I’m actually typing this message in virtual desktop on my Quest 3. I just did some A/B again with this and the desktop in my AVP and I really think it’s mostly just the resolution and colors that make the AVP look way better when it comes to desktops and it’s not about ‘rendering’ as that article claims. I just clearly see pixels in the Q3 which I find really distracting, especially when it comes to desktop work. And the colors are way too dull for my taste. That being said, there IS one aspect here that’s better on the Q3 and that’s the motion blur. Reports claim that Apple introduced some blurring effect to hide the imperfections, I’m not sure if that’s true. But either way what IS true is that there’s pretty much no motion blur on the Q3 and it’s very noticable on my AVP when I move my head. But again, I wouldnt work in my Q3 unless I really needed to. And with my AVP it sometimes really tricks me into thinking that i’m actually looking at a real physical monitor. So what I mean is, people can make all kinds of statements about technical aspects but if in the end the AVP just looks way better, then isn’t that what it’s all about?
Zuck should first upgrade the resolution so that you won’t be staring at pixels anymore, then the colors so that it won’t look dull anymore and THEN come back with making some comparisons, which then might or might not make any sense. But right now it’s just miles behind and I find all those reports and statements just laughable when I’m actually staring at pixels on the Q3.
The answer is super simple imo: the topic and headline generate clicks.
I have never before discussed an HMD with so many people that have a very strong opinion about it without ever having used it as the AVP.
And that’s down to Apple and their brand appeal. People WANT to read and believe that their Pico 4/Quest3 is comparable to the AVP. Doesn’t matter that they aren’t.
Regardless of technical specification, what looks better in headset? That’s all that ultimately matters, because human eye and still camera aren’t equal by any means.
Not had the opportunity to try AVP yet, so I’ll assume Apple did some clever tricks to improve that all important human perception
Hahaha exactly this. But then again, I would probably be like that too I have always hated Apple. Mostly for selling stuff way too expensive and then having so much success with it, feels so unfair LOL. But damn the AVP is just REALLY good. Anyway getting a bit tired of defending the headset. If people want to hate it, without even having had one in their own hands, that’s fine. I mean I surely can relate to the Apple hatred. But nowadays I probably hate Google and Meta even more
I’m not singling Apple out every headset has its flaws. I wouldn’t buy any of them. I’m hanging on to the Pico4 until a worthy successor comes along. BSB has too much glare, Crystals too big, VR-1 too much for too little, Quest3 is just Meta, Just non of them get me excited or do what I want them to do for a price I want to pay taking into account the depreciation a voilatloty of the VR market.
I want a headset with no onboard compute. The size of the Pico4 with wider FOV at a price under 1k. Looking at Future HMDs it’s either Index2, BSB2, Pico4 v2 or even Quest Pro2 if it ticks all the boxes.
Karl’s pics were taken apart on Reddit. Standard problem with a lot ppl with TTL pics. His methods of capture is quite poor.
Similar FoV as an Index approx 110 wide and 90 vertical. Though strange won’t just disclose an est min to max value. As there is a max. Though maybe just wanting to ride a wave of folks who will believe it is higher than possible.
It should be possible to pull the rendered fov data from the AVP headset driver, assuming it works like other HMD in that respect.
I’m getting 109x109 on my Index measured in headset using developer Boll’s excellent Wimfov tool which locks the display as unwanted head movement tends to exaggerate field of view markers in steamVR test environments.
Personally have 63.5mm ipd with 0.5mm left offset and 1mm vertical offset, using 3d printed wide Index base and custom pu cushion
Something to consider is that Field of View is dynamic and not even constant from frame to frame whilst head in motion, Wimfov measures your own maximum fov rather than maximum rendered.
small adjustment of ipd to centre optical eyebox, and Z distance (lens depth/eye relief) depending on your physiology / craniofacial fit has noticeable consequences for both measurable and perceived field of view / stereo overlap.
Personally I’ve never had satisfactory through the lens camera shots compared viewing to directly with MK1 hairy eyeball
That’s super interesting to hear, I didn’t think ALVR was that good already on the AVP. I’ll hopefully be getting a lend of one soon to test so will be trying ALVR asap ha.
Honestly also haven’t even tried it yet, didnt really bother, just like you I figured it would not be that high quality. On the Quest3 I barely use SteamVR streaming for that same reason, I don’t like the visual impact it has. But probably need to try it LOL.
won’t just disclose an est min to max value. As there is a max. Though maybe just wanting to ride a wave of folks who will believe it is higher than possible.