04-12-2019 02:53 PM
04-16-2019 03:23 AM
04-16-2019 03:39 AM
04-16-2019 03:45 AM
04-16-2019 03:47 AM
04-16-2019 03:48 AM
DaftnDirect said:
No problem bigmike, I hope I was careful not to target anyone with my analogy thing, it was really a criticism of the analogy not of anyone... unfortunately my post came straight after yours which was just coincidence as I think you're the least likely to make poor analogies.
Yeah half dome is a problem for Oculus as much as a solution depending on how things eventually turn out!
04-16-2019 03:57 AM
DaftnDirect said:
I've mentioned that analogies aren't great for comparing to VR but cars really are the worst!
Car manufactures can produce whatever they like in the knowledge that the infrastructure is there... the roads are there... the petrol stations are there (sorry gas stations). Every car manufacturer is free to choose their target customer, safe in the knowledge that they can sell mass-market or small scale performance/specialist vehicles, able to make a profit on every vehicle they sell, without concerning themselves with the long term success of the automobile industry/road network ecosystem as a whole. The oil companies all make huge profits, road construction and maintenance is publicly funded.
EV is the only car analogy that comes close. Tesla had to build a network of chargers to plicate potential buyer's range anxiety. But even then, the only chance Tesla has of surviving is to make an affordable non-performance EV which they're trying to do. As of the end of 2018, after 10 years, the company has a net loss of $1 billion.
But even then this analogy is pointless, the infrastructure of roads isn't something Telsa has to contribute to. Regardless of Telsa's business plan, climate change is driving everyone to move to EV anyway. Governments are banning ICE vehicles from major cities and putting rules in place to ban them totally in the future.
VR headset manufacturers have none of these external influences. They have to grow the ecosystems themselves. They can't target anyone without there being a long-term business case that makes sense.
04-16-2019 04:05 AM
bigmike20vt said:to be completely honest i think it is fair to suggest we have the vive to thank for the tracking we have with the rift. I do fully believe the rift WAS meant to be primarily a forward facing 270 degree motion controller tracked device.
inovator said:How can you say he has no clue and posts on faith. That may be true with the index. Nobody has tried that. But we have seen quite a few hands on with the rift s and quest.
04-16-2019 04:10 AM
04-16-2019 04:14 AM
Mradr said:Most of what VR is already built in the form of cell phones creating the way for high performance low power chips that even goes as far as manufacturing of these devices to keep cost low. Same for screen technology used in most VR headsets. They are design for more than one application of use. The computer hardware has out match software needs for a little while now allowing VR to raw brut force its way to work in today's software.
Short of Vision tracking and Eye tracking - there really has not been anything VR has had to create yet on its own. IR tracking has been around for a long time as well. Even in the future - there are still many leading technologies that will be used to carry it forward for a while.
Software wise - there has many been many advancements - but even then - most of them has been around for a while. FOVA turn into VRS for the most part or future FOVA is going to be relying on it more if anything. AWS is the only major software that VR had to create so far.
VR has the added benfit of games engines already starting the work from 2D - 3D and not a full refresh of how programming, 3d models, etc works. So that road was already created - they just needed to render it 2x times for the most part - really even then - they just need to work with the API not create new API for VR as the headset creators would do that work instead (and soon that will disappear with openXR).
My point is that is why we saw soo many early VR devices - granted most of them die off for one reason or another - but VR still could built off what was already there instead of trying to built it from the ground up.
VR will have all this soon enough - it really just comes down to what the manufacturers want to produce now and their target audiences. Some are going to try and go the Quest route and others will try to build a better spec HMD and we are seeing that right now.
04-16-2019 04:18 AM
Zenbane said:
bigmike20vt said:to be completely honest i think it is fair to suggest we have the vive to thank for the tracking we have with the rift. I do fully believe the rift WAS meant to be primarily a forward facing 270 degree motion controller tracked device.lol... right. Well, that's not how intellectual property works. However, I will simply respond to you with the same words you said to snowdog: You post with confidence, i will give you that, i imagine it will work well in an interview😉