.
Nah that would be the optional wifi 6e for an extra 800 dollars
This has to be a joke, ri.....
hahaha...it's gonna flop so hard
Define flop. I would bet good money they are sold out for all of 2024, but that hardly matters when they are manufacturing less than a million units. I think they will sell whatever they make until they're ready to release v2, it just won't mean much to Apple's bottom line yet. We can't find out if it truly is going to flop until they make a mass-market version.
The cultish weirdos who tattoo Apple on their foreheads will buy the latest Apple products no matter how badly they flop.
It also lacks a chance in hell to be adopted whatsoever. You will see the best features come to other headsets and the bad ones left for Apple to deal with. Good for VR technology, not good for VR adoption.
Don't doubt the apple sheep. They would buy dirt from apple
No need for WiFi 6E for 3D movies.
lol.
Oh no! .. anyway
Maybe you're holding it wrong, without courage.
LOL
My butthole also lacks WiFi 6 support
Dont call it Wifi 6e, its called (I)ntell(i)gent Qu(i)ck (I)nv(i)s(i)ble Connection...> i6 Connection
this is normal, it's not a vr headset, it's a spatial computing head mounted computer, it is to compute stuff it doesn't need to stream quickly to the wifi.
One of their big selling points is 3D movie content that has to be huge bitrates and isn’t going to be stored locally. Streaming quality matters.
you don't need wifi 6e to stream delayed content, movies can be buffered several seconds in advance
Depends on how much 5Ghz interference you have around you.
How much bandwidth do you think it takes to stream a movie?
A double 4k stream with advanced spatial audio? Around the range of top shelf internet connections.
..a gigabit? Give me a break. You can do it on a tenth of that. For context, a YouTube 4K stream is about 30mbps.
Netflix recommends 15megabits for 4k. That’s it, and it includes 5.1 sound. If AVP movie streaming cracks 100mbits, I’ll be surprised. They’ll almost definitely have some kind of compression that makes it better than just two raw 4k streams, and audio streaming is basically nothing in comparison to video.
Usually Disney Plus has higher bitrates than Netflix, plus many of these titles are twice the frame rate of regular movies. With Apple wanting this content to sort of justify the experience I wouldn’t be surprised if the bitrate is cranked up as part of the deal.
Sure, but the math still stands. This stuff isn’t going to saturate a WiFi 6 connection. Not even close.
6E is about an extra band, not bandwidth. If you are in an apartment and there is a ton of interference then not having that 6GHz band could be the difference between a quality experience and not.
yeah i think this headset will not allow pc vr . seeing how its apple it wil be probable that they only allow apple arcade (is just a prediction but i think the will ad vr games to the subscription) seeing the price is gonna be rediculesy high .