Not really. Meta has been dominating the market lately, it seems like people really only care about the price. And with the quality of the Quest 3, AVP was doomed from the start.
Who cares about the market? Nobody who matters wants to buy hardware that’s locked to a walled garden that will inevitably be rendered useless as soon as it stops being profitable.
This post is inherently about the market and Apple’s failed attempt at making a viable product. Which apple no doubt thought they could steal market share from Meta in the VR/AR space. Different people want different headsets and most people want the cheapest plug and play option. That’s why the #2 headsets are strictly PC periferals.
Indeed, and yet for some reason you’re still talking about the business model and not the obviously-deficient hardware and software it mistakenly assumed would be profitable.
Or just some kind of displaylink thing so you can use it to AR any kind of monitor input without it being Mac only. Instead of buying monitors you just buy one of those and you’d have unlimited monitors.
What copium? All I’m saying is Valve can make it happen. Apple is not preventing it.
Why is that so difficult to understand?
How does this help one feel better about the available software on the Vision Pro? Citing the fact they already have Steam link is just proving Valve isn’t barred from the platform.
I wouldn’t have made a comment if the original comment was “Valve should release a native Steam link for the Vision Pro with SteamVR support.”
My whole point is it was an uninformed and misguided comment.
The Vision Pro lacks software and users. It needs controllers for better gaming. It’s a device without an audience right now. It’s too expensive for your average consumer. I agree with all that.
I mean think it is extremely clear what I mean, it doesn’t have native support. I have to buy an iPad which is a second device for no reason at all and then even then it still doesn’t work without getting a third party application.
You are stretching the definition of “allow” somewhat don’t you think?
I mean think it is extremely clear what I mean, it doesn’t have native support. I have to buy an iPad which is a second device for no reason at all and then even then it still doesn’t work without getting a third party application.
You don’t have to buy an iPad. You’re also ignorant of the details. Just like Kayzee above.
You are stretching the definition of “allow” somewhat don’t you think?
In what way? There is no evidence that Valve is being prevented by Apple from releasing a Vision Pro native version of Steam Link. The app would be just like the app Valve has on Meta’s Oculus Quest.
Currently the iPadOS version of the Steam Link app can be ran on VisionOS. But it does not stream SteamVR. Only standard games.
By allow I think they meant first party support to some degree. I don’t want to have to use an iPad cluge with potential latency issues to use my $3.5k vr headset. It needs to be able to connect directly to a PC and play directly from Steam VR with no latency.
Also no, I hadn’t heard of ALVR. Very cool.
Still latency is an issue there, not to mention re-encoding the already demanding rendering task of highres high frame rate VR.
It’s still nonsense to say Apple is blocking Valve from doing this. Steam Link isn’t blocked. And there is no evidence Apple blocks immersive streaming apps for playing PCVR titles.
The suggestion that “some sort of Steam link” meant specifically a cable is stretching things when “Steam link” literally means either a discontinued hardware box, or an app that is available on multiple platforms, including VisionOS, tvOS, and iOS.
Streaming from Steam literally works on every Apple platform that has apps other than the Watch. And this is with Valve’s own software.
I’m not here to defend streaming immersive VR. I think it sucks no matter the option you use. I always see the compression artifacts, etc.
But the fact is, the majority of people when given an option to use a cable vs wireless streaming, they choose wireless streaming. I play VRChat on PC exclusively, and this is what I hear from other PCVR users. I’ll rant about the latency and compression, and they will complain about cables.
The fact stands that the OP was claiming something was blocked by Apple, without knowing the details about it. And then you came in to stretch the idea to be a DisplayPort connection over USB-C.
I don’t think that’s a stretch from OCs comment… Frankly using a cable is a fundamental thing even most wireless headsets can do and the Apple vision pro can’t. (AFAIK)
I just want to play racing sims at the highest fidelity possible but without any cluges. I.e. I would probably have bought a vision pro if I could use it like the valve index.
So my take on his comment was: yeah, I agree. It’s not an open system and fundamentally that doomed it to being adopted by a broader audience.
literally all apple had to do was allow some sort of steam link functionality, and those puppies would have flown off the shelves
Would they? Ridiculous price combined with ridiculous look.
Do you find the Oculus Quest the epitome of fashion then?
Apple’s whole thing is to spin their products into fashion accessories.
Not really. Meta has been dominating the market lately, it seems like people really only care about the price. And with the quality of the Quest 3, AVP was doomed from the start.
Who cares about the market? Nobody who matters wants to buy hardware that’s locked to a walled garden that will inevitably be rendered useless as soon as it stops being profitable.
This post is inherently about the market and Apple’s failed attempt at making a viable product. Which apple no doubt thought they could steal market share from Meta in the VR/AR space. Different people want different headsets and most people want the cheapest plug and play option. That’s why the #2 headsets are strictly PC periferals.
That’s been Apple’s very successful business model since the beginning. That ain’t it.
Clearly the business model alone isn’t enough, they’ve had plenty of duds like this
Of course not but that’s what you pointed at
Indeed, and yet for some reason you’re still talking about the business model and not the obviously-deficient hardware and software it mistakenly assumed would be profitable.
Bruh…you did that 🤷
Bruh, all I said was that I’m not in the target audience and that I don’t respect the preferences of those who are…
You brought up the business model as if to suggest that my lack of interest in its’ profitability was some kind of moral or intellectual failure.
Or just some kind of displaylink thing so you can use it to AR any kind of monitor input without it being Mac only. Instead of buying monitors you just buy one of those and you’d have unlimited monitors.
Exactly my thoughts. Good AR glasses will be the future someday.
Can’t you run normal iOS apps on VR?
Allow? Like they disallow it?
Have you heard of ALVR?
The steam link iPad app runs fine. Works with a controller too.
What was your point again?
Oof. Let me have a whiff of that copium you’re inhaling because that shit must be strong as hell
What copium? All I’m saying is Valve can make it happen. Apple is not preventing it.
Why is that so difficult to understand?
How does this help one feel better about the available software on the Vision Pro? Citing the fact they already have Steam link is just proving Valve isn’t barred from the platform.
I wouldn’t have made a comment if the original comment was “Valve should release a native Steam link for the Vision Pro with SteamVR support.”
My whole point is it was an uninformed and misguided comment.
The Vision Pro lacks software and users. It needs controllers for better gaming. It’s a device without an audience right now. It’s too expensive for your average consumer. I agree with all that.
But Apple isn’t blocking Steam link.
I still have to buy an additional product to make my 3.5k headset work.
What do you mean?
I mean think it is extremely clear what I mean, it doesn’t have native support. I have to buy an iPad which is a second device for no reason at all and then even then it still doesn’t work without getting a third party application.
You are stretching the definition of “allow” somewhat don’t you think?
You don’t have to buy an iPad. You’re also ignorant of the details. Just like Kayzee above.
In what way? There is no evidence that Valve is being prevented by Apple from releasing a Vision Pro native version of Steam Link. The app would be just like the app Valve has on Meta’s Oculus Quest.
Currently the iPadOS version of the Steam Link app can be ran on VisionOS. But it does not stream SteamVR. Only standard games.
By allow I think they meant first party support to some degree. I don’t want to have to use an iPad cluge with potential latency issues to use my $3.5k vr headset. It needs to be able to connect directly to a PC and play directly from Steam VR with no latency.
Also no, I hadn’t heard of ALVR. Very cool. Still latency is an issue there, not to mention re-encoding the already demanding rendering task of highres high frame rate VR.
It’s still nonsense to say Apple is blocking Valve from doing this. Steam Link isn’t blocked. And there is no evidence Apple blocks immersive streaming apps for playing PCVR titles.
The suggestion that “some sort of Steam link” meant specifically a cable is stretching things when “Steam link” literally means either a discontinued hardware box, or an app that is available on multiple platforms, including VisionOS, tvOS, and iOS.
Streaming from Steam literally works on every Apple platform that has apps other than the Watch. And this is with Valve’s own software.
I’m not here to defend streaming immersive VR. I think it sucks no matter the option you use. I always see the compression artifacts, etc.
But the fact is, the majority of people when given an option to use a cable vs wireless streaming, they choose wireless streaming. I play VRChat on PC exclusively, and this is what I hear from other PCVR users. I’ll rant about the latency and compression, and they will complain about cables.
The fact stands that the OP was claiming something was blocked by Apple, without knowing the details about it. And then you came in to stretch the idea to be a DisplayPort connection over USB-C.
I don’t think that’s a stretch from OCs comment… Frankly using a cable is a fundamental thing even most wireless headsets can do and the Apple vision pro can’t. (AFAIK)
I just want to play racing sims at the highest fidelity possible but without any cluges. I.e. I would probably have bought a vision pro if I could use it like the valve index.
So my take on his comment was: yeah, I agree. It’s not an open system and fundamentally that doomed it to being adopted by a broader audience.