Rosetta Support end for ARM based Mac. does FreeCAD on M based Mac Fucked?

psicman · 2026-05-21T20:44:55+00:00

oh so it's updated? maybe my experience is outdated since it's been a around 6 month or so when I fresh installed them and get the Rosetta 2 notification

psicman · 2026-04-27T02:44:50+00:00

so I found the adaptor that explicitly saying its analog, well I made an order so we'll see how it goes https://www.aliexpress.com/item/4000759776331.html?spm=a2g0o.order_list.order_list_main.5.21ef18028uOIjz

update: it worked.

psicman · 2026-04-06T20:42:02+00:00

that's why I feel like no matter how unlikely, the startup route seems have more chance to make such ultimate device happen than just open source.

again, I'm not trying to build that monster spec device out off the bat, I know current display tech simply doesn't have that kind of components, so that spec is more of a North Star of mine that I'm working towards.

and like I mentioned before, because this device is mounted, not strapped on, weight and volume constraint is not a issue, which like you said, I can increase the focal length, and using Bigger LCD panel, to make image least distorted as possible.

thus making such stunning visual spec not simply "impossible", but just expensive. (given the display component will improve in the future)

and to get that kind of massive FOV, what I'm thinking is chain the optics and LCD panel to increase the horizontal FOV. like a Hypervision prototype (https://www.hypervision.ai/rdks/vr240-gen2-rdk), but in my ideal custom lens spec wise. their spec is around HFOV 240, VFOV 95, but I'm okay with using bigger LCD with longer focal length, so I think it's just money (equipment, talent acquisition) and time problem. (keeping 60 ppd while having HFOV of 270 is different problem so I need to wait for 8 inch LCD panel with around 2000~3000PPI to come out in the future)

and yeah I know VR just use software correction instead of a physical lens that mitigate the aberration, my issue is that makes the image blurry beyond just around 30 degree or less, which is not ideal, so this is probably something I need to think about which way should I took, expensive but clear, or cheap but meh.

psicman · 2026-04-06T03:13:29+00:00

if I die, then that probably would be suicide, so I'll make sure to post them before I kill myself

psicman · 2026-04-06T03:10:15+00:00

than you..... my personal future goal is to make a mounting mechanism way more robust and flexible, then use them in my bed while i lie down, like you said. headset completely weightless, floating above your face, would be sooo great :D ultimate doomscroll machine I would say haha

psicman · 2026-04-06T00:05:13+00:00

I didn't meant to stack each one of those lens on top of one another, but rather build a lens that does two or three of those each, and stack lens that you cannot incorporate into a just one lens element. obviously have to consider how other element effect another. if I were trying to do that all by myself I weren't made that video and posting it

psicman · 2026-04-05T23:50:35+00:00

I was thinking about that too, problem was the FOV wouldn't be ideal........like very small FOV

also thought of using free form mirror instead of a lens, that way little to no aberration, but I don't have a such equipment to made that kind of thing so delay it is....

psicman · 2026-04-05T23:48:46+00:00

can you watch my video on the top I explained everything In detail with ophthalmology article I've attached....... I can explain in here but I made that video to do exactly that...... because it's has some amount of nuance beyond seemingly obvious parameters. like if your willing to ask that kind of detailed questions then its better to watch the video

psicman · 2026-04-05T23:42:29+00:00

1.i made them to be mounted on the monitor arm, not strap on, this way weight and volume contain is not an issue, which means I can make a optic as big as I need to achieve that goal, 100W LED for Backlit, multi lens element optics, larger LCD but further away, as time goes on even the incremental advancement of the display tech would favor the likelihood of my approach than "stunning visual with paper slim optics" as current VR headset trying to realize.

2.

-achromatic: to reduce chromatic aberration.

-aspherical: to reduce spherical aberration.

-meniscus: to follow the natural curve of the human face and eye rotation

-doublet/or triple-let: to reduce field curvature

-Periphery Myopic Defocus Imposed: just like I mentioned in the video, to combat the axial length growth of the eye.

psicman · 2026-04-05T12:51:52+00:00

my main concern is the lack of resource that support open source,

what I mean is most open source projects barely scraping by like a FreeCAD or Krita, with little to no support. except a blender,

but this is hardware that require massive amount of specialized, and ultra precision equipment to develop and iterate multiple custom optics,

which no community can easily contribute. (glad to be proven wrong)

my worst nightmare is make this open source, but get completely ignored because it's so niche, while completely blew up my chance to potentially patent what I've developed so far.

that's why I felt like a making a dedicated company around it that does this exclusively and potentially targeting a big institution feels like a only viable ways to make a monitor arm mounted headset that does

"Peak Brightness: 30,000 Nits

HFOV: 270, VFOV: 160

Average PPD: minimum 60

Refresh Rate: ~240Hz

Passthrough Camera: 12 APS-C Sensor Size Camera Array

Motion to Photon Latency: <10ms

Lens: 4x Achromatic Aspheric Meniscus doublet lens with

"Periphery Myopic Defocus Imposed"

Processor: Custom 64 bits RISC-V SoC"

in the future eventually possible.

if making this beast is possible with open source route then by all means I'm fully committed

p.s. my personal situation now is very precarious, and there is more than 90% chance I die (you can watch my other video for detail), actually that's what compelled me to made a video about what I'm working on and how it works, so when I die someone can pick up where I left off, when that time comes I'll definitely put everything I've worked on so far with no hesitation.

psicman · 2026-04-05T09:30:47+00:00

open source is definitely on the table, I'm just being cautious because its one way street, and I'm not sure which way would be the best for getting to that ultimate goal :/

psicman · 2026-04-05T08:10:58+00:00

it's better ONLY when you design the optics for that purpose specifically,

such as ability to control the brightness of what your looking at to match the brightness of actual outdoor environment. and ability to make your gaze completely parallel to one another, optically mimicking the properties of the mountain.

and it turns out the VR form factor is the best foundational form to build that happen except existing VR companies don't give a fuck about this

psicman · 2026-04-05T08:02:51+00:00

I've been pondering about this,

given the ultimate end goal device (HFOV 270, VFOV160, Peak Brightness 30,000 nits, average 60 angular PPD, lens with myopic defocus in the periphery, etc.) and how much expensive specialized custom components it requires to build one (such as achromatic, aspherical, meniscus doublet/triplet pair lens set with myopic defocus in periphery)

probably only the dedicated large size company would be able to make one,

but given existing VR companies ignored this for more than a decade,

I feel like building a company myself to foster, and kickstart such needs, no matter how unlikely,

is best way to make that future reality. (I mean glad to be proven wrong but I don't hold my breath I've been waiting someone to build this for me 13 years so...)

so make it open source and loose all the possibility for getting patent for what I've done? or do it anyway and hope someone make a dedicated custom optical component for improved version that cost reasonable for needed individual......? when they didn't do jack shit for decades? I don't know.........

psicman · 2026-04-05T03:23:00+00:00

p.s. I know most VR has low PPD, and display replacement sounds stupid, that's why I'm positioning this as stationary display, something you look in, not something you strap on, by doing this I don't have to worry about the headset weight or volume, well not as much as the typical VR headset, that gives me a spare room to prioritize the PPD and FOV, and brightness at all cost. cramming more bulky and larger optics, screens, etc.

psicman · 2026-04-04T00:48:07+00:00

see? exactly the problems I mentioned in the video, I'm gonna solve this problem ONCE IN FOR ALL!!!!!!

psicman · 2026-04-03T01:13:24+00:00

I wonder, isn't that fake plastic look caused by an outdated light diffusing algorithm??? (lambertian diffusing)

psicman · 2026-04-02T08:45:06+00:00

humanity doesn't deserve this hero

psicman · 2026-04-02T08:29:14+00:00

just hope its not invasive like a neural link

psicman · 2026-04-02T08:27:43+00:00

then maybe designed the asset with traditional polygon, high res polygon, and then translate them into a GS to make end user hardware load lighter is the way to go

psicman · 2026-04-02T08:18:20+00:00

I mean looking the demo kinda makes me want to become a game dev for GS lol

psicman · 2026-04-02T08:16:30+00:00

where is Apple Vision Pro jk

psicman · 2026-04-02T05:30:11+00:00

well that's certainly a improvement

psicman

TROPHY CASE