Hacker News Reader

It's so satisfying watching them get their just desserts after betraying their Kickstarter backers by taking the Facebook money and then going back on all their words about keeping the platform free for everybody. Meanwhile that acquisition kicked off a race among the other big players which Valve appears to be winning while having the best features. I mean, Valve isn't perfect, but they're a lot better than Facebook. Things seem to have worked out for the best for once.

They already got their billions from Facebook, so just desserts at this point mostly affect the consumers who just got locked in, months after their purchase.

One thing worth noting is all Kickstarter backers get a free Oculus CV1 from Facebook (that's of course in addition to the DK1 they received after backing in August 2012).

That decision takes away a lot of the "betrayal" of the Facebook acquisition - for backers it's an incredible return on investment (that was unlikely to happen if it weren't for Facebook)

Can't agree more, especially since the secondary market is quite good right now and you can very easily sell it and get a Vive. ;)

Can't agree more, especially since the secondary market is quite good right now and you can very easily sell it and turn it into a free Vive. ;)

I don't share your conviction that ROI is far more important than any ethical consideration. I seem to recall the KS pitch was full of aspirational language about a democratized future of VR spearheaded by a close-knit team of diehards who wouldn't fall prey to Big Whatever.

You're suggesting that the majority of backers will be mollified by an artifact of the very forces that Oculus promised to avoid; I'm sure some of them will be.

Not sure you recall correctly. I checked the Kickstarter [1], and I didn't see anything along those lines in the video, the description (which doesn't seem to have been modified, per archive.org), or the first few updates. If Luckey talked about that, I think it was somewhere else.

[1] https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1523379957/oculus-rift-...

The video you linked has competing companies all taking about how good it will be to integrate (valve included)... you are right there is no line like "it will be an open platform" but they heavily imply it will be an open platform

I backed the Kickstarter with a friend, backing at the level to get two of the dev kits, because we happened to be living together at the time. After explaining that situation, I was told that I would not get a CV1.

I never expected to get the CV1 when I backed, so I'm not angry about that, it just sucks a bit to hear 'you are getting this for free' and then get told, no you are not.

I'm reminded again about this very prescient post:

http://assayviaessay.blogspot.com/2014/03/virtual-spaces-rea...

I only learned this recently, but it's actually spelled "just deserts".

Although desserts (sweet confections) are often associated with rewards, the word "deserts" refers to the element of distributive justice.

Source: I wrote a paper about this for a class and got a C+.

So why the c+? Seems rather informative. Just learned something new.

Deserts is an archaic word meaning "reward", i.e. a kind of noun form of "deserve".

It's those things left for you - which have been deserted.

No, that usage has a different etymology. Compare:

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/desert#Etymology_1

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/desert#Etymology_3

"Just Desserts" would be a great name for a bakery, no?

http://www.justdesserts.com/

It's been a while since I've seen the marquee element in action.

Is it pronounced like desserts still?

Yes (the same as the _verb_ deserts is pronounced)

At first I defended the Facebook buyout because it seemed like a logical move. I feel Oculus was pressured into the buyout because valve was about to kill them. Truth is, Carmarck joining the team made it all that much sweeter.

If you read through the lines of some of Palmer's communications, it's obvious that there is a rift between Oculus and Facebook that no one is talking about. Carmarck, being Carmarck keeps pushing even when the top tries to push you down. Reading the tweets, it's obvious that he remains focused on the technology, which is a good sign.

In the end, I think Oculus is facing a backlash because of the buyout, and their 'simular' to Origin approach rings bells of many gamers and how EA continues to alienate them.

Microsoft proved it could compete with the Xbox. Oculus just needs to change its game or get away from its overlord. Blizzard had some fallout with Diablo 3, it happens.

The real question for Oculus, now is, what is your next move?

> Carmarck

Carmack. Only one 'r' in the name.

Thanks for reminding me I'm on the internet.

> taking the Facebook

It was at that point that I abandoned the platform. Wild conjecture isn't discouraged on Reddit and, over there, the creepy Facebook user tracking was predicted well in advance.

Given the comments here on Palmer's diminishing public interaction, and the quotes in the article, I don't think the founders completely anticipated what Facebook would demand. Although I now have zero interest in the platform, I still can't help but feel a little sorry for them. They clearly still believe in that vision but do not have the autonomy to follow it through.

Valve's Lighthouse tracking system isn't particularly elegant from a usability standpoint. I see Oculus' and Valve's current systems as a temporary solution. The future likely is in inside out tracking (i.e. one or more cameras on the headset, looking out). Oculus is working on that. I'd be surprised if Valve isn't.

I agree with your comments on the Oculus platform. It's sad to see them building higher and higher walls for their garden.

Have you seen this demo of Jack McCauley's new laser based tracking? http://www.roadtovr.com/mts-virtual-reality-vr-tracking-syst...

Certainly this is better than camera based tracking but I don't think it's got a significant advantage over the Lighthouse system from a consumer standpoint. Especially when it comes to tracking multiple peripherals I have my doubts when it comes to MTS.

Interesting bit from the article:

By some definitions (including his) McCauley is a co-founder of Oculus due to his contributions and status as one of the earliest hires, though as far as Oculus itself is concerned, the company represents Palmer Luckey as the one and only “Founder” (with a capital F). As a seasoned design engineer who played an instrumental role in the creation of the Guitar Hero peripherals, McCauley brought hardware design experience to the young company, which was about to embark on designing, manufacturing, and delivering thousands of Rift DK1 headsets to eager backers of the crowdfunding campaign.

Kind of funny how kingmaking works, eh?

I'd like to hear you expand on that, perhaps we don't align on the definition of elegant? I think the Lighthouse system is elegant specifically because it doesn't use cameras at all. That's what makes it so cool is that it's not limited by sensor resolution, to get really accurate tracking using cameras you need to crunch a LOT of data really quickly. I wouldn't be surprised if it's order's of magnitude less computationally expensive, especially since IIRC in the Lighthouse system most of the heavy lifting is done using an FPGA.

I think the system mentioned by jc4p is similarly elegant but for different reasons. Based on a skim through the article he posted I'd say the Lighthouse system is likely cheaper, and can more easily track multiple (infinite really since the tracking is done on the object rather than using the base station) objects, but won't have the same sort of range as MTS. Both are loads better than using cameras IMO.

> I think the Lighthouse system is elegant specifically because it doesn't use cameras at all.

Not to be purposefully pedantic, so please excuse me, but aren't the small "dimples" on the Vive hardware technically very simple, low-res infrared cameras that are designed to pick up the Lighthouse lasers?

They're just simple IR sensors - they can detect when IR is shining on them, but not from which direction. Put another way: each one is the equivalent of a single pixel in a camera sensor.

Position is determined by watching the timing very closely of when each sensor detects the IR sweep, and then doing the math given those timings and the known orientation of the sensors relative to each other.

They're photodiodes, so each one is only capturing a single luminance value, they're not capturing an image.

I've used both and the differences between the platforms are so small compared to the huge technological breakthrough that I think which one people buy will be a toss up. I bought the oculus because I have a one bedroom apartment and have maybe a 2x2 foot space to use it in. Room scale isn't really an option for me. I like the Vive, but I really think that room scale is a liability nightmare waiting to happen. In two weeks of doing demos at work, we lost two computers from people ripping the cords out or kicking them and at least one person got clocked with a controller while I was watching people do demos for an hour. (and this was with a full time minder) Encouraging people to move around a swing controllers while wearing a blindfold is a terrible idea and someone's child or pet is going to be seriously hurt, no matter how many warnings you give people.

>as far as I can tell it only exists to lock people into a particular ecosystem.

sounds like a certain parent company..

It's also satisfying watching some hardcore fan in Oculus Rift looks down on other HMD startup has admitted Vive is way better.

Thanks, I didn't jump in the bandwagon early.

The CV1 that Oculus gave me, which I'm very grateful for, won't even turn on when I plug it in. I'm not installing Windows and a sub-Steam walled garden to use it. I should have kept the DK1. :-/

I have experienced a whole host of problems with the CV1, the DK2 is currently my goto headset as it pretty much just works and since the resolution/refresh rate isn't absurd I can drive it even on modest hardware.