All fair points. However, if the competitors are well accepted by the public as good enough, Oculus will be segregated to a niche market for VRphyles.
Oh yea that is already happening. A decent enthusiast/initial part of the VR users behind Oculus were doing research with the headsets and utilized Mac's+OSX/Linux or Other hardware with Linux installed. The Dolphin Emulator devs are one of the first big folk gaming wise who are going to move VR development away from Oculus to OSVR. Considering most the resulting emulators are also GPL licensed(v2) the exodus will probably spread in the near future to any devs looking at such implementations.
I'm not anyone important, but Oculus is certainly no longer a go for me from this news, and the Vive will be out before it with with similar specs and a decently sized ecosystem.
OSVR I will keep an eye on as well.
Microsoft has a VR headset they are pimping around... do a search to see the videos. The software does allow a good interaction with what you see.
One caveat: A VR headset will permanently destroy your depth of field vision.
Microsoft has a VR headset they are pimping around... do a search to see the videos. The software does allow a good interaction with what you see.
One caveat: A VR headset will permanently destroy your depth of field vision.
Edit: I've seen Project Irides, but only Neowin seems to be referring to it as an actual product. Every other website has so far refered to it as a concept, and it indeed is available at Microsoft's research website, in which the demo suggests it is more of a general technology than a specific headset.
Microsoft has thus far only unveiled Augmented reality in the form Hololens. I've searched for the videos you speak of and have seen nothing but the same videos speculating for a future VR reveal at this years E3. Do not confuse AR for VR.
^ Presumably if HoloLens can overlay content onto the real world, it could overlay the entire screen, blocking out the real world, and have effective VR?
In the very early days of personal computing, which I lived through, Apple computers were open and one could plug boards in that performed specialist tasks. This in fact was quite necessary. Then Apple (Steve) released the Mac (corrected from earlier iMac), a (very tightly) closed ecosystem and overnight, a huge market for Apple computers dried up as engineers and later their employers and businesses turned to open PC's. They had no choice. The iMac almost spelled doom for Apple and today the legacy continues. Imagine Apple as just a (non-handheld) computer company.
Perhaps this is a wakeup call. I wouldn't hold out too much hope though.
The Apple IIc lacked expansion ports. Nice try for your doomed narrative.
^ Presumably if HoloLens can overlay content onto the real world, it could overlay the entire screen, blocking out the real world, and have effective VR?
Presumably yes, although it probably wouldn't be a very fun experience.
VR is primarily immersion. The semantic nature of AR will change the visualization and projection of content in accordance to the physical world, a restriction that VR does not have.
So unless you have a very specifically designed room or area for it, the experience is unlikely to go further than a few ooo moments before being broken.
Same thing with VR. VR can visualize information like much of AR. However VR is far less portable than an AR headset(as of current) and would probably need additional hardware such as a forward facing camera built into it to do so to gather information than the real world, and even then the depth perception might get a bit wonky, factoring in the additional space.
Your claim as I more or less gathered was that AR could "effectively" become VR, to which I responded it could become so if you crippled it.
The information displayed by AR, regardless of what it is, will change to fit the reality of your surroundings. It is the specialty of AR, visualizations. So unless you were in an area that was designed with AR in mind, to block out the world in an attempt to mimic VR would be silly. You;d be better off with a VR headset, since that is what VR is meant to do, immersion.
Similarly the example with the VR camera is the same. If you built in a camera a VR headset, you could "effectively" create an AR experience by visualizing information in the context of the outside world. However it is equally as pointless because the AR headset would be both lighter and specifically designed to visualize information in the world. Can VR still be used for visualization? Of course, but again, outside of very specialized areas, you aren't going to find them there. Most VR headsets will be doing what they were made to do, Simulations for training purposes, education ect...where there is not much movement and your surroundings are irrelevant.
Your claim as I more or less gathered was that AR could "effectively" become VR, to which I responded it could become so if you crippled it.
The information displayed by AR, regardless of what it is, will change to fit the reality of your surroundings. It is the specialty of AR, visualizations. So unless you were in an area that was designed with AR in mind, to block out the world in an attempt to mimic VR would be silly. You;d be better off with a VR headset, since that is what VR is meant to do, immersion.
Similarly the example with the VR camera is the same. If you built in a camera a VR headset, you could "effectively" create an AR experience by visualizing information in the context of the outside world. However it is equally as pointless because the AR headset would be both lighter and specifically designed to visualize information in the world. Can VR still be used for visualization? Of course, but again, outside of very specialized areas, you aren't going to find them there. Most VR headsets will be doing what they were made to do, Simulations for training purposes, education ect...where there is not much movement and your surroundings are irrelevant.
"Crippled it"? I'm not talking about making permanent changes to the HoloLens, just that it could have a VR mode where it fills the entire display with opaque image of whatever the VR software is, the simulation or game or whatever. I'm not sure what has been crippled.
I really have no idea about what you're talking about with "areas that were designed with AR in mind" with relevance to VR. AR and VR serve completely different purposes, and VR would not normally be something that you would physically move anything other than your head in, so the area is irrelevant. Again, we're just talking about another mode for the HoloLens.
Why would you use the camera for the HoloLens to pass information into a VR experience? Just use the AR mode if that's what you need? I'm not suggesting using the AR software in a VR experience, the VR mode would be traditional VR use cases and software.
I don't think you've really understood what I was saying, which is that the HoloLens, by filling the entire screen with images and not letting light from the real world in, is then effectively able to function as a VR headset, with VR-enabled software. Cameras are not necessary for a VR headset, all you need is the screen and motion sensing, so cameras would be switched off in this mode. Since the thread was talking about whether Microsoft has a VR headset in development, I was just speculating that the HoloLens, though marketed as AR, could feasibly be something of a VR solution as well (probably not as good as a dedicated unit like Oculus or Morpheus). Not to the detriment of the AR capabilities, but as well as them, for different use cases.
I don't think you've really understood what I was saying, which is that the HoloLens, by filling the entire screen with images and not letting light from the real world in, is then effectively able to function as a VR headset, with VR-enabled software.
This is a better explanation, and more clear and now I understand your point, though IMO it would still serve as a poor substitute for dedicated VR headset. Sounds Windows 8-ish, only on a hardware level instead of software
I also never stated that cameras were necessary for VR. I said that if you wanted to hypothetically turn a VR headset and give it AR capabilities(in a reverse example), you would need something capable of processing visual information of the outside world as is in the same way an AR headset gathers it relative to the real world. Put a VR headset on to realize the street you're walking down and look around in the real world, it just isn't magically going to know what the street, people , cars are. It needs visual processing. Again, though that was a farfetched example.
However as you stated, I missed your point initially, and thus such a statement came into play.
Comments
All fair points. However, if the competitors are well accepted by the public as good enough, Oculus will be segregated to a niche market for VRphyles.
Oh yea that is already happening. A decent enthusiast/initial part of the VR users behind Oculus were doing research with the headsets and utilized Mac's+OSX/Linux or Other hardware with Linux installed. The Dolphin Emulator devs are one of the first big folk gaming wise who are going to move VR development away from Oculus to OSVR. Considering most the resulting emulators are also GPL licensed(v2) the exodus will probably spread in the near future to any devs looking at such implementations.
I'm not anyone important, but Oculus is certainly no longer a go for me from this news, and the Vive will be out before it with with similar specs and a decently sized ecosystem.
OSVR I will keep an eye on as well.
Microsoft has a VR headset they are pimping around... do a search to see the videos. The software does allow a good interaction with what you see.
One caveat: A VR headset will permanently destroy your depth of field vision.
Microsoft has a VR headset they are pimping around... do a search to see the videos. The software does allow a good interaction with what you see.
One caveat: A VR headset will permanently destroy your depth of field vision.
Edit: I've seen Project Irides, but only Neowin seems to be referring to it as an actual product. Every other website has so far refered to it as a concept, and it indeed is available at Microsoft's research website, in which the demo suggests it is more of a general technology than a specific headset.
Microsoft has thus far only unveiled Augmented reality in the form Hololens. I've searched for the videos you speak of and have seen nothing but the same videos speculating for a future VR reveal at this years E3. Do not confuse AR for VR.
^ Presumably if HoloLens can overlay content onto the real world, it could overlay the entire screen, blocking out the real world, and have effective VR?
Microsoft has a VR headset they are pimping around... do a search to see the videos. The software does allow a good interaction with what you see.
One caveat: A VR headset will permanently destroy your depth of field vision.
Do you have a link for the permanent destruction of depth perception? I had a quick look and didn't find anything credible.
In the very early days of personal computing, which I lived through, Apple computers were open and one could plug boards in that performed specialist tasks. This in fact was quite necessary. Then Apple (Steve) released the Mac (corrected from earlier iMac), a (very tightly) closed ecosystem and overnight, a huge market for Apple computers dried up as engineers and later their employers and businesses turned to open PC's. They had no choice. The iMac almost spelled doom for Apple and today the legacy continues. Imagine Apple as just a (non-handheld) computer company.
Perhaps this is a wakeup call. I wouldn't hold out too much hope though.
The Apple IIc lacked expansion ports. Nice try for your doomed narrative.
^ Presumably if HoloLens can overlay content onto the real world, it could overlay the entire screen, blocking out the real world, and have effective VR?
Presumably yes, although it probably wouldn't be a very fun experience.
VR is primarily immersion. The semantic nature of AR will change the visualization and projection of content in accordance to the physical world, a restriction that VR does not have.
So unless you have a very specifically designed room or area for it, the experience is unlikely to go further than a few ooo moments before being broken.
Same thing with VR. VR can visualize information like much of AR. However VR is far less portable than an AR headset(as of current) and would probably need additional hardware such as a forward facing camera built into it to do so to gather information than the real world, and even then the depth perception might get a bit wonky, factoring in the additional space.
^
"Semantic nature"? What does that mean?
Why would VR need a forward facing camera, or any cameras at all?
Your claim as I more or less gathered was that AR could "effectively" become VR, to which I responded it could become so if you crippled it.
The information displayed by AR, regardless of what it is, will change to fit the reality of your surroundings. It is the specialty of AR, visualizations. So unless you were in an area that was designed with AR in mind, to block out the world in an attempt to mimic VR would be silly. You;d be better off with a VR headset, since that is what VR is meant to do, immersion.
Similarly the example with the VR camera is the same. If you built in a camera a VR headset, you could "effectively" create an AR experience by visualizing information in the context of the outside world. However it is equally as pointless because the AR headset would be both lighter and specifically designed to visualize information in the world. Can VR still be used for visualization? Of course, but again, outside of very specialized areas, you aren't going to find them there. Most VR headsets will be doing what they were made to do, Simulations for training purposes, education ect...where there is not much movement and your surroundings are irrelevant.
Your claim as I more or less gathered was that AR could "effectively" become VR, to which I responded it could become so if you crippled it.
The information displayed by AR, regardless of what it is, will change to fit the reality of your surroundings. It is the specialty of AR, visualizations. So unless you were in an area that was designed with AR in mind, to block out the world in an attempt to mimic VR would be silly. You;d be better off with a VR headset, since that is what VR is meant to do, immersion.
Similarly the example with the VR camera is the same. If you built in a camera a VR headset, you could "effectively" create an AR experience by visualizing information in the context of the outside world. However it is equally as pointless because the AR headset would be both lighter and specifically designed to visualize information in the world. Can VR still be used for visualization? Of course, but again, outside of very specialized areas, you aren't going to find them there. Most VR headsets will be doing what they were made to do, Simulations for training purposes, education ect...where there is not much movement and your surroundings are irrelevant.
"Crippled it"? I'm not talking about making permanent changes to the HoloLens, just that it could have a VR mode where it fills the entire display with opaque image of whatever the VR software is, the simulation or game or whatever. I'm not sure what has been crippled.
I really have no idea about what you're talking about with "areas that were designed with AR in mind" with relevance to VR. AR and VR serve completely different purposes, and VR would not normally be something that you would physically move anything other than your head in, so the area is irrelevant. Again, we're just talking about another mode for the HoloLens.
Why would you use the camera for the HoloLens to pass information into a VR experience? Just use the AR mode if that's what you need? I'm not suggesting using the AR software in a VR experience, the VR mode would be traditional VR use cases and software.
I don't think you've really understood what I was saying, which is that the HoloLens, by filling the entire screen with images and not letting light from the real world in, is then effectively able to function as a VR headset, with VR-enabled software. Cameras are not necessary for a VR headset, all you need is the screen and motion sensing, so cameras would be switched off in this mode. Since the thread was talking about whether Microsoft has a VR headset in development, I was just speculating that the HoloLens, though marketed as AR, could feasibly be something of a VR solution as well (probably not as good as a dedicated unit like Oculus or Morpheus). Not to the detriment of the AR capabilities, but as well as them, for different use cases.
I don't think you've really understood what I was saying, which is that the HoloLens, by filling the entire screen with images and not letting light from the real world in, is then effectively able to function as a VR headset, with VR-enabled software.
This is a better explanation, and more clear and now I understand your point, though IMO it would still serve as a poor substitute for dedicated VR headset. Sounds Windows 8-ish, only on a hardware level instead of software
I also never stated that cameras were necessary for VR. I said that if you wanted to hypothetically turn a VR headset and give it AR capabilities(in a reverse example), you would need something capable of processing visual information of the outside world as is in the same way an AR headset gathers it relative to the real world. Put a VR headset on to realize the street you're walking down and look around in the real world, it just isn't magically going to know what the street, people , cars are. It needs visual processing. Again, though that was a farfetched example.
However as you stated, I missed your point initially, and thus such a statement came into play.