Hacker News Reader

Comment by lowglow | Hacker News Reader

Just from an outsider's perspective: The entire Oculus acquisition has been one fumble after another, I dare call it a debacle. They traded their community trust online to participate and get the resources of a bigger company (probably due to competitive pressure). The bigger company was facebook, which doesn't evoke a large amount of community trust, so there was considerable splintering in the community rallying behind what was seen as the future champ of VR.

This was the same early adopter community that wanted to spend the money, buy the rigs, develop for the platform, and further VR in general.

Now when I see old school innovators join up, it just feels like they've sold out by association.

I don't know what's going to save its image? Maybe a killer app?

View on HN

I feel this view point assumes most people are Reddit users. Reddit gave them a ton of hate for being purchased by FB, and most people on Reddit hate FB, but the statistics and how much their units are sold tells us they're not having a problem reaching customers.

Most companies gave really favorable reviews of touch, and gear vr has sold really well. I think the image problem is mostly just vocal Reddit users.

> I feel this view point assumes most people are Reddit users. Reddit gave them a ton of hate for being purchased by FB, and most people on Reddit hate FB, but the statistics and how much their units are sold tells us they're not having a problem reaching customers.

> Most companies gave really favorable reviews of touch, and gear vr has sold really well. I think the image problem is mostly just vocal Reddit users.

Something like 80% of internet users use Facebook. Anyone that thinks that Facebook integration is going to bother the average person (or care that Facebook just owns the company) is out of touch.

I use Facebook and owned a DK1 and DK2, but did not get the CV1 or continue to the use my DK2 because of the Facebook integration.

I trust Facebook with the information I explicitly share with it, i.e., posting photos or comments on Facebook. I do not trust Facebook to have unfettered access to a microphone, camera, and activity just to be able to play a game. The Facebook integration was, well, integral, and not just an opt-in for enhancing social aspects. You can't use the headset to play local content without phoning home (short of using old drivers/OpenVR or something).

Of course maybe this still places me in a minority of users because I have the same reaction when a mobile app requests every permission possible, which seems to be the case with all apps now.

I own a CV1 and worry about the same things, actually. I unplug my cameras & rift when not in use, otherwise I'd literally have cameras pointing at my living room.

Many many people don't give a crap though, I have friends with Alexas and Xbox kinects in their living room. Kinect cameras can actually see you much more clearly[1] than the obfuscated Oculus ones which mainly see IR.

[1] some games have video replay on kinect, clear visualization of faces, etc

> I use Facebook and owned a DK1 and DK2, but did not get the CV1 or continue to the use my DK2 because of the Facebook integration.

Fair enough, I care about privacy as well but I'm just pointing out you need to acknowledge most people aren't bothered by this.

> I do not trust Facebook to have unfettered access to a microphone, camera, and activity just to be able to play a game.

I'm curious: do you have Whatsapp or the Facebook app installed on your phone? Facebook could spy on you via this or Oculus but if they were found out it would be seriously damaging to the company.

Just an FYI to anyone who didn't know this, the facebook app records audio in the background. It then targets ads to your conversations. Use the browser version if you want some semblance of privacy.

Do you have a source for this? It seems fairly unlikely for a lot of reasons.

>Anyone that thinks that Facebook integration is going to bother the average person (or care that Facebook just owns the company) is out of touch.

The average person is not an early adopter of expensive tech gadgets.

> Something like 80% of internet users use Facebook.

Do you have a source far that percentage? It seems high.

Haven't looked into how accurate these are but it's mentioned fairly often.

"Market leader Facebook was used by 79 percent of internet users" https://www.statista.com/statistics/246230/share-of-us-inter...

"71% of online adults use Facebook" http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheets/social-networking-fac...

"72% of all online US adults visit Facebook at least once a month" https://www.brandwatch.com/blog/96-amazing-social-media-stat...

Given that Facebook boasts 1.8 billion monthly active users users, and there are about 3.5 billion Internet users, it seems broadly plausible that 80% of people on the Internet have used Facebook — but 80% definitely aren't regular users.

Pew Research had a January 2014 number of 71% of 'online adults' being on facebook, Statista had 79% of US internet users for April of 2016.

http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheets/social-networking-fac... https://www.statista.com/statistics/246230/share-of-us-inter...

Are they looking to just push units? If so that strategy might work for a while. But many of us are under the impression they are looking to build an ecosystem, and the hardware is just a replaceable component to that (with plenty of competition).

I feel like the concerns were more around what that ecosystem was going to be like, than the viability and or cool factor of the hardware itself. (i.e. just because I was an early adopter of a dk2 does not mean I am on board with Oculus for the long run).

>I don't know what's going to save its image? Maybe a killer app?

For me they'd save a lot of face if they just opened up their APIs/store to other headsets. They tried to pin down the PC VR HMD market and failed due to Valve/HTC. But they're still trying to become the Steam of VR despite Steam doing the same and having the distinct advantage of already being the Steam of everything else. But there's definitely room for other storefronts out there like GOG and EA's Origin so I don't begrudge them wanting to take that 30% for themselves but let me use whatever HMD I want.

My major gripe with them too, they aren't competing on technology but rather marketing and exclusivity arrangements. So glad they aren't the only ones driving the space forward, otherwise it's IE6 all over again.

I can't agree more. The whole Oculus platform is so intrusive, it really feels like they care 100% about ways to extract value from their IP and 0% about delivering something users want.

Honestly I'd like to see VR headsets be treated more like PC monitors or video cards than like game consoles. A display with some tracking sensors should have to come with a walled garden. I feel this would encourage a lot more VR game development as well as a lot faster release cycle on new hardware, as well as a better range of hardware options, just like how you can buy a cheapo monitor or video card and live with lower resolution/framerates, or you can splurge a couple grand and get a really nice one. Games don't really care which end of that spectrum you go, they have settings to accommodate various resolutions and graphical horsepower.

Are they actively blocking the other HMD's or just not supporting them with drivers, etc? I know they locked it down at one point with DRM, but quickly backtracked.

Revive is a free option, that works with the Oculus Store and the Vive but that's obviously not as nice as native support from Oculus.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com