cancel
Showing results forย 
Search instead forย 
Did you mean:ย 

High end oculus vr.. don't hold your breath

bigmike20vt
Level 14
https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=3&hl=de&nv=1&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=...

Pretty bleak reading imo excuse long link Google shortener not working on it
Fiat Coupe, gone. 350Z gone. Dirty nappies, no sleep & practical transport incoming. Thank goodness for VR ๐Ÿ™‚
401 REPLIES 401

DaftnDirect
Volunteer Moderator
Volunteer Moderator
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.

Intel 5820K OC@4Ghz, Titan X (Maxwell), 32GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4, ASRock X99 Taichi, Samsung 500Gb 960 Evo M.2, Corsair H100i v2 Cooler, Inateck KTU3FR-4P USB 3 card, Windows 10 Pro v20H2 (19042.804)

Cooler, Inateck KTU3FR-4P USB 3 card, Windows 10 Pro v2004 (19042.662)

bigmike20vt
Level 14
I didnt start the car analogy i was just responding to someone else and rolling with it ๐Ÿ˜‰
Oculus in part bought this on themselves by sending mixed messages.

sure they did say that dome was no promises etc etc etc........ however you cant show off a hmd like the dome and then 12 months later seemingly massively distance themselves from it and not expect some people to be disappointed.

If we had to use analogies perhaps TV analogies work a bit better.
they all ultimately display the same programs over the same airwaves but there is still a range of models to suite different pockets..... this is where i would have liked to have seen oculus go (one may argue the go and quest do that, but they are totally different devices and use different software so imo not really valid).

I dont think anyone has an issue with oculus bringing out an affordable device to try to sell to the masses.... but with a company the size of facebook behind them i think the issue is many people cant understand why they didnt also bring out a slightly higher end device along side it.... esp as oculus are not making it they are licencing it out to a 3rd party.

anyways i am just repeating myself now so should probably just STFU ๐Ÿ™‚

Fiat Coupe, gone. 350Z gone. Dirty nappies, no sleep & practical transport incoming. Thank goodness for VR ๐Ÿ™‚

DaftnDirect
Volunteer Moderator
Volunteer Moderator
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!

Intel 5820K OC@4Ghz, Titan X (Maxwell), 32GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4, ASRock X99 Taichi, Samsung 500Gb 960 Evo M.2, Corsair H100i v2 Cooler, Inateck KTU3FR-4P USB 3 card, Windows 10 Pro v20H2 (19042.804)

Cooler, Inateck KTU3FR-4P USB 3 card, Windows 10 Pro v2004 (19042.662)

dburne
Level 16
It's called a change of direction for Oculus in their PC-VR business model.
And they certainly have changed that big time in the last year.
Thankfully at least there are others out there that are picking that mantle up.
Don

EVGA Z390 Dark MB | I9 9900k| EVGA 3090 FTW3 Ultra |32 GB G Skill 3200 cl14 ram | Warthog Throttle | VKB Gunfighter Pro/MCG Pro grip | Crosswind Pedals | EVGA DG 87 Case| Rift S | Quest |

bigmike20vt
Level 14


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!


its all good anyway, after all it is all out of our hands we are just along for the ride.. and i do fully admit i love an analogy. I didnt see it as a criticism.
Fiat Coupe, gone. 350Z gone. Dirty nappies, no sleep & practical transport incoming. Thank goodness for VR ๐Ÿ™‚

Mradr
Level 13


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.


What do you mean? 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 - but even then its more of nice to have than it requirement.

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.

Sorry, I am not trying to get into this argument either XD I am just confused when you say the roads are already built - it just sounds the same as the hardware/software was already there for VR to built with. They still need to build it out - but the "idea" is good as built in terms of what we can do right now.

Zenbane
Level 16

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
๐Ÿ˜‰


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.

Agreed. There are far too many hands-on Reviews of both Rift-S and Quest by notorious names (e.g. Tested) and tons of newcomers. Even people going to PAX events are raving about how good these HMD's are on Facebook's VR groups. The debates in this thread, and this forum in general, tend to focus too much on theorycrafting. Especially by those who want to intentionally take a negative stance due to the fact that Facebook has decided to avoid directly competing with the Vive Pro and Pimax HMD's.

There are TWO Races to the Bottom in PCVR today:
  1. Hardware spec wise. Vive Pro and Pimax 5K/8K are trying to race to the top tier of 1st Gen PCVR HMD's. While Facebook and Oculus appear to be racing to the bottom by going with a more cookie-cutter approach via inside-out tracking and something more affordable and convenient for the masses.
  2. Profit and Revenue. HTC ran out of money a long time ago and sold IP to Google to avoid Bankruptcy after over 9 consecutive Quarters (over 27 months) of pure financial loss. Pimax needed a Kickstarter to get out their 2nd Consumer products even though they were already on the market with a PCVR CV1 headset that was an epic flop. Both Pimax and HTC are racing to the bottom of the financial spectrum by tying their organization success to the top tier of PCVR which has already proven to be so niche and exclusive a market that on financial loss awaits. Meanwhile, Facebook and Oculus are racing to the top of the Global Mainstream Consumer Market with mass adoption.

In the year 2019, to argue in favor of manufacturing the highest-end of PCVR Hardware is in fact to argue in favor of embracing financial ruin.

DaftnDirect
Volunteer Moderator
Volunteer Moderator
I think the things you've listed there @Mradr are the equivalent of the nuts and bolts that car manufacturers rely on and can be used for everything from mobile phones to consoles as you say, rather than the roads and the gas (argh, you've gottn me into this analogy thing now!).

I'm talking about the infrastructure that people look at when they weigh up the pros and cons of buying into VR. I'm talking about game availability and to a lesser extent hardware compatibility and cost.

I'm talking about Oculus' business case and whether sustainability and profit is in site.

Intel 5820K OC@4Ghz, Titan X (Maxwell), 32GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4, ASRock X99 Taichi, Samsung 500Gb 960 Evo M.2, Corsair H100i v2 Cooler, Inateck KTU3FR-4P USB 3 card, Windows 10 Pro v20H2 (19042.804)

Cooler, Inateck KTU3FR-4P USB 3 card, Windows 10 Pro v2004 (19042.662)

Zenbane
Level 16

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.



Wow, there was so much wrong in that entire wall of text that I can't figure out how to avoid writing a 10,000 word essay in response. That was some massive amounts of misinformation about VR and Technology with a healthy dose of misrepresentation and a side-dish of downplaying innovation. Bravo, sir!

I think you're a nice guy, Mradr, but I nominate that as: The worst post about VR and Technology of 2019.

Thus I give you, Video Response!


bigmike20vt
Level 14

Zenbane 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
๐Ÿ˜‰



whic is why i "suggested" it and said what i believe...  there was no, or not meant to be any statement that i was making as a nailed on fact.

and again, i was being misquoted i was not saying he has no clue about the rift S that was a strawman argument that i never made....  @snowdog has at least as much of a clue about RiftS as I do.... for him the rift S may be a decent device but i am outside of its officially supported IPD so i have reasons for concern my end.

also despite all the videos of the tracking i have yet to see someone playing pool or playing lone echo, so i think the concerns there are real as well, esp as they are so easy to put to bed i am curious why they havent been.

edit
btw just to add.. i know the S has extra cameras to improve tracking but this is the kind of BS i am concerned about.

this works perfectly using the current rift..... but will it work with riftS ? (without having to resort to what the windowsMR guys have to?)


Fiat Coupe, gone. 350Z gone. Dirty nappies, no sleep & practical transport incoming. Thank goodness for VR ๐Ÿ™‚