Is the Oculus Rift doomed?

[Askarus]

attempt to save Facebook

Yeha, Facebook is actually facing a bleak future - decreasing revenue from advertising, potentially shrinking active user base down the road, too... To stay relevant they have to absorb other companies, anyway. WHat's good for them is that they have piles of cash to do so.

Why not buy Nintendo and save the WiiU .

 

[EvilDragon]

Well, I've chatted a bit more with Palmer yesterday night, and can totally understand why he did it.

I can't tell more (don't know what's public and what not) but with that deal they managed to solve the most annoying issues - and that's doing compromises by using existing hardware (like we do with the SoC and display).

That's huge for them - and we still will have tons of headaches about that in our case.

 The Pyra Hardware is an compromise? Hm, I was sure it is a pretty solid thing yo uare designing, good chipset, good components, good display, where is the compromise? Even with more money I guess it would not be easy to find better components for this kind of (niche) device. ^^

The screen is.

It's a portrait screen.

We need it as landscape.

Means: It needs to be rotated somehow.

notaz is currently working on that. OMAP5 has hardware for that, but you need to make compromises again. The image needs to be rendered in a special format to make use of the hardware rotator (TILER), so most non-X apps need to be updated for that.

(No problem in X though, as the X driver renders already in the correct format).

notaz wrote a quick conversion for it, but right now, it crashes (he only got the LCD a few days ago, so he didn't work much on that yet).

This is additional work and adds some compromise.

Plus it's a smartphone LCD, it might suddenly be EOL (unlike industrial panels, it's not guaranteed to be available within a few years).

This is already pretty annoying for us, but the LCD is the most important thing of the Oculus.

Being able to create your own LCD, the way YOU need as, without having to fear a sudden EOL is worth A LOT.

And that's only possible with a LOT of money.

However, you have a now very rich friend that is also interested in the Pyra, I see some possiblities there...

Honestly? I don't care about that.

I won't beg for money or anything else.

If Palmer (or notch or whoever else) want to help out at some time (and be it just giving a loan for a few months to get the first production run going), then it's up to them.

I'm not in contact with him because I hope to get financial backup, but because I am also interested in the Oculus (and still hope Facebook won't kill it) and because he's interested in what I do.

 

[WizardStan]

Luckey on reddit answer questions like a BAWS

> If I ever need a Facebook account to use or develop for the Rift, I'm done.

You will not need a Facebook account to use or develop for the Rift.

> If I ever see Facebook branding on anything that's not optional, I'm done.

Not really reasonable in a literal sense, but I get your drift.

> If I ever see ads on anything that I've already paid for, I'm done.

That is a developer decision, not our decision. If someone wants to sell a game with built-in ads, they will have to deal with the natural consequences.

 

[Hồng Thất Công]

Luckey on reddit answer questions like a BAWS

> If I ever need a Facebook account to use or develop for the Rift, I'm done.


You will not need a Facebook account to use or develop for the Rift.


> If I ever see Facebook branding on anything that's not optional, I'm done.


Not really reasonable in a literal sense, but I get your drift.


> If I ever see ads on anything that I've already paid for, I'm done.


That is a developer decision, not our decision. If someone wants to sell a game with built-in ads, they will have to deal with the natural consequences.

>If I ever see Oculus Rift has any association with Facebook, I'm done.

Now you're really done.  But I don't give a shit 

 

[WizardStan]

It's strange, a lot of comments he is making are promises that Facebook will not alter things and require log ins and ads and tracking and whatnot, and those are getting downvoted. I'm not sure I understand (or like) reddit.

 

[EvilDragon]

Well, that's because people won't believe that.

And that's exactly the major issue. People don't believe Facebook.

As long as Palmer and his team REALLY are in charge and doesn't have to follow any stuff Facebook tells him, everything will be fine.

However, now with Facebook owning Oculus, who knows if that will really be the case?

There's a huge Damocles sword hanging above Oculus, that's the issue.

If you read the blog post by notch, it seems he has the same fear.

He doesn't trust Facebook. And that's what most people don't.

Whatever deal they made with Palmer, I really really hope he doesn't have to bow down to anything Facebook wants.

I want to use an Oculus with Linux, the Pyra and a lot of crazy ideas.

I want to use it together with the Omni for doing excercises while playing games as well

As long as that is possible without issues, I'm happy. But if Facebook forces you to register somehow (similar to how google forces you to register with them for using an Android phone comfortably, or Microsoft with their phones or XBox), then I'm pretty much annoyed.

 

[_wb_]

Split some not-quite-on-topic walls-of-text to a new thread to keep this one a bit more sane. Split thread is here: http://boards.openpandora.org/topic/15992-will-oculus-rift-ruin-your-life-discussion-between-god-ginrai-and-wizardstan/

 

[God Ginrai]

And my point is not that people won't become addicted to it nor that we shouldn't be aware of the possibility, my point is that someone who uses the technology, perhaps almost exclusively even, is not something that is necessarily "horrid" or a bad thing. It's a different method of interaction, just because isn't the way you like to talk to people doesn't mean someone else is suffering because of it.

Well, not completely. Technically, the more you partake in virtualized interactions, the worse it is for your body. It's not healthy to just lay around all the time, and if you use this technology almost exclusively, then that is what will happen.

Also, such seclusion often leads to many other problems. This has especially started to show up in Japan. Ever heard of the term hikikomori?

-God Ginrai

 

[Askarus]

As long as that is possible without issues, I'm happy. But if Facebook forces you to register somehow (similar to how google forces you to register with them for using an Android phone comfortably, or Microsoft with their phones or XBox), then I'm pretty much annoyed.

I think it might be as it's with Android.

You can legally and easily get a Google account or make your own free OS or go the illegal way and do whatever you want.

 

[Yoyobuae]

Well, I've chatted a bit more with Palmer yesterday night

Looking at the 'should Pyra have a camera' thread, and your connections with Palmer (& mention of Pyra Oculus support), you should probably consider instead (I'm only half-joking) a pair of fisheye lensed cameras either end of the case - make the Pyra capable of taking stereo 180 degree stills (i.e. hemispherical pairs), viewable as explorable flat images onscreen or as immersive 3D on an attached Oculus...!
There are a few companies playing with (2D) 360 degree lenses and paired GoPro cameras with fisheye lenses for 180degree3D, but nothing (yet) like a camera with integrated editing/viewing/connectivity facility for 180 stereo...


Even as an accessory (especially in light of the facebook deal) an 'Oculus-ready' camera is an inevitability...!


'Slices of Space-Time.. saved!'

A stereo fisheye camera can only capture so much. Stuff in the forward direction would be captured pretty well, but stuff on the left/right sides not so much. Both cameras would then be inline, thus unable to properly capture stereo vision.

Also, one thing with OR and social interaction: the device blocks out the user's face. So fine, one can have a VR avatar which would point their heads just as the user, but that avatar won't have the same facial expressions as the user. In that sense a video conference is a better tool for communication (since one can see other persons face/expressions/etc).

OR feels more like a device to consume content, ie. video games, specially prepared VR scenes, etc. Not a device to share content between users (because making/capturing VR content won't be all that easy/need even more specialized hardware).

 

[Natsu]

And my point is not that people won't become addicted to it nor that we shouldn't be aware of the possibility, my point is that someone who uses the technology, perhaps almost exclusively even, is not something that is necessarily "horrid" or a bad thing. It's a different method of interaction, just because isn't the way you like to talk to people doesn't mean someone else is suffering because of it.

Well, not completely. Technically, the more you partake in virtualized interactions, the worse it is for your body. It's not healthy to just lay around all the time, and if you use this technology almost exclusively, then that is what will happen.

Also, such seclusion often leads to many other problems. This has especially started to show up in Japan. Ever heard of the term hikikomori?

-God Ginrai

There's a thread for this now.

 

[levi]

Whatever deal they made with Palmer, I really really hope he doesn't have to bow down to anything Facebook wants.

I've worked in places that have been taken over before, and part of the problem I've faced is even if the parent company tells you to do things as before, there are apparently little things that change. Build systems, bug trackers and the likes. In my case it was a software company getting taken over by a hardware and software company, and the bug tracker in particular just wasn't well designed for a software workflow where you can get a bug fixed in minutes, and require different safeguards to those needed by hardware hackers. In the Oculus' case it's the opposite way round - a hardware and software company getting taken over by a larger software company. I just hope that if they do push their processes down soon (it'll always happen eventually, I believe) then it's not so much of a mismatch that way round, but I don't really know.

 

[God Ginrai]

And my point is not that people won't become addicted to it nor that we shouldn't be aware of the possibility, my point is that someone who uses the technology, perhaps almost exclusively even, is not something that is necessarily "horrid" or a bad thing. It's a different method of interaction, just because isn't the way you like to talk to people doesn't mean someone else is suffering because of it.

Well, not completely. Technically, the more you partake in virtualized interactions, the worse it is for your body. It's not healthy to just lay around all the time, and if you use this technology almost exclusively, then that is what will happen.

Also, such seclusion often leads to many other problems. This has especially started to show up in Japan. Ever heard of the term hikikomori?

-God Ginrai

There's a thread for this now.

If you notice, the post which I was responding to was not moved to that thread. Besides, I had started responding to WizardStan's post before _wb_ made that thread.

-God Ginrai

 

[Asmo]

A stereo fisheye camera can only capture so much. Stuff in the forward direction would be captured pretty well, but stuff on the left/right sides not so much. Both cameras would then be inline, thus unable to properly capture stereo vision.

Yes, just like your eyes (looking left to right without head movement) - it's limited but a solution with full 3D all around is a lot more difficult and memory consuming. At least depth would be kept when looking up and down, preserving height and scale perception.The beauty of a Stereo fisheye camera with VR as viewer would be apparent 1:1 scale of your subject, with some additional peripheral information. Much better than any previous means of viewing 3D images - it's only a matter of time before someone makes it!
If your subject was static, you could rotate the camera and take a series of 4 or more stereo pairs, some clever software could let you 'look around' with minimal 3D breakdown... at least it'd be fun to try!

 

[Yoyobuae]

@Asmo: Yes, it's limited. That's my point.

IMO, I would prefer a mobile device with stereo cameras and 3D screen. It won't be as inmersive as VR viewer, but would still allow to "look around" by simply pointing the device where you want to look. Such a device would also allow 3D video conferences, if it also has stereo cameras pointing at the user's face (so 4 cams). And when user is done, he/she can simply pocket the device and continue on with their lives.

 

[Majin Wamu]

Oh I didn't say that. There are lots of reasons to be wary of Facebook. They're a big company that does a lot of questionable things and maybe you don't want to give them any incentive at all. Or probably a great many other things. I'm just saying that this one particular fear, that you'll need a Facebook login, or that games will be required to put ads that send revenue back to Facebook, or any of these other changes that people seem to be worried about, are pretty unlikely to happen. The final product will almost certainly be the same and if you're OK giving money to an "evil" company to get a cool product I'm sure we won't be disappointed. Just don't install the CD that comes with it.

Yeah that is enough to not want me to buy it though. If I was a bigger gamer I might just be whatever about it but I am too much of a retro gamer and not so much a modern gamer at all. But thank you so much for your information. You helped make a lot of sense

 

[Asmo]

VR headset communicating with a moveable 'platform' that has a stereo fisheye camera setup on it would solve the rotation issue (for live feeds- the platform moves with you), though latency is a problem - still, who wouldn't want to try:

http://www.engadget.com/2013/07/16/intuitive-aerial-oculus-rift-fpv-drone/


I'd like such a camera setup on one of

https://www.youtube.com/embed/1lYGUROZ_Pg?feature=oembed though!

A fixed stereo pair would work really well in theaters - they could stick one, along with binaural microphones, on a box/balcony area and sell streamed admittance to shows for people who'd rather stay home and skip the weather/taxi fare!

 

[Majin Wamu]

I've worked in places that have been taken over before, and part of the problem I've faced is even if the parent company tells you to do things as before, there are apparently little things that change. Build systems, bug trackers and the likes. In my case it was a software company getting taken over by a hardware and software company, and the bug tracker in particular just wasn't well designed for a software workflow where you can get a bug fixed in minutes, and require different safeguards to those needed by hardware hackers. In the Oculus' case it's the opposite way round - a hardware and software company getting taken over by a larger software company. I just hope that if they do push their processes down soon (it'll always happen eventually, I believe) then it's not so much of a mismatch that way round, but I don't really know.

I have dealt with this too...and you are 100% correct.

 

[Klumpen]

Well, maybe FB is full of people that think about the greater good but spending a great deal of money to buy OR and then refrain from getting that money back as fast as they can using their little VR monopoly (while it'll last) is too generous in my opinion.

What I'm afraid about the OculusVR - Facebook deal, is that Facebook will use it to track you even more. And unfortunately they do not need you to login to FB to track you, the same way they do not need you to login to FB to track your movements on the Internet (thanks to ubiquous FB plugins in most if not all big web pages).

Why would they want to buy OculusVR if they are not planning to use it to track you? They spent 19 billions on WhatsApp just to track you even more.

Also I'd like to add there is a huge pile of good reasons to sell your soul to the devil, but that doesn't mean that is the only option you have.

Yeha, Facebook is actually facing a bleak future - decreasing revenue from advertising, potentially shrinking active user base down the road, too... To stay relevant they have to absorb other companies, anyway. WHat's good for them is that they have piles of cash to do so.

People here tend to forget how Facebook got those giant loads of money in the first place:

Mass espionage and selling out whoever they can, even if he has no FB account.

Seriously: What do you guys expect them to do?!

So much naivety here...

 

[fusion_power]

The screen is.

It's a portrait screen.

We need it as landscape.

Means: It needs to be rotated somehow.

notaz is currently working on that. OMAP5 has hardware for that, but you need to make compromises again. The image needs to be rendered in a special format to make use of the hardware rotator (TILER), so most non-X apps need to be updated for that.

(No problem in X though, as the X driver renders already in the correct format).

notaz wrote a quick conversion for it, but right now, it crashes (he only got the LCD a few days ago, so he didn't work much on that yet).

This is additional work and adds some compromise.

Plus it's a smartphone LCD, it might suddenly be EOL (unlike industrial panels, it's not guaranteed to be available within a few years).

This is already pretty annoying for us, but the LCD is the most important thing of the Oculus.

Being able to create your own LCD, the way YOU need as, without having to fear a sudden EOL is worth A LOT.

And that's only possible with a LOT of money.

OK, didn't knew that but I'm sure notaz will also solve this problem. Making an LCD dedicated to the Pyra would be indeed very expencive compared to just buy an existing (smartphone) one. With alot of money I could imagine something like a 5" Pixel Qi screen *dreem* ^^