Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
The Internet Apple

Apple Vision Pro Will Support WebXR For Fully Immersive Experiences In the Browser (ampproject.org) 56

Posted by BeauHD from the currently-behind-a-developer-toggle dept.
Ben Lang, writing for Road to VR: In a somewhat surprising move, Apple confirmed that Safari on Vision Pro will support WebXR. Prior to the reveal of the headset, it was an open question whether the company would entertain the idea of XR experiences through the browser, and even more so if the company would adopt the relatively new WebXR standard. But now Apple has confirmed that Safari on Vision Pro will indeed support WebXR. The company confirmed as much in its WWDC 2023 developer talk titled Meet Safari for Spatial Computing, in which the Apple explained the version of Safari running on Vision Pro is "truly is Safari with the same WebKit engine underneath, plus some thoughtful additions for [Vision Pro]."

Thanks to Safari on visionOS being a fully-featured version of the browser, existing websites should work exactly as expected, the company says. But to go beyond flat web pages, Safari on visionOS includes support for WebXR for immersive experriences and the new tag for 3D models. For the time being, WebXR capabilities on Safari for visionOS are still hidden through a developer toggle, but once enabled it will support the 'immersive-vr' session type, and the 'hand-tracking' feature for user input.

WebXR allows developers to build fully immersive content that can be delivered through a web browser. It's possible to create fully interactive VR games and experiences, like this Beat Saber clone, which can run across various headsets and browsers using the same code, just like a web page can render the same way between different devices and browsers. Apple plans to make WebXR a mainline feature in visionOS Safari after more time collaborating with the rest of the industry on the WebXR standard. With Apple now officially supporting WebXR, the standard can claim truly widespread support [...].
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Vision Pro Will Support WebXR For Fully Immersive Experiences In the Browser More

Apple Vision Pro Will Support WebXR For Fully Immersive Experiences In the Browser

Comments Filter:

  • Because pop ads weren't bad enough (Score:4, Insightful)

    by GrumpySteen ( 1250194 ) on Friday June 23, 2023 @07:39PM (#63627834)

    Now we'll get pop-out ads that literally block your entire field of vision!

    Hooray for progress!

  • I don't see this as making 'widespread support' when everyone else already supports webxr but I suppose it is notable because of the way they've fought open standards in their other products.

    • I don't see this as making 'widespread support' when everyone else already supports webxr but I suppose it is notable because of the way they've fought open standards in their other products.

      Name three.

      • If we are talking about "widely adopted standards" that Apple has pushed through the years that pretty much everyone thinks are beneficial that pop right into my mind;
        - HTML5 (They had an open letter saying Flash sucks, remember?)
        - OpenCL (You remember it came from Apple originally, yeah?)
        - Truetype Fonts (Yeah, you guys might be too young to remember this but TTF originates from Apple)

        And there's a lot more that they either created or helped push forward like USB-C, LLVM, CLANG and so forth.

        Apple has their

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by narcc ( 412956 )

          Naming a few open standards they did support doesn't change the fact that they've fought other open standards tooth and nail. Still, you're really stretching to make the claim that they 'give back'.

          HTML5? iOS Safari has consistently held back the web.

          TTF is not an open standard.

          USB-C? You've got to be kidding

          Their involvement in CLang/LLVM (they didn't start it) was more about getting the GPL out of their tool chain than anything else. That's about taking, not about giving back.

          • Naming a few open standards they did support doesn't change the fact that they've fought other open standards tooth and nail. Still, you're really stretching to make the claim that they 'give back'.

            HTML5? iOS Safari has consistently held back the web.

            TTF is not an open standard.

            USB-C? You've got to be kidding

            Their involvement in CLang/LLVM (they didn't start it) was more about getting the GPL out of their tool chain than anything else. That's about taking, not about giving back.

            So, IOW, you can't name three Standards that Apple actively opposed. Got it!

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by narcc ( 412956 )

              Having trouble reading? I named far more than just three, you piece of shit lying troll. Fuck off back to 8chan where your kind belong.

              • Having trouble reading? I named far more than just three, you piece of shit lying troll. Fuck off back to 8chan where your kind belong.

                You're an idiot.

                Seriously.

                Go back and read your posts.

        • If we are talking about "widely adopted standards" that Apple has pushed through the years that pretty much everyone thinks are beneficial that pop right into my mind;
          - HTML5 (They had an open letter saying Flash sucks, remember?)
          - OpenCL (You remember it came from Apple originally, yeah?)
          - Truetype Fonts (Yeah, you guys might be too young to remember this but TTF originates from Apple)

          And there's a lot more that they either created or helped push forward like USB-C, LLVM, CLANG and so forth.

          Apple has their downsides and they're certainly not "good" if you're on the isle that believes everything should be open or free but to complain that they don't give anything back is a downright lie.

          I already know Apple authored, participated in the Development of, and/or Endorsed, several Standards

          The OP was positing that Apple had a history of opposing/trying to block "Standards". I told him to "name three".

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by narcc ( 412956 )

        "Name three"... So you could only come up with two ways in which Apple has fought open standards? Let me help:

        - refusing to support RCS
        - ignoring various web standards
        - delaying support for various web standards for years, and then only offering partial support.
        - refusing to allow alternative browsers on iOS (so no one else can offer support either)
        - USB C (now on some iPads, still no iPhones)

        I tossed in some extras in case you wanted to combine everything web related.

        • USB-C on the other hand they adopted on their Macbooks almost before anyone else did and were one of the major forces pushing it.

        • "Name three"... So you could only come up with two ways in which Apple has fought open standards? Let me help:

          - refusing to support RCS
          - ignoring various web standards
          - delaying support for various web standards for years, and then only offering partial support.
          - refusing to allow alternative browsers on iOS (so no one else can offer support either)
          - USB C (now on some iPads, still no iPhones)

          I tossed in some extras in case you wanted to combine everything web related.

          Stating "Various web standards" is horseshit.

          They allow multiple browsers on Mobile Devices; just not multiple Renderers.

          USB-C? They were first, or among the first, to widely adopt USB-C and also Thunderbolt.

          Try again.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by narcc ( 412956 )

            Stating "Various web standards" is horseshit.

            Pathetic. There are far more than three just in that. Do you need me to explicitly name them for you? Can't use a search engine? Get real.

            just not multiple Renderers.

            Get a fucking clue. By doing so, they are actively holding back the web. You know this, which makes you a piece of shit lying troll.

            Try again.

            LOL! Cry harder, troll. You got just taken to school.

            • Stating "Various web standards" is horseshit.

              Pathetic. There are far more than three just in that. Do you need me to explicitly name them for you? Can't use a search engine? Get real.

              So, still can't name them, then. Got it!

              just not multiple Renderers.

              Get a fucking clue. By doing so, they are actively holding back the web. You know this, which makes you a piece of shit lying troll.

              So, Apple is singlehandedly "Holding back the web"? Riiight. . .

              Try again.

              LOL! Cry harder, troll. You got just taken to school.

              Certainly not by you. . .

  • I heard that's all the rage and will replace the web any day now...

  • Apple has announced that the potential #1 killer app category, porn, will not be allowed. So why the hell buy one of these things?

    And I say that has a hard core and long time Apple fan and shareholder.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by dgatwood ( 11270 )

      Apple has announced that the potential #1 killer app category, porn, will not be allowed.

      And how, on a device that supports 3D web content, do you think they'll be able to prevent it? I suspect that immersive porn will be the #1 most common use for WebXR.

      • The web isn't an app.

        • When Apple introduced the iPhone, the only apps you could add from anyone but Apple were webapps. This was a dumb idea and they soon implemented real apps and an app store. But today, most browsers can do a pretty good imitation of a real application. Ironically, Safari is pretty much the worst for that, but Apple could conceivably make improvements there.

          • When Apple introduced the iPhone, the only apps you could add from anyone but Apple were webapps. This was a dumb idea and they soon implemented real apps and an app store. But today, most browsers can do a pretty good imitation of a real application. Ironically, Safari is pretty much the worst for that, but Apple could conceivably make improvements there.

            Pretty much the only PWA-type Sites that up-to-date versions of Safari have trouble with are those that use non-Standard Tag(s)/Extension of same, or an incompatible Browser Extension being Required.

            Having said that, Apple does "Dailies" of Safari/Webkit; so, obviously, Improvement is a never-ending Project/Duty.

            Now as to how often these Improvements make it into an actual Update; that's quite another story. . .

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by narcc ( 412956 )

            the only apps you could add from anyone but Apple were webapps. This was a dumb idea

            It was only a terrible idea for Apple. It was great for users, even though it was a little too early.

            Safari is pretty much the worst for that, but Apple could conceivably make improvements there.

            Apple understands the danger, which is why they're crippling PWAs by refusing to support modern standards. A standard for apps that works across platforms is a serious threat. We wouldn't be stuck with this ridiculous duopoly if PWAs were common.

            today, most browsers can do a pretty good imitation of a real application.

            I don't think things weren't all that bad in the past either. I don't know anyone that used Palm's webOS at the time that had anything other the good things to

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by dgatwood ( 11270 )

              today, most browsers can do a pretty good imitation of a real application.

              I don't think things weren't all that bad in the past either. I don't know anyone that used Palm's webOS at the time that had anything other the good things to say about it.

              Prior to 2011, there was no WebGL, so usable games were pretty much a non-starter without dropping down to native code. Games in webOS were written as browser plugins.

        • The web isn't an app.

          No, it's a somewhat open-ended Relational Database with Data and Scripts jumbled together in some Clusterific, inefficient mess. The Browser traverses this vast, Separate-But-Connected "Soup". It IS "The App".

        • No but video players are apps and that covers 99% of the VR porn out there.

        • The web isn't an app.

          The web may not be an "app" but the web can deliver webXR porn [vrporn.com].

          WebXR allows for interaction [playcanvas.com] so how is it not an app?

      • Apple has announced that the potential #1 killer app category, porn, will not be allowed.

        And how, on a device that supports 3D web content, do you think they'll be able to prevent it? I suspect that immersive porn will be the #1 most common use for WebXR.

        Exactly!

  • Sounds like a do over of "Web VR"/VRML. "Walk though a virtual museum and look at Rembrants in a cyber wonderland!" except this held the public's interest for all of 5 minutes, forgotten, and the "virtual museum" became low tech Wikipedia and Google image searches. And yeah, I expect Web VR 2.0 (sorry) to be a jumpscare fest of sudden unwanted immersive ads. Pass.

    • VRML came too soon. At the time at which it was introduced, and thus had any currency, most home computers didn't have 3d accelerators. As well, most homes were still using dialup. It just wasn't realistic to have a decent experience.

      • VRML came too soon. At the time at which it was introduced, and thus had any currency, most home computers didn't have 3d accelerators. As well, most homes were still using dialup. It just wasn't realistic to have a decent experience.

        Precisely.

        The Spirit was Willing; but the Silicon was Weak!

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by narcc ( 412956 )

        I liked VRML. It was a good standard. Simple, consistent, and no XML in sight. Everything that X3D isn't.

  • God knows from their presentation it looks like they were launching hardware without apps or use cases, doomed to fail. Shit on Meta all you want at least their showcase focused on the content rather than the hardware. ... Shit content, but at least they understand you need a killer app to sell your hardware.

    • It's not releasing until next year and the SDK released yesterday.

      I had a quick play with it and it's very easy to build and test before the kit arrives.

      • So Apple launched a $3500 product on hopes and dreams? There's a reason all other companies in this space have a content first focus.

  • That some people will puke, and others don't want to spend $3500 to have to wear some big thing on their face.

Slashdot Top Deals

Truly simple systems... require infinite testing. -- Norman Augustine

Close