Apple has shown that it’s getting serious about the VR on Mac with platform-spanning VR announcements crossing both hardware and software at last year’s WWDC event. With SteamVR and the Vive now up and running on MacOS, eyes turn to Oculus, but the company isn’t ready to commit.

Update (6/4/18): This week is Apple’s WWDC 2018 event and it’s been one year since the company announced that SteamVR (and Vive) support was coming to MacOS. Since then, the first Macs with VR Ready specifications have begun shipping, and external GPUs for modern Macs and MacBooks are now officially supported out of beta, allowing systems without a dedicated internal GPU to meet VR Ready specifications. And while there aren’t many supported games yet, SteamVR and the Vive on MacOS is now fully functional and gets updated in sync with its Windows counterpart.

Though Apple didn’t touch on VR during its keynote, at WWDC this week the company is hosting a developer session dedicated to the platform’s newest VR graphics capabilities, as well as a ‘lab’ session offering hands-on on guidance for developers building VR applications on MacOS.

Checking in with Oculus—which supported Mac early on but “paused” support for the OS in 2015—the company’s stance doesn’t seem to have changed in the last 12 months—a spokesperson for Oculus offered us the same response as last year: “Oculus is committed to bringing PC VR to as many people as possible, but no news on MacOS support at this time.”

Original Article (6/7/17):

The “Pause”

Once upon a time, back in the days of the DK1 and DK2 development kits, Rift support for MacOS (then called OS X) was alive and well. It wasn’t uncommon to see developers building and running VR applications on Apple computers. Then in mid-2015, the company “paused” their support of MacOS (and Linux) in order to focus on the impending launch of the consumer Rift headset with Windows as the only compatible platform.

The move made plenty of sense, not only because Windows is far and away the biggest PC platform for gaming, but especially because the minimum hardware Oculus was recommending for VR was not available from any Mac computer at that point. At the time the company said they planned to “get back to development for OS X and Linux but we don’t have a timeline.”

Vive and SteamVR on MacOS, What About Rift?

Photo courtesy Apple

Fast forward two years later to this week; Apple has made a slew of VR announcements including new computers that do indeed meet Oculus’ recommended hardware requirements. Additionally, the company announced that Valve is bringing SteamVR to MacOS, which will bring Vive support along with it. And while SteamVR supports the Rift on PC, it relies on elements of the Oculus PC SDK to function, which means Rift support on MacOS won’t be seen officially until Oculus is ready to commit to it.

For now, Oculus’ stance on Rift support for MacOS remains unchanged. When we asked the company for an update in light of this week’s Apple VR announcements, a spokesperson offered, “We’re committed to bringing PC VR to as many people as possible, but no news on MacOS support at this time.”

SEE ALSO
3 Moves Oculus is Borrowing from Apple's Marketing Playbook

Not If, But When (Probably)

Apple’s new iMac Pro (pictured), high-end iMac, and Macbooks equipped with external GPUs are the first computers from the company to be VR Ready | Photo courtesy Apple

Back in 2016, Oculus founder Palmer Luckey (who at the time was still with the company), said about VR support for Apple computers, “If they ever release a good computer we will [support Mac OSX].”

It seems inevitable that Oculus will support the Rift on MacOS, but the big question is when. It could still be a while yet.

Though you can finally buy an Apple computers that meets VR Ready specifications, it’s only some of their high-end devices—and the Apple high-end is ultra high-end for everyone else. With an estimated PC market share around 7.4%—and only the newest, high-end models of that 7.4% being VR Ready—it’s likely to take a long time before any significant number of VR end-users are using VR Ready Macs and iMacs.

At this particular moment in the VR industry, perhaps the more valuable addressable market of Apple users is developers. With one of the most successful app ecosystems in the world, Apple has attracted a large and loyal developer community. Supporting Rift on MacOS would mean easier access for Apple devotees to experiment with and ultimately build for VR; as long as Vive remains the only option for VR on Mac Oculus could be missing out on that unique developer population.

Competition in the Bigger Picture

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg highlights the company’s 10 year roadmap, with VR and AR as explicit goals. | Photo courtesy Facebook

The user and developer side is one way to look at it, but there’s also the grander scheme to consider as well. Oculus is owned by Facebook, which competes with Apple in a number of realms.

We know that Oculus is developing a standalone VR headset and has huge AR ambitions. Meanwhile, Apple is rumored to be working on their own VR and/or AR headsets—and just launched AR development software that will reach “hundreds of millions” of users on iOS devices—which would put the companies in direct competition in the high-risk realm of hardware. That’s just one example of potential broader competitive pressures which could inform Oculus’ commitment (or lack thereof) to MacOS.

Newsletter graphic

This article may contain affiliate links. If you click an affiliate link and buy a product we may receive a small commission which helps support the publication. More information.


Ben Lang
Ben is the world's most senior professional analyst solely dedicated to the XR industry, having founded Road to VR in 2011—a year before the Oculus Kickstarter sparked a resurgence that led to the modern XR landscape. He has authored more than 3,000 articles chronicling the evolution of the XR industry over more than a decade. With that unique perspective, Ben has been consistently recognized as one of the most influential voices in XR, giving keynotes and joining panel and podcast discussions at key industry events. He is a self-described "journalist and analyst, not evangelist."
  • Sam Illingworth

    Are they crazy!? The audience for Mac users ready to play VR games is bound to be huge! Why, owners of the new iMac Pro will probably number in the thousands (until they get caught in their cables and pull their iMacs off their desks)!

    • Sam Illingworth

      (Yes, that was sarcasm, and yes, I know the non-Pro 5K iMac is theoretically VR ready, though I question how much power it’ll have left over after rendering its own 5k display)

    • Andrew Jakobs

      Let’s not forget these systems that are capable are still a few months off before released, so Oculus still has time to make sure it will work before these systems are released. And even then, there won’t be many people buying an external GPU for their MacBook, or buy a new mac for VR only.. Personally I don’t think it will take them much time to make the current SDK work with the Mac.
      But ofcourse you were just joking ;)

      • Sam Illingworth

        I doubt they’ll bother, to be honest. I’m a Mac user myself but I have to have a Windows PC for games, and I don’t see that changing any time soon.

    • Sebastien Mathieu

      they won’t need cables…. because it won’t have ports :-)

  • Well, here’s hoping Oculus can get the Rift to work with Macs now too because that would help with sales of the system; otherwise Vive is just going to steamroll it now as more and more people see Vive/SteamVR as the way to go just because it’s getting more exposure and mindshare.

    • Get Schwifty!

      It’s pretty obvious that Apple didn’t care for Palmer’s comments, even though he was right (this might apply to quite a few things he has said that people didn’t like). Even corporations as collective wholes have feelings, and no doubt his bluntness in describing the inability of current Macs to support VR stung them a bit. Apple, since they like a closed ecosystem, also may not care for Oculus home, etc. which also plays a factor in how they see it existing on their hardware. I think ultimately they will do so.

      FWIW, I was heartened to walk through a major mall near me in the metro-Atlanta area and see an Oculus Rift demo setup smack dab in the middle of one of the wings with someone playing and people watching. I spoke with the guy running it for the Microsoft store it was outside of and no question this kind of ground floor, hands on exposure is what VR needs and a is a good play for Oculus. According to him it was definitely spiking interest. I think the big problem right now is still the fact we live unfortunately in a console led world. VR will fly when the headset, controllers and decent tracking units are an all in one box like consoles in the 70’s were and there is good content to go with it. Expecting average people to have a PC capable of supporting VR is still a significant stretch. Telling someone they need a $1500 PC and lay out another $698 or so is not going to fly in today’s world in the long term.

      We have a generation (Millennials) that are not as PC savvy as their predecessors (they generally are more tech dependent, not tech knowledgeable), and grew up using phones, tablets and consoles primarily and PC’s when they have to. Things are even grimmer for Gen-Z. Given all that, a PC-based solution is just not the way to go in the long haul, and that coming from someone who still feels the PC is superior all the way around but it’s the way the market goes.

      • rob

        I had fun on Saturday in London doing an experiment to see how many VR experiences I could find at retailers in the West End shopping area (centred around Oxford Street).

        I started with Oculus Rift (+Touch) at 12pm at John Lewis (an upmarket department store). Then found a Samsung brand store who offered a Gear VR 2 demo complete with industrial strength motion control chair. I moved onto a Gaming retailer, and paid £12 for 30 mins on PSVR (PS4Pro), then another £12 for 30 mins on the Vive trying out different apps. Quickly moved onto another retailer with a free Google Daydream demo, very cool. Then move Vive time, with a free demo of Space Pirate, Job Sim and Tiltbrush. Other VR experiences were on offer, although some had hardware issues, others a lack of trained staff, 1 retailer an air conditioning fault causing the HMD to fog up immediately!

        Overall, a very encouraging few hours and VR was literally everywhere…every cell phone retailer had a Daydream, Gear VR or similar on similar.

        Re: Macs. Anything that increases the user base can only benefit VR, especially if introducing wealthy creatives to VR, who may become invested and willing to invest ;)

        • Darshan

          Rob you are positive its good as apple enter the VR.

          Its good you tested many system, so which one you really liked? i have enjoyed DayDream , HTC Vive, Rift DK2 and Gear VR for me its was 1.HTC Vive, 2.Gear VR, 3.DayDream, 4. Rift DK2 never tried RIFT CV as it did not came to my nation or city so far.

          Only grip with Apple venture is they packed mediocre GPU, they are asking too much price for it on top of it.

      • Nimblerichman

        I totally agree with everything you are saying here! The new generation isn’t as tech savvy as the old one and they need things to be simpler and easier.

  • Justos

    Let’s be real, nobody is buying an imac and then saying ‘ i want VR too ‘. Mac owners are not gamers.

    Though this is good news overall, I would not expect a bigger install base overnight.

    • Get Schwifty!

      VR is about far more than gaming though… a LOT of applications will utilize AR/VR beyond gaming in multimedia and that is the target set I think.

    • David Herrington

      You are right. But Apple is mostly about looks and if Apple says something is worthwhile, then Elitists might be less skeptical about VR in general. This might make VR more fashionable and in turn help VR sales across the board.

      • Bryan Ischo

        Apple is mostly about looks if you don’t understand product features beyond what you look at. Do you?

        • David Herrington

          “Features” like Additional Cost…
          Yeah I own an iPhone because I got hooked into their infrastructure back when they first came out, but you can’t make me spend 2x what I should for a decent desktop.

          • Bryan Ischo

            So I guess the answer is ‘no’.

          • David Herrington

            So tell me about all these “product features” I’m missing out on that are worth 2x what I have paid.

          • Bryan Ischo

            Security and stability are big ones. My mom had a PC for years and suffered numerous problems that inevitably required me to fix them. You know, Windows destroying itself for one reason or another, it’s not at all uncommon. I finally got fed up and bought her a Mac mini. Number of problems in the six years since? ZERO. I’ve had similarly much better stability from my Macbook than I ever had with any PC running Windows. And I’m a software developer, I really, really know what the fuck I am doing, and Windows will fuck itself up now and then without provocation, it’s what it’s been good at for 20+ years now. Windows 10 is a bit better, but it’s also ridiculously bad from the ‘forced updates’ standpoint that cause my PC to take many minutes to boot nearly every time it boots as it installs updates that Microsoft has to push down because they still can’t get their shit together and create a secure OS. I consider an operating system that usually takes minutes to boot in 2017 on fast hardware somewhat fundamentally broken.

            There are many usability features in Mac OS X, I’m not going to bother listing them all. I’m pretty sure you’ll say they don’t matter anyway.

            Macbook hardware is very good. My Macbook Pro (2012) is head and shoulders above the three PC laptops I owned prior to it in terms of build quality.

            If you’re a software developer, the Apple software development environment is generally better than what’s on Windows, especially when it comes to documentation. Nobody, and I mean nobody, writes documentation as good as Apple.

            Also 2x is complete bullshit and you know it. It’s the kind of number that people with no clue throw out because they have, you know, no clue, and don’t actually even care to get a clue because doing so might disturb the comfortable mental box they’ve placed themselves in.

          • David Herrington

            I almost can’t believe you develop software from what you are saying…

            “Microsoft has to push down because they still can’t get their shit together and create a secure OS.”

            There is no such thing as a secure OS, as you as a developer SHOULD know. The main reason Windows has such an issue with security is because they hold the largest share of users on the planet. Let me ask you a question as a developer. Would you choose to develop a program on an OS with 88.7% (Windows) of the total user base or 9.6% (Mac). If you are like most other people you would pick the larger user base. The same thinking goes with hackers and phishers. Hence, more security issues.

            If you are a Grandma who only needs to use their computer for email then by all means you should get a Mac, because no self respecting hacker would try so hard for such a small fish.

            But, if you are a professional that needs to be compatible with the rest of the world and its programs and work with a budget then you get a Windows based PC. If you need custom programs you go straight to a Linux based system.

            I would show you a comparison for what you get on comparably spec’d PC’s vs Macs but its impossible to upgrade the graphics on a Mac. So you just have to stick with whatever they want to give you apparently. So instead I will compare solely on what is available from a Mac.

            2.3GHz dual-core 7th-generation Intel Core i5, Turbo Boost up to 3.6GHz
            8GB 2133MHz DDR4
            1TB Serial ATA Drive @ 5400 rpm

            Mac: $1,099.00
            https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/imac?product=MMQA2LL/A&step=config#

            PC: $449.99
            https://www.amazon.com/Acer-Desktop-i5-7400-Windows-TC-780-AMZKi5/dp/B01N5SXZY8/ref=pd_lpo_vtph_147_bs_t_2?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=9DN3DBF0PNG155GE6YP5
            Yes, the PC doesn’t come with a screen but for $200 you can get one that is comparable. Also this PC has a 2 TB hard drive while the Mac doesn’t which you could add about $200 for on the Mac side. Its as close as I care to get. Most people will get the point. You, as a fan boy, will probably not.

          • Bryan Ischo

            Nah, it’s because Microsoft went all NiH when they designed their “Next Technology” and ignored many of the lessons of the previous 30 years of operating system design. They created their own system that did not have good separation between user space and the operating system itself and have been trying desperately to fill the holes for 20 years now.

            If your argument made any sense, then we’d expect Mac OS to experience security issues at a rate of about 1/10 that of Windows. But in actuality it’s more like 1/1000 or less.

          • Jistuce

            “Security through obscurity” doesn’t actually work once you stop being obscure, though.

            And Apple’s managed to pass that threshold without developing good coding practices(and their adaptation of FreeBSD consisted of taking a secure OS and ripping out most of the security).

            The number of gaffes that come out of Apple-land are simply astonishing, ranging from “your password hint is your password” to “here is a system API explicitly designed for arbitrary applications to take root access without asking permission”, with a brief layover at “your music CD’s copy protection will erase your boot ROM”. Hell, at one point the largest botnet in the world ran exclusively on OSX.

            I’d call Apple products a lot of things, but “secure” is not one of them. They desperately need to put as much effort into making premium software as they do their hardware.

          • Bryan Ischo

            For each gaffe you could find from Apple, you will find 10 gaffes from Microsoft. For every insecure aspect to the Mac operating system, you will find 10 insecurities in Microsoft’s. If you haven’t been using both types of systems for 30 years, you might not be able to make that comparison. I have and I can.

          • Jistuce

            The largest screwups I’ve seen have come from Apple.

            MS has never offered me my password in plain text in response to my saying I don’t know it. And while they still struggle with convincing people to not run their systems as the system administrator, they’ve also never implemented an API designed intentionally to allow applications to silently bypass the protections afforded by not running in godmode.

            Apple’s security track record is PRETTY GODDAMN AWFUL, and doesn’t appear to be due to back-compatibility concessions or forgotten legacy code from twenty years ago, but rather sheer incompetence. And this is all made worse by the fact that they started with FreeBSD, which is one of the more secure OSes available. It takes a lot of work to start there and end up as bad as they have.

            The only saving grace is that they only have 8% of the PC OS market, so they’re not a primary OR secondary target. Not that that always helps(see “world’s largest botnet”). Hell, the “copy-protected CDs brick your machine” thing was ACCIDENTAL. The CDs weren’t even designed to do that, just to be unreadable in a computer.

            I also remember the complete fiasco that was the OSX launch, where large swaths of daily usage features were completely unimplemented in what was allegedly a complete, retail-ready product. And how it somehow managed to be LESS stable than the raging dumpster fire known as MacOS 9, which was a feat in and of itself.

            I’ve never seen any evidence that Apple actually makes a better OS than anyone at all. In spite of that, I was still sad when they retired the PowerMacintosh architecture for “yet another IBM PC clone”, because they were the last holdouts of the platform wars and it was a shame to see that end.

          • Get Schwifty!

            They are more secure because due to the lower adoption rate of Apple devices the exploitation footprint is lower. Security-wise in terms of vulnerabilities, it’s been shown time and again that Linux/Unix, Windows, IOS/MacOS, etc. is more or less about equal. What is different overall is the exploitation footprint which follows adoption.

          • Jistuce

            Exactly. Security through obscurity.

      • Get Schwifty!

        Hmmm… while I cannot bear to use a Mac, I love my other IOS devices. I think the factor in favor of the Mac is OSX. Even though I don’t use it, I do believe the attitude that if you learn to use it you will despise Windows.

    • NooYawker

      Yep. I actually prefer macs over PCs but since I like gaming I don’t use a Mac.

    • Rasmus Hellgren

      I work for an architecture firm with 100+ employees, and we only use Macs for our work. Our push into VR (which is very useful in an architectural setting and not at all related to gaming for us) is hampered by the need to go through a separate PC. I for one would love a strong integration with VR and Oculus (which is the VR set brand we went for, for whatever reason).

  • J.C.

    Ehh, Oculus has made a parade of mistakes, but I’m not sure ignoring Macs is one of them. It’s a tiny market, compared to pcs, and tends to attract less tech-competent customers. Until VR headsets have zero set-up, don’t expect a Mac user to have the patience for it. Someone willing to spend $4000 on $900 of hardware isn’t exactly running on all cylinders.

    • daveinpublic

      A little salty, J.C. I’m not sure if a Mac user would ‘have the patience for it’, but I am sure that my favorable outlook of Oculus Rift would descend significantly if SteamVR continues to beat them in this space. If Steam has the resources, even though Apple may have reached out and helped, Facebook can definitely scrape together the resources, and them ignoring this market, however small, will have a big impact on my view of the company. And the opinion of the Mac market is important, because a very high percentage of them have the money to buy VR.

    • mrtexasfreedom

      J.C- The hardware that you must be referring to that Apple is pricing at $4000 must be the new iMac pro. 8-core xeon CPU with VEGA GPU powering a 5k display. I don’t think you’ll find a Dell or other PC manufacturer bundling that hardware for $900. In face, I think I read that an equivalent PC would cost $7000. The 8-core variant is the entry-level and it goes up to 18 cores.

      For clarity in this discussion, the new iMac Pro (yes, I think that’s an oxymoron) is targeted at content creation professionals. People who will create content for VR users such as 360 video in 4k. These professionals have been lacking the hardware and apps on the mac platform for tackling these workflows for a couple of years now. The iMac Pro is a stop-gap solution until they can develop and release a true mac pro in 2018.

      BTW- as for Macs attracting “less tech-competent customers,” I would encourage you to visit a tech trade show like DreamForce, re:Invent, or anything by Oracle or Microsoft. You’ll see tons of macbooks opened up on tables used by visiting tech professionals. My employer equips all employees with macbook pros and I would say most people are seasoned tech professionals earning more than $100k per year. Not true to your characterization of the mac market at all.

      • Darshan

        True mrtexasfreedom i also think iMaC pro components except GPU(which is really down grade even from GTX 1070 and is a poor choice by rest of the componenets) are expensive and may reach at $3000 approx other $1000 you just pay to Apple Inc. to build it and brand that white apple logo for you on it.

      • ogger151

        2016 Imac users where pissed when the GTX 1080 came out. A $6000 desktop that you can’t upgrade the graphics card. And we all know you can build a PC with the same specs for half if not a third the money. Compare and Alienware laptop (Dell) price and specs with a Mac Pro. Apple can’t compete.

    • NooYawker

      You should watch the documentary on the building of the Mars rover. The engineers use Macs. Nothing says stupid like working for NASA I guess.

      • J.C.

        I install fiber for a living, and generally, the customers with Macs are technologically clueless. Just because part of NASA uses them (I guarantee you they aren’t used exclusively) doesn’t mean the GENERAL AUDIENCE for them isn’t in it for ease of use. It also doesn’t mean that EVERY Mac user is clueless, I’m just judging from what I’ve seen in general.

        I’m honestly surprised Apple isn’t re-branding a Vive, making it white and charging $1600 for it. Maybe in a year there will be an Apple VR headset, and it’ll undoubtedly look way more stylish. That might be a great thing for VR, currently all the headsets are clunky, pre-production-looking devices. Theirs won’t be cheap, but Apple’s target audience has never worried about hardware value.

        • NooYawker

          I’ve been in tech over 25 years and generally speaking everyone is technologically clueless.
          This isn’t Steve Jobs Apple where he tried to control every friggin’ facet of the business. A little openness and collaboration is beneficial for Apple.

        • Dobba

          I’m a Mac user of 27 years. I also built a PC for my HTC VIVE. I’m not technologically clueless but I guarantee to someone I probably am in some way shape or form. For every “technologically clueless” person out there using a Mac, there will be the same using a Windows PC.

          I used to work for the NHS (UK health service) working with some brilliant surgeons that were supremely clever in their fields of work. They had both Apple Macs and Windows PC’s but I would say they weren’t the best when it came to computers in general. A computer to them is just a tool as it should be for everyone.

          Drop the ‘Mac users buy them for fashion accesories’ line that’s been going on for ages. It makes you sound clueless and and someone that is trying to justify your own buying decision by putting down others that chose a different option.

  • daveinpublic

    This is a big move by Valve. Not only will this get them into the presence of a huge base of creatives that are already using Macs to create iPhone/iPad games, but it will give them the perception of cross-platform playability. I think this move is a heck of a lot stronger than many people realize.

    • Lucidfeuer

      No professional creative are using Mac anymore, it’s not 2012, wake-up.

      • JMB

        Speak for yourself. Pretty much all creative entities I work with from architects to marketing agencies are all using an Apple based environment.

        • Lucidfeuer

          You just spewed out an obvious lie to someone who works in the domain. Nobody does serious architecture on Macs anymore, but “marketing” or “community management” or “poster design” yes I do believe you. These are the only menial task I do with a Mac anymore, but I simply can’t do serious 3D, development and design on it just from a softwares and plugins standpoint.

          • Dobba

            Elitism is strong in this one.

            Architecture is not the only industry of ‘Professional Creatives’ out there. Maybe open your eyes a little to the world around you and realise there’s more to creative creation than architecture. Just because your little bubble equals ‘A’ doesn’t mean everyone else’s equals ‘A’.

  • Gamers, get over yourselves,… Pffrrttt ! There is so much more to AR/VR that most you Gamers can imagine.

  • Mike

    Clicked this article expecting to read about a British mother Oculus enthusiast. Disappointed to learn “Oculus mum” meant “Oculus is silent”.

    • Strawb77

      must say i was a bit bemused.
      i was expecting some kind of game- like `job simulator`, but with breast-feeding and nappy*-changing side quests.
      or something.
      if they had put the word `stays` in there it would have helped.

      * diapers, for our american friends.

      • Mike

        Haha, that would have been… interesting.

  • Dominic Cerisano

    You don’t need VR to see that Apple has hoisted itself by its own petard.
    But to really appreciate that imagery, you would need a Rift PC.

  • MarquisDeSang

    Oculus Go is the new iPhone. If you dont innovate, you will be left behind. Apple is now a company stuck on its past glory.

    • Laurence Nairne

      So the only reasons I can fathom as to why you are shoe-horning your love for the Oculus Go into every comment thread are:

      1. You’re a paid shill
      2. You’re deluded into exclusively using a single product
      3. You’re running some really inaccessible inside joke that nobody is getting

      • jj

        It’s number 3, he’s been trolling these woods for some times now and used to go by the name jean sebastion

  • disqus_pyGxIsHMlL

    Macs are neat. Macs are also a really terrible platform for graphics. Apple has been moving away from the professional market for a while now. The Powermac / Mac Pro used be the go to system for professionals working in multimedia but now not so much. Most have moved on to PC Workstations and opted out of the Trashcan once the 2012 Mac Pros were retired.
    The iMac Pro is alright but anything VR related is sure to cost you more to get started (eGPU’s yikes) and likely cause you more trouble in the end. The fast moving world of graphics and VR are and the slow to update Apple hardware refresh cycle is sure to leave you high and dry. J

  • Till Eulenspiegel

    John Carmack’s hatred for Steve Jobs has soured the their relationship with Apple.

  • impurekind

    At this point Rift really should be working on Macs too.

  • Oculus know that If Apple were truly committed to VR then they would stop faffing about and just offer AMD/NVidia GPU upgrades in their product line up. Simply supporting third party eGPU enclosures is just a half-way solution.

    And for the love of crumb cake, allow the GPU manufacturers to write drivers for their own hardware as the Apple model of keeping it all in-house creates several year delays on driver patches. That itself is anti-commitment.

  • jeff courtney

    Wonder Jobs was still around if they would be involved with vr currently ? We have to give them credit for the smartphone which included the gyroscope,in which we wouldn’t have vr without.Praise Jesus!

  • Lucidfeuer

    Mac is pretty much a dead platform for 3D, VR, Interactive, Simulation etc..: OpenGL & OpenCL Are Deprecated on Mac & iOS

    • Yeah just read about that. Apple don’t seem to like cross-platform and this will make it much harder for developers to support both platforms. Mac just took another step backwards for gamers, VR and the visual FX industries. Idiots.

      • Lucidfeuer

        Everywhere I’ve heard about Metal it’s been a failure: Blender tried and abandoned it’s integration (most other 3D softwares won’t even try), Square-Enix tried with the last Deus Ex and had nothing but problem over 3 years. In fact in the 3 years since it’s release only 30 games or so have been ported, not without problems.