Sponsored:
Browsing without a VPN is like mailing your passwords on a postcard. Hackers, advertisers, and your ISP are tracking every click.
PureVPN wraps your data in military-grade encryption, making you completely invisible to snoops while unlocking restricted content worldwide. Don’t leave your digital life exposed for another second.
Reclaim your online privacy. Click here to secure your connection now!
Author: Thom Holwerda
Source
This article is a partial-rebuttal/partial-confirmation to KGOnTech’s Apple Vision Pro’s Optics Blurrier & Lower Contrast than Meta Quest 3, prompted by RoadToVR’s Quest 3 Has Higher Effective Resolution, So Why Does Everyone Think Vision Pro Looks Best? which cites KGOnTech. I suppose it’s a bit late, but it’s taken me a while to really get a good intuition for how visionOS renders frames, because there is a metric shitton of nuance and it’s unfortunately very, very easy to make mistakes when trying to quantify things. This post is divided into two parts: Variable Rasterization Rate (VRR) and how visionOS renders frames (including hard numbers for internal render resolutions and such), and a testbench demonstrating why photographing the visual clarity of Vision Pro (and probably future eye tracked headsets) may be more difficult than a DSLR pointed into the lenses (and how to detect the pitfalls if you try!). ↫ Shiny Quagsire I did it. I think I managed to find an article that isn’t just over my head, but also over most of your heads. How’s that feel?