Who else thinks it should be called “m1” instead of “8k”?


M1 to me sounds badass and legit for a product.


I believe that M1 stands for Mass Product v1.
Could be wrong, we could end up with the M4 or M5 hardware if they keep working on it.

So… :neutral_face:




Nah, it stands for middle finger 1= ONE.


How about…

Pimax 8k



Does the name really matter that much? I think the name Pimax 8K has already become a brand that most ppl recognise, so from a marketing perspective it would just be stupid to change the name now, so close to release.

The 8K-confusion about it not being “true 8K resolution” is a mess indeed, but personally I can’t understand why ppl see this as a huge problem. Its 2x4k panels, align them horisontally and u get 8k (8000) pixels in a row (well almost at least…7600 something). Simple marketing term, nothing wrong with that if u ask me.

No its not ‘real 8K’ in TV standards as it would need close to 4000 vertical res totally, but no matter what, its still 8K pixels totally rendered horisontally. I know its a bit misleading if you are a tech-guy, but is this really crucial to the big masses? Most ppl out there have still no clue about the difference between 1080p and 4k, and even less about real 8K.

Let the Pimax team call it whatever they prefer, after all its their own decision and not ours.

Also, the confusion itself is not a big issue compared to the negativity from sceptics, using the 8K-name as the first thing to whine about when the headset is even mentioned.
Say something good about the Pimax 8K in public and you will instantly get bashed by 10 trolls saying “- gaah its not true 8k”. Well, so what? :slight_smile:

Just because they don’t believe in the product, just because they didnt back it and just because they need to express their excuse why they think it will fail, they keep bashing that 8K name. And hilariously this seems to be the perfect subject to bring up in a Vive Pro vs Pimax 8K discussion, especially if the 8k sceptics feel threatened.

Btw, why is nobody whining about Microsoft’s hilarious “steal” of the term “Mixed Reality” and how come they still can use it as their primary marketing-thing when their headsets obviously have NOTHING to do with mixed reality, augmented reality or anything similar. Its plain and simple VR headsets just like Vive and Rift. And people still buy it… :wink: Well, maybe because people simply dont care about that false advertising Microsoft has made. They sell thousands of headsets anyway.

And one last thing… IF the 8K headset meets (at least) most of our expectations, IF it succeeds and IF it really works as we all hope for upon release - nobody will even care anymore about that 8K name confusion. Those of u that care about resolution and FOV will for sure buy one and live happy ever after. 8K or not, dont forget the fact that this VR headset is using BY FAR the highest resolution panels of them all currently available hands down, no competition. Whenever u call it 8K, 6K, Horizon or even Pimax Pro :wink:

Let’s wait a few more moths until release, without taking any sudden unnecessary conclusions today.

Just my two cents


The point is, the journalists like Ben Lang are amongst that select group of techies who feel offended about their use of the 8K - that much, that they have to repeat it in almost any article they write about the 8K, and let it take up the first 2-3 para‘s. So in that sense it is a bad choice, because it apparently pushes a wrong button with these guys and they start any review with a mini-rant, setting the tone for the review.

Otherwise I agree with your view, and I guess at this stage it does make sense to stick to it and not change the name.


Who cares about Ben Lang and his opinion? He just a guy. As it was told already, everyone know what Pimax 8K is, it is too late to change it. Also, people will educate themselves and eventually will understand that they can’t came with TV standards to VR. Only first generation HMD are using 16:9, resulting to scuba mask effect, second generation HMD should have much wider aspect ratio. I’m sure that even Ben Lang would understand it eventually, if you value his opinion that much.


Simply because it is not true or it seems deceptive advertising.


Who cares about Ben Lang and his opinion?

A lot of people cares about what Road to VR says.

people will educate themselves and eventually will understand

That never happens.


In Pimax survey they call us “futurists”. By definition, it mean someone with vision and open mind. Such person should see where this “Road to VR” lead. And it lead to wider aspect ratios. I do not know what aspect ratios of VR sets in 5 years would be: 32:9, 28:9, or maybe 36:9 (4:1). But I know for sure, they wouldn’t be 16:9. So, if today some guy bubbling that Pimax8k is not 16:9, it only means that he have no vision, where “Road to VR” is going, and just limping behind. Then why futurists should care about his opinion? He will get where they are, when he will get there.

And regarding educating people, in the 5-7 years or so, guys would buy VR sets with screens something like 20Kx5K, and idea that they should be angry because it is not 16:9 would be ridiculous for them. It will come naturally, that VR is not TV, it is inevitably.


It’s not about the person Ben Lang, I used him as a representative of a group of people, actually of two groups of people:

  1. The tech-loving, knowledgeable experts: they use terms like 8K based on agreed definitions, and anyone who applies such term to his products while they in fact do not perform at that level will be massively called out for that by them.
    Imagine some car manufacturer calculated their new car’s horse power in a different way so that their calculation results in a higher number of horse power units, and then even used that number in the product name. Say, the new “Jaguar 400 HP”. And then, when looking closer, you notice that when they claim the motor of their new car provides a horse power of 400, in the traditional way of calculating it it would only have been 300 HP. You would think that is a bit dodgy and be tempted to say something about it, wouldn’t you.

  2. The critical but fair journalist: people who are reporting on new developments as their profession, and who are expected to provide insights and critical journalism beyond what the average Joe would immediately notice. They will be more critical by nature, and the good thing about that is, that when they are pleased with a product, chances are high that you will be too. I at least do not want to read raving reviews and then, when I decided to buy the product based on such reviews, find out it’s crap.

We could debate for ages whether it makes sense to apply the term 4K, 8K etc. where saying 1080p etc. is perhaps more concise, or whether it makes more sense to just count all pixels like with the photo sensors where you talk about mega pixel - but like it or not, 8K has been given a certain meaning in the community and Pimax did not apply it exactly as it should have been applied. No more, no less.


People are perfectly fine with one mile at sea is quite different from the one mile at the road. TV and VR are like apples and tomatoes, different things. Then why 8K should mean the same in the different worlds?


It doesn’t have to do with aspect ratios, but with knowingly using something that can cause confusion. Pimax marketing managers may be interested, but those who have to refer to the product don’t want to be associated with these practices, for what they put 8K quoted or indicate that it’s not really 8K but two 4K screens.

If it’s not changed, from now on it will always be like this; in 20 years, when someone remembers the “8K” there will be always a person who will say “Well, it was not really 8K, but…”


It have everything to do with aspect ratio. Aspect ratio is define resolution, and resolution is define aspect ratio. And no one will care about 16:9 for VR quite soon. And in 20 year, probably almost no one will even understand what the fuss was about Pimax 8K name.


I just imagined how conversation about VR history in 20 years would look like:
“And then was Pimax8K, first VR HMD with truly VR aspect ratio. We had 200 degree FOV with it! You know, we used scuba mask type VR’s with 16:9 screens and 110 degree FOV before that”
“WOW! 16:9? It must been horrible!”
“Well, it was. But we didn’t knew any better back then, so we were OK with it. In fact, when Pimax8K specs appeared, some guys were complaining that it is not 16:9 screen”
“But why? This make no sense at all!”
“Well, you know how some people are. They always complain, no matter what”


@Lehmen haha u are so right! I remember people whining about 16:9 when the first widescreen TVs were sold in local shops. 4:3 was the standard. Some people didnt like that wider view. And also people were complaining that a 32 inch widescreen 16:9 TV felt significantly smaller than a 32 inch 4:3 TV :slight_smile:

Today we laugh at the 4:3 aspect ratio…


Some people either don’t know or forget Pimax was not the first HMD manufacturer to use this marketing term. They’re just the only one who used it in the product name. The fact is it’s not completely incorrect, true you only see 4k in each eye but it’s 8k width of screens, period.


Who really cares what it’s called and really do people have nothing better to do?


“Pimax 8k” is fine with me.